So I have no visual sense of the debate, only words and tone of voice. Calling Mr. McCain a put down artist is a bit excessive as it implies he was really good at it and he wasn't. I must admit, I loved the tone in his voice when he spoke of Mr. Obama's willingness to negotiate without preconditions O! The Horror! O! The Humanity! As someone who has done professional negotiations for corporations, Mr. McCain, let me explain preconditions to you. Negotiations are the process of solving the other side's problems. You agree to some things that the other side wants, usually because they think they need them, and they agree to some things that you want. Preconditions abrogate that process somewhat because they represent concessions by the other side to what you want without corresponding concessions on your part and before you even start to negotiate. Preconditions work if and only if one side has the preponderance of power, e.g. the other side may need things to change and you don't really care because you're content with the current situation. Since power here doesn't mean military power alone, demanding preconditions hasn't worked and will not work since the only preponderance we have is military power. America is only now beginning to understand the limits of military power.

What bothered me the most was where they agreed. Will someone explain to me why we should be putting America's power and prestige on the line for a bunch of arrogant, right wing Jews? We have been warned of entangling alliances before. Stalwart allies, we were told by both. Stalwart allies at what? Oppressing the Palestinian people whose only crime was living somewhere for time out of mind (like two millennia) for the last 60 years? Have they fought in our wars? Sent us money? Supported us in delicate negotiations with other major powers? Can anyone explain to me why we should be kowtowing to the desires of Israel?

The other spot is the newish countries on the southern border of Russia. Both want entangling alliances that could force us into a war with Russia. Hello people! There are two countries in the world capable of destroying it: the USA and Russia. Calling us the sole superpower is misleading. Russia still has a boatload of ICBMs and nuclear warheads. Do you really want to bait these guys? Do you really want to play chicken with them over a couple of little countries that are of no strategic importance to us?

Of course, none of this has anything to do with weather they looked or sounded presidential. Personally, I'd prefer someone who was presidential rather than merely sounding that way.

I want to hear how they're going to stop spending. Obama was the only one to say that we've got to stop the bleeding (literally and figuratively) associated with these inane foreign adventures.

Here's reality:

1. The USG has been on a spending spree that would make any woman blush.

2. The USG hasn't been making the money before it spends it (i.e. raising taxes) so we have a crushing level of debt before we talk about bailing out Wall Street

3. With the bailout of Wall Street, our debt to equity ratio is going to be so high that we're talking about losing our AAA credit rating.

When a individual is in this situation, they have to increase income (second job) and reduce spending. Governments are different than individuals but not as different as many would like to believe. A major portion of this debt is going to have to be paid off. Before you say, well, right enough, consider what that means. In order for the government (just like an individual) to pay off debt, they have to be running a budget surplus (in order to have loose change to make the monthly payments). Other than a couple of years under Clinton, when was the last time you remember the government running a surplus?

For time out of mind, all the government has been doing is rolling over the debt; retiring old debt but issuing new debt at the same time. Sorta like taking continuous credit card offers and transferring the balance from one credit card to another. That doesn't pay off a goddamn thing. The requisite level of fiscal discipline will be breathtaking for the spending addicts in DC. It'll be more interesting to watch than a smack addict going cold turkey.

And if they don't? There'll be a financial meltdown of a different sort. Oh! And did I mention that when you owe everybody on the planet and your credit limits are all reached, you won't have any money to help any voters?

In Iraq we knew what a WMD was, an Å-bomb. We didn't know where they were (it proved to be nowhere). In this instance, as you say, we know what the WMD is but we don't know where they all are. We know where some on them are but I doubt we've found them all.