Tulip — w/r/t the apology issue, see my comments above. As to your other points. The “we want democracy, but only if we like who you elected” needs some explanation. I can guarantee you that “we” didn’t want Hamas elected in the Palestinian territories, but we still supported democracy there. And the U.S. gov’t won’t be electing the next generation of leaders in either Iraq or Afghanistan. Of course you neglect to point out that the people in Iraq and Afghanistan wouldn’t be electing anyone, if it weren’t for U.S. intervention.
Your torture issue is a fair one, and a hotly debated one here in the U.S. I’m probably more on your side on this one than not, but I think you again have to be careful here to not trust all the stories of alleged torture that have been bandied about about the U.S. There is no doubt that the U.S. did waterboard, I believe, 2 or 3 very high-level Al Qaeda prisoners after unsuccessful interrogations but the U.S. has absolutely not been conducting any sort of wide-scale torture as is often alleged and insinuated in much of the press. You would likely call water-boarding torture, but there are a significant number of people who don’t agree. The reason why is that, many, many of our military people go through water-boarding for their military training and since it does not cause any permanent damage but just is very frightening, many people will not call it torture. Still, I think it is very important that the U.S. is as consistent as possible on this issue so I think that is a fair criticism.
On the issue of “rounding people up”…I find this quite disingenuous. With the exception of one man, Jose Padilla, there has been no mass rounding up of people without charges, and his case went through our entire court system and to the Supreme Court. After 9/11 there were groups of people who had illegal overstayed visas and committed a large number of other immigration violations who were sought out and deported, but, while this may seem awfully harsh, it is absolutely within the laws of the U.S., and ALWAYS has been that we can remove people in the country illegally. there were a couple of cases where innocent people, not guilty of immigration violations were caught up in this. And they also have won court cases and damages, etc. The point being that the “government”, in the end, through the courts and rights of appeals of citizens did the right thing. If you are talking about people “rounded up” when fighting in Afghanistan who are now in Guantanamo, that is an entirely different question, that, again, is hotly debated here. But the justification is simple, the people were caught fighting against our forces or abetting the fighting. If this was a conventional war, they would be prisoners of war and held, without charges, until the war ended. Because they are not acting as agents of a state they are unlawful combatants. The difficulty in this war is that there is unlikely to be a clear end, so what is to be done with prisoners captured? And, much as critics of Guantanamo like to imply that it is an easy thing, it is not an easy situation at all. Should they simply be freed after a few years? A number have been freed after military review panels let them go. and a good number of them have gone right back to fighting. Should they be put on trial in U.S. courts? Well, that would be a huge change, as non-U.S. citizens have NEVER had the same rights to U.S. courts. And then there is the difficult issue of evidence to make a legal case, etc. which is often very difficult to collect when one is in the middle of fighting a war. Again, these issues are very complex, and the one-sided view that is often seen in the press, ESPECIALLY the overseas press, often does not tell both sides of the story.
Finally, as to Couric and Gibson — when I see either Couric or Gibson do some tough questioning of Obama on his relationships with Ayers and Wright and Rezco and his own complete lack of executive experience, then I’ll start believing in some sort of press balance. Nearly the entire U.S. media is in the bag for Obama. If you go and find the actual transcript for Gibson’s interview with Palin, for example, when he asks her about the U.S. relationship with Russia, you will see that his show intentionally edited out nearly a paragraph of her explanation where she clearly downplayed the idea of any real conflict with Russia. So what were the headlines the next day? Palin suggests war with Russia might be necessary, etc. Couric and Gibson’s goals were to make Palin look as bad as possible. And you know what? That’s perfectly fine with me, as long as they take the exact same attitude with Obama and Biden. That’s why Tim Russert was so admired, because he took it to both sides of the aisle, despite his own ideology. Unfortunately there are very few Tim Russerts out there, and Gibson and Couric certainly aren’t two of them.
I enjoy the debate, but this will likely be my last comment. Time to move onto other things.
All the best.

