Poland? (I really love the Daily Show) Didn't Bush learn anything when Gerald Ford lost a debate by insisting on bringing up Poland?

Kerry did go astray on bringing up Kyoto and Bush zinged him with the Global Approval stuff. Kerry was lost in the forest, had something important to say but didn't say it the way he wanted to.

Bush did well explaining his rationale for the 6-party talks with N.Korea, even though it was complete horseshit. Kerry picked up very well on Bush's aside on Iran and then told the "real story" which brought Kerry back from the forest and he DID say he wanted "both" bi-lateral and I can only assume he still wanted to continue the current multi-lateral talks -- but he didn't seem to say so. He only concentrated on the 2-way talks and Bush grabbed that up saying they 6-way talks would then unravel.

Bush got my mom to go along with that one. Kerry was prepared for Iraq, but blew Korea, but MS and the spinners only hammer their script which only has a paragraph on Korea (much like the campaigns themselves) and several chapters on Iraq.

Once again Bush makes the point that you have to keep with him because he's screwed things up so baddly that there's no undoing his mess, just seeing it through. And is mind-boggingly effective and sincere doing it.

C-SPAN had the best coverage with their split-screen. Indespensible for the all important second opinion on the replay. Fox's network feed worked decidedly against Bush by catching Kerry's serious note taking and Bush with that weird smirk. On C-SPAN you see Kerry smirking too, and at times whole-heartedly agreeing with Bush, and some smugness that the other networks didn't show.

MSM believed the ABC, CBS and CNN insta-polls, which gave Kerry the overwhelming edge. Therefore (notice -- not because) Kerry was more prepared, less angry, his canpaign doing better for this all-important event, and they're liking the underdog getting back in the race (as if he was out of it), able to shake the flipper lable.

Does that answer the question Professor Rubyan? How about the quip repeated on CNN's morning show: "Bush brought 30 minutes of material to a 90 minute debate." "Mexed messages," in case you didn't catch the talking point repeated 12 times. Gloss: Kerry -- professional, in command, presidential, all but out of it saves his ass; Bush -- think meaner Dan Quale without substance.

Tee Hee, they go with a free-for-all and then domestic policy next with fewer expected viewers. Kerry will be expected to surge.

My first opinion was seen through my partisan lens and experience from my college forensics team which discounts Bush on substance and had no doubt Kerry won on style. Second look and quick perusal of conventional wisdom comfirmed first look, but closer exam saw missed opportunities for a complete slam dunk by Kerry and Bush spin team missing the Korea point completely which resinated with at least one member of the "Greatest Generation" in my household.

MSM (and Blogtopia) has decided Iraq was the only issue and Kerry is sharpening his message more every day on that. And he knows how to grab and keep Bush close during their hand-shake to show their size difference in a quick photo-op. Watch MSM to look for Bush to get even testier next time, hoping for a Bush melt-down.

He forgot Poland. Geez Rose, you of all people should have been proud of Bush picking up on that serious gaff by Kerry and Bush hamering him on it more than once. Our great number two ally!!

Q.: How many Polish Prime Ministers does it take to make George Bush look like a liar?

A.: Same as it takes to screw in a light bulb -- because despite all the jokes, Poles really aren't dumbasses -- Just One.

"They deceived us about the weapons of mass destruction, that's true. We were taken for a ride."

"I thought Bush scored very nice points on reminding Kerry about the Polish Brigade, but I couldn't help remembering how this nation was Gerald Ford's undoing at his debate against Carter.

I really wonder if it will play at all.

As an excersize in forensics, Kerry severly crushed POTUS. The polls and pundits give Kerry the edge on style if not substance. As for getting anyone to change their mind -- of the few truly undecideds out there who bothered to watch -- which is all that really matters, Kerry certainly swayed more people than Bush.

As for the griping about no details on the plan, just how disingenuous is it to expect that in 90 seconds? You guys are bloggers, true participants in the process. You've know what the plan is and where to find it and also know that Kerry's last two speeches address in specific detail first Iraq then the larger WoT. They were bullet points, with details, that will take about 30 minutes to fully vet and at least 5 minutes merely to list.

Do you really prefer a complex foreign policy to fit on a bumper-sticker? Why then do you go to the trouble to use the net at all? This is a medium where time and length restraints are anathama. That critique is spin and if you really are serious about what is good for this country -- instead of merely playing spectator and rooting for your team -- you know better.

Or is it more important to expose the source of Kerry's tan and wrinkle-free forehead?

It is my fervent hope that America is smarter than that, but I've been disappointed before.