Ruthie Kelly’s Portfolio

The first presidential debate took place last Friday, and Republican nominee Sen. John McCain and Democratic nominee Sen. Barack Obama confronted each other one-on-one for the first time. The topic of discussion was foreign policy, which as moderator Jim Lehrer pointed out, “by definition includes the current global financial crisis.”

Each candidate chose a different strategy to appeal to viewers, with Obama emphasizing their differences and his detailed knowledge, and McCain hitting hard on his experience and appealing emotionally with his use of stories. And despite my fervent support of Obama, I can safely say that neither candidate won the debate outright, if by “won” you mean “made significant headway that would sway those elusive swing voters and undecideds.” McCain performed surprisingly well, considering that he’s shorter and less eloquent than Obama, characteristics that spelled doom in past debates. He spoke very passionately, even if his eyes were glued to the moderator, avoiding his opponent, audience and camera.

But there was one thing that stood out significantly as I watched the candidates volley back and forth, interrupting each other again and again. McCain was understandably emphasizing his experience, reminding us that he was elected to the House of Representatives in 1983 and he’s “been around a long while,” but he kept trying to undermine Obama’s experience. They were little digs, such as remarking on Obama’s “naiveté” and saying he “just doesn’t understand” and “just doesn’t get it.”

Unfortunately for McCain, these attempts were painfully transparent. Language like that is the language of an intimidator and manipulator - in essence, the language of a bully. Speakers use it so they don’t really have to engage your points of contention because you are “too stupid to understand.” But one thing that the debate left no doubt about is that Obama does understand the multitude of America’s foreign policy situations. Looking at it in perspective, both Obama and McCain have a level of foreign relations knowledge that greatly surpasses that of previous presidential candidates, notably that of our current president, George W. Bush.

It’s true, Obama hasn’t been in politics for as long as McCain has. But the continued refusal to acknowledge Obama’s time as a community organizer and senator in the Illinois state legislature as a valuable and legitimate part of his experience says more about McCain than Obama. Especially considering that McCain includes his years in the House in his own experience, where he had considerably less influence and impact than Obama did as a state legislator. Of our nation’s 100 senators, only 19 have served longer than McCain, and the fifth down on that list is Obama’s running mate, Sen. Joe Biden, who took office in the Senate 14 years before McCain did and is in the top 20 on the list of longest serving senators in the history of America. Biden also has actual successful bills as proof of the bipartisan work McCain claims to value.

McCain also attempted to show Obama’s “inexperience” by noting Obama’s comparably fewer visits to foreign countries. What’s ironic about this is that Obama is arguably the most traveled freshman senator. He’s only been in office for a little more than three years, but he has traveled to Eurasia, visiting Russia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Germany and England. He’s been to Africa, visiting South Africa, Kenya, Sudan, the Congo and Djibouti, and to the Middle East, visiting Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Jordan, Israel, Iraq and Afghanistan. He’s doing pretty well making contacts in foreign countries considering McCain got an 18-year head start.

Yet McCain kept repeating the “doesn’t get it” line, which was one thing that McCain didn’t seem to “get” himself. Just because someone doesn’t agree with your assessment of a foreign policy situation doesn’t mean that they don’t understand the situation. Disagreement does not equal ignorance and inexperience. His insistence otherwise was disproven by Obama’s own answers and replies, which showcased his detailed knowledge and well-thought-out assessments regarding nuclear proliferation, plans for Iraq and Afghanistan and the Russian aggression toward Georgia. McCain’s comments, which showcased a level of knowledge we can only expect from a former soldier and 20-year veteran of the Senate, served only to highlight his own condescending attitude and invalidate his claims about bipartisanship and cooperation across the aisle.

Both senators did well in the debate on Friday. But McCain’s glaring deficiencies stood out in a way Obama’s artful avoidances did not. We’ll just have to watch the next two debates to see which of them sways the hearts and minds of the American people.

Read the original column online here.