From my perspective, I’m not quite sure what exactly is wrong with the US government (or any government for that matter) apologizing for some of its actions (actually make that many of its actions). Yes the US government has done many good things, but it most certainly has certainly caused quite a bit of destruction, death, and suffering to millions of people around the world, especially in recent years. Plus when you factor in the hypocrisy that has been on full display for the past 8 years (ie: we want democracy, but only if we like who you elected. You can’t torture people but we can. You can’t round people up and detain without charges for years but we can. You can’t prop up dictators but we can) I think some major apologies, not to mention changes, are in order quite frankly.

And with regards to couric and gibson being “hostile interviewers”, they were about as hostile as a newborn kitten.

“ad hominem attacks on people’s intelligence are not mature ways of assessing candidates.”

You are voting in the 2 most powerful people in the WORLD. God forbid they might appear “elitist”. I think any arguments, even “ad hominem attacks” on their intelligence might, MIGHT have just a tiny bit of relevance. If you don’t believe intelligence is an issue, I feel sorry for your country that you are allowed to vote.

“we do it with our military that not only fights, but does so many other positive things around the world that are too numerous to state here”

I can list people from differeing parts of the world that I’ve spoken with face to face who hate your country for what it’s military has done, from South Americans to South East Asians to Australians. You say people rely on America in a way that seems to give you an excuse to defend its military actions around the world, no matter how destructive.

“And I want a president who will make THAT case, not be running around the world apologizing for the U.S.”

No, why would you want a president apologizing for screwing up? You might lose grip on that all encompassing power you were mentioning before.

“and thinking that he can sit down with a person like Ahmadinejad and actually convince him of anything.”

No, why would you want to be diplomatic and talk to anyone? Just shoot them in face, make everyone hate you even more and bring on the next, even more crazier fundamentalist in his place.

In regards to views and contrasts, while not written by me, I think it sums up nicely:

Obama/Biden vs McCain/Palin

What if the roles were reversed? Think about it.

Would the country’s collective point of view be different?

Could racism be the culprit?

Ponder the following:

What if the Obamas had paraded five children across the stage,

including a three month old infant and an unwed, pregnant teenage
daughter?

What if John McCain was a former president of the Harvard Law Review?

What if Barack Obama finished fifth from the bottom of his graduating
class?

What if McCain had only married once, and Obama was a divorcee?

What if Obama was the candidate who left his first wife after a severe
disfiguring car accident, when she no longer measured up to his
standards?

What if Obama had met his second wife in a bar and had a long affair
while he was still married?

What if Michelle Obama was the wife who not only became addicted to pain
killers but also acquired them illegally through her charitable
organization?

What if Cindy McCain graduated from Harvard?

What if Obama had been a member of the Keating Five?(The Keating Five
were five United States Senators accused of corruption in 1989, igniting
a major political scandal as part of the larger Savings and Loan crisis
of the late 1980s and early 1990s.)

What if McCain was a charismatic, eloquent speaker?

What if Obama couldn’t read from a teleprompter?

What if Obama was the one who had military experience that included
discipline problems and a record of crashing seven planes?

What if Obama was the one who was known to display publicly, on many
occasions, a serious anger management problem?

What if Michelle Obama’s family had made their money from beer
distribution?

What if the Obamas had adopted a white child?

You could easily add to this list. If these questions reflected reality,
do you really believe the election numbers would be as close as they
are?

This is what racism does. It covers up, rationalizes and minimizes
positive qualities in one candidate and emphasizes negative qualities in
another when there is a color difference.

Educational Background:

Barack Obama: Columbia University – B.A. Political Science with a
Specialization in International Relations.

Harvard – Juris Doctor (J.D.) Magna Cum Laude

Joseph Biden: University of Delaware – B.A. in History and B.A. in
Political Science.

Syracuse University College of Law – Juris Doctor (J.D.)

vs.

John McCain: United States Naval Academy – Class rank: 894 of 899

Sarah Palin: Hawaii Pacific University – 1 semester
North Idaho College – 2 semesters – general study
University of Idaho – 2 semesters -journalism
Matanuska-Susitna College – 1 semester
University of Idaho – 3 semesters – B.A. in Journalism

Education isn’t everything, but this is about the two highest offices in
the land as well as our standing in the world.

You make the call.

