Question Number Twelve: What did you think of the debate on Friday night? We're not asking for a winner or loser necessarily, although you may name one. What were the high points? What were Bush's best moments? Kerry's? Should this debate - should any debate - sway the votership?

Many important questions were raised at the Presidential debate/town hall meeting last Friday - so many that only a few minutes could be devoted to each one. Every issue deserves serious thought, and a consideration of all viewpoints, to make an intelligent decision. I can be swayed by complete, well thought-out arguments. But it is disconcerting to realize that people can be swayed by two-minute "performances" such as these debates give us.

The President gave a much better "performance" in this debate than in the first one. As Ann Richards has said, George W. Bush is best when he "doesn't allow himself to be distracted by the question." So when he sticks to a basic message, talking points, and right-wing buzzwords and phrases, he appeals to emotions, can appear "strong," and can be extremely persuasive.

The best example was when he was asked how he planned to repair relations with other countries. The President's response did not speak at all to repairing relations. Instead, it was a monologue of patriotic jingoism. Unfortunately, I could see this being very effective with sectors of the public for whom this kind of talk provides a needed emotional security: I love our country! We have a great country! As president, I stand on principle, as Ronald Reagan did. Sometimes unpopular decisions have to be made because they are right!

In response to later questions, President Bush used buzz-phrases such as "vicious enemy with an ideology of hate" and "freedom is on the march!" He spoke of Kerry as having "naive and dangerous ideas." He said Kerry is the most liberal senator in Congress (an assertion that watchdog groups quickly showed was false) who will tax everyone because "that's what liberals do."

One Bush statement I have not heard anyone pick up on was that the war on terror will be a "long, long war." It would be interesting to know what was behind that statement.

I liked Kerry's portrayal of the President as using "weapons of mass deception," although I think he could have expounded on this more. Good points raised by Kerry included:

* The top 1 percent of Americans stand to get $89 Billion from the tax cuts - more than the bottom 80 percent combined - and that top 1 percent is all that should be rolled back (in other words, Kerry, as he stated directly into the camera, would not roll back taxes for those making under $200,000);

* In order to get enough votes in Congress for the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLBA), President Bush promised $28 Billion more than he actually allocated;

* Less than 1 percent of health-care costs have anything to do with malpractice suits. When Bush made his tired speeches about tort reform, he left out the fact that up to 30 percent of the rise in costs is due to high CEO salaries, advertising, and other costs of allowing private industry to drive health care in this country - the costs, in other words, passed on to us all by the myriad HMOs and private insurance companies.

* John Edwards authored the Patients' Bill of Rights. No one mentioned that in Texas, a Patients' Bill of Rights was passed over then-Gov. Bush's veto and without his signature. Later, when running for president, he claimed credit for it.

* Tax breaks, incentives and loopholes for U.S. corporations that outsource jobs to other countries need to be eliminated;

* Loose nuclear material remains a huge danger - one about which the Bush administration has not done enough - and the need to account for all of it is urgent.

Issues so far pretty much ignored by both candidates include:

* Being poor remains a plight for too many Americans - and more and more members of the middle class are being squeezed toward that plight.

There is too much corporate power over our lives at home, as well as over foreign policy.