lsanderson | Obama’s debate win

There is no need to recount the debate in full. It was a dull affair that amply exposed the mediocrity and conventional thinking that mars American politics and policy on both sides. It is enough to note the moment when things went decisively south for John McCain. That point came when Obama went on the offensive in what is, I believe, the key passage from the whole ninety-minute event. I’ve noted before that Barack Obama is one of the great rhetoricians of our era, even if he loses his eloquence when shaken and unscripted. Prodded and mocked over the better part of an hour by his opponent — through the whole debate, McCain derided his “understanding” seven times, and his “naivete” three times — he finally let loose with a brutal and effective exercise in rhetorical parallelism, made the more cruel by its basic truth:

“John,” said the Democratic nominee, “you like to pretend like the war started in 2007. You talk about the surge. The war started in 2003, and at the time when the war started, you said it was going to be quick and easy. You said we knew where the weapons of mass destruction were. You were wrong. You said that we were going to be greeted as liberators. You were wrong. You said that there was no history of violence between Shiite and Sunni. And you were wrong.”

In one swoop, the superiority of John McCain on foreign affairs was laid waste. An effective debater would have responded with a series of his foe’s own grievous errors in the same sphere — and despite his thin public record, Barack Obama has several. Instead, McCain lamely replied, “I’m afraid Senator Obama doesn’t understand the difference between a tactic and a strategy,” and segued into a non sequitur about General Petraeus. To paraphrase Tallyrand, this was worse than a crime — it was a mistake. Assaulted on the very pillar of his candidacy, John McCain yielded.

Stolen Shamelessly from Joshua Trevino