American Bedu — I don’t mind things getting rough as long as they are honest. My problem is with the lies and rumors going around and the fact that much of the American press is happy to propagate lies about McCain and his supporters while they ignore what is going on with Obama and his supporters.

For example, how many of the commenters on this blog are aware that Obama said at a recent rally, “I need you to go out and talk to your friends and talk to your neighbors. I want you to talk to them whether they are independent or whether they are Republican. I want you to argue with them and get in their face”? Obama himself directly called for his supporters to “argue with” and “get in the their face” people who don’t agree with them. (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/09/17/politics/p185733D40.DTL&type=politics) Yet this comment is barely heard about while the fact that one person at one rally for Palin yelled a nasty comment is some how reflective of McCain and Palin being supportive of thugs. It’s ridiculous, but that kind of reporting bias is going on every single day here. And if you are overseas, you are likely only seeing the one side, and not the other.
As to what others think of America — well, this is how we change power. We don’t fight, we don’t pass power from father to son, we get in political, verbal mudfights every 2, 4 years. I’ll take it over most of the ways that power is passed on in the countries people are judging from.
Finally as to the diplomats’ opinions, it is absolutely no surprise to me that most American diplomats support Obama. The State Department of the United States is overwhelmingly staffed by people of a left-leaning persuasion (as is a good deal of most of the bureaucracy of the U.S. government), so I would even expect a room of U.S. diplomats to lean to Obama. And it is obvious that Obama is saying all the things that foreigners seem to want to hear from America — they seem to want America to be humbled, to apologize for itself etc. This is exactly the talk Obama talks and I am sure it is music in the ears of nearly everyone overseas. But here is the problem. The fact is that when push comes to shove, over and over again, the world needs the U.S., looks to the U.S., etc. And we respond over and over again. We do it monetarily, we do it in humanitarian missions, we do it with private citizens who donate millions of dollars to charities that operate helping the poor around the world, and yes, we do it with our military that not only fights, but does so many other positive things around the world that are too numerous to state here. In short, the world looks to the U.S when they are in trouble, and no matter how we have been treated and reviled by the people in those same countries, we still come to their aid because it is the right thing to do. In Saudi Arabia we need only look back at the first Gulf War to see what I am talking about. And do you know who voted against the first Gulf War? Joe Biden did. And based on his rhetoric, it seems highly unlikely that Obama would have supported that war any more than he supports the current Iraq war. There is no way to tell of course, but that’s my guess. My point is this — I understand that people around the world get frustrated with the U.S., I understand all the arguments against the recent Iraq war. Even though I support George Bush, I think he made mistakes both in his rhetoric and in tactical military decisions in the war. But in the bigger picture, I believe that America is a force for good in the world, that we try to help where we can. We’re not perfect, but we are not the evil entity we are often portrayed to be. And I want a president who will make THAT case, not be running around the world apologizing for the U.S. and thinking that he can sit down with a person like Ahmadinejad and actually convince him of anything. The level of hubris involved in thinking that he, Obama, is going to be so much more convincing than any one of the parade of diplomats from the U.N, the E.U. and yes, the U.S. is really worrisome.

Again, I thank you for the opportunity to air my thoughts here. I don’t think that I will convince anyone, but I hope that people will understand that there are good and decent and mature reasons for supporting McCain in this election, just as there are for Obama.

Since I’m not an American, I can’t vote but when the most powerful man in the world is about to be voted in, I’d like to think the Americans are voting for someone that isn’t just “brave” or a woman that isn’t just “easy to relate to”, but people who also have some bloody brains!!!!!!!!!!!!

God forbid the most powerful people in the world should actually be people who can think. If you dont believe John McCain is incapable…. Palin? I mean, come on Joe Sixpack!

I do agree with you that at this stage in the campaigns, it is getting ugly on all sides. What impression and perception does this now give of America?

I’m sure many will find it interesting. I was at a function over the (Saudi) weekend which included various officials, diplomats and well-traveled professional expats. American guests were in the minority but still the upcoming election was a hot topic of conversation. An informal poll was taken among the guests (which included some foreign ambassadors) and it was anonymous for Obama. What does that say?