They way the debate was setup interruptions were inevitable...This was NOT a debate where each candidate got 30 seconds and they moved on...

It was SUPPOSED to be a back-and-forth between the candidates...Just like everyday conversations, people jump in when they can...ESPECIALLY when being argumentative...

I didn't see it being "over the line" with either candidate, but I DID see the moderator giving more leeway to one side...

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd

I don't think that Lerher was giving one side an advantage, I think it was a stylistic issue. It's harder to give McCain more time when he forcefully interrupts. That was the difference between the McCain and Obama interruptions. McCain was more forceful and Obama was academically protesting. I've taught the same tactics. The forceful interruptions wouldn't work as well for Obama.

__________________

The problem goes back to what the Saddleback Q&A shown...

Ask McCain a question...you get an answer...

Ask Obama a question...you get a 67 page thesis filled with nuance and arbitrary arguments...

As someone wrote last week (I forget where I saw it)...

Ask McCain what time it is and he'll tell you the time...

Ask Obama what time it is and he'll tell you how watches are made...

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd

But for the most part, the issues we are fighting with require a certain amount of voter education.

__________________

Absolutely...

But that requires direct answers and not pontifications...

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd

And this is where you and I disagree on characterizations and understanding. A direct answer is not an answer on these issues because there isn't a direct answer. The issues are far too complicated for a direct answer. The answer must be as nuanced as the issue.

__________________