You Knew This Was Coming . . .

You're probably wondering whether I watched the debate on Friday. As a matter of fact I did, and I found it rather informative, but it's taken me a while to process what I thought of the candidates' positions. Perhaps that's because nothing really outrageous happened. The debate was fairly civilized and both candidates held their own, neither scoring any real knockout punches on the other. Still, there were a few statements and trends that made a lasting impression on me.

First off, I think Obama earned points simply for delivering a competent performance. Many people had speculated that the more experienced McCain would steamroll him on foreign relations, and though McCain did indeed demonstrate impressive knowledge of global history and issues, Obama kept pace with him and presented some alternate ideas which I think are well worth considering.

By contrast, some of McCain's proposals and attitudes concerned me a bit. While I don't believe that McCain is the Bush clone that Obama sometimes paints him to be, he did demonstrate some of the philosophies that have most troubled me about Bush's administration. For example, Bush and company were so intent on invading Iraq that they chose to do it despite the fact that evidence against Saddam was shaky and Al Qaeda was somewhere else (i.e. that country where we were already waging a war). During the debate McCain seemed to show a similarly narrow view, constantly harping on Iraq as if his opponent never acknowledged that it was important. Obama completely agreed that we need to act wisely in Iraq, but he made the valid point that we can't let that battle distract us from other equally important fronts in the War on Terror: Afghanistan, Pakistan, and other areas where Al Qaeda has a presence.

I'm also troubled by the Bush/McCain "us vs. them" mindset. McCain proposed bypassing the U.N. and organizing a league of democracies to put some real pressure on Iran. Obama pointed out that if we want to have any kind of influence on that country, we'll need non-democratic Russia and China to participate, too. McCain also wants to take a hard line with Russia, isolating them and sending a strong message that their behavior is unacceptable (even though the Bush administration has made little headway with that same stance). Obama agrees that we need to take a firm approach to Russia, but he also insists we should look for common interests with them, since nations rarely want to negotiate if they have nothing to gain. Obama also pointed out that if we're worried about extremists hating and attacking us, we ought to cultivate a national reputation for promoting positive things (like education) instead of being an international bully (or maverick, or sheriff) who seems to act unilaterally without regard for other nations.

The "us vs. them" factor also figured into the candidates' interactions with each other. Some commentators have criticized Obama for occasionally saying he agreed with McCain while the latter never made any such concession. Considering that both men bill themselves as candidates who can reach across the aisle and work with both parties, I find it telling that only Obama even acknowledged they had any common ground during the debate. That detail is reflective of their entire campaigns: Obama and the Democrats in general profess respect for McCain's war record and some of his character traits, but McCain refuses to acknowledge there is anything worth praising about Obama. If McCain's bipartisanship goes out the window when an election is on the line, does that mean he's only willing to reach across the aisle when it's convenient?

As for Obama, it's difficult for me to tell whether some of his foreign policy ideas are wishful thinking or just different from McCain's philosophy. Since I myself am inexperienced with foreign policy, it's hard for me to tell whether McCain's dismissal of unconditional talks with Iran demonstrates sounder judgement, or whether it merely reflects his personal opinion. My general conclusion is that since our current approaches with some nations aren't making headway, it can't hurt to try something new. I also believe that Obama is both flexible and smart enough to recognize whether a policy is working, and make course corrections if needed. McCain is smart, but he doesn't strike me as the flexible type.

Also, while I appreciate Mr. McCain's crusade against earmarked funds in recent years, I would encourage him to please stop treating them like a major campaign issue. His relentless emphasis on that subject rang hollow with me because, 1) Congressional earmark allotments have already decreased by over 20% in the last three years, 2) As Obama pointed out, they're small change compared to tax cuts and other big financial matters we should be discussing, and most significantly 3) McCain's own running mate supported earmark funds for Alaska's Bridge to Nowhere, and kept those earmarked funds for her state even after the bridge project was cancelled. If McCain doesn't feel that disqualifies Palin from being his right-hand woman and a potential future president, he shouldn't imply that Obama's recent conversion to the anti-earmark gospel disqualifies him either.

And speaking of Ms. Palin, tomorrow's vice presidential debate should be veeeeeery interesting . . .