The Dallas Morning News has a good fact check page open that I suggest you view.

DISCLAIMER: I am partisan and I made up my mind to vote for Bush long before there was even a Democratic candiate. I will however attempt to give my impressions of the first presidential debate as non-partisan as possible. Readers may choose to agree or choose to disagree, and if you do either I would like to hear everyone’s opinion on the matter.

In the first presidential debate the topic was foreign policy, which turned heavily towards Iraq for the first 30+ minutes. It is my opinion that John Kerry carried the first portion of the debate, not because of the issues, but because it appeared that Bush was on the defensive taking shots from Kerry right and left. There were gaffes by both candidates, but one sticks in my mind that was said by John Kerry.

Never confuse the warrior with the war.

While Senator Kerry is right in this phrase, it is just a bit ironic given his history of labeling his fellow soldiers that faught and lost their lives in Vietnam war criminals. To his credit however, Bush did not seize the opportunity this afforded and seemed not to be listening to his fellow candidate.

Kerry made his regular talking points regarding alliances and his newest criticism of the war in Iraq as being a diversion from the war on terror. I do not believe this is an argument that will win over voters. It is clear before the war as well as now that terrorism within Iraq was deep rooted and is even more deep rooted now. Our fine young men and women, my brave peers, are digging up terrorist cells and networks and eliminating them. No, it’s not as fast as we all would like to see it, but it is happening.

Bush hammered Kerry on his continued mention of not having coallition partners, but he has done so many times before with mixed results. It fires the base up but I’m not sure how much it does for the undecideds. Kerry mentioned the lack of safety inside of Iraq and Bush brought up Kerry’s and a member of Kerry’s campaign denegrating of Iraqi Prime Minister Allawi.

This was classic because many viewers probably did not realize this. What Bush should have done is much of what fellow blogger Scrappleface used as a humorous peace and suggested Kerry call Allawi up and offer to give Allawi a guided tour of Iraq. Doing so would have interjected a great deal of humor as well as serving the point that much of the criticism just might be because of the political season.

The discussion quickly turned to foreign policy as a whole, specifically North Korea and Iran as well as nuclear proliferation and alliances. John Kerry continues to live in a fantasy world that he would be able to somehow sweetalk “allies” into supporting our crusade in Iraq and in the war on terror. Bush clearly outclassed the Senator when he mentioned the nations that are now supporting this war and how his policies have enabled Libya to give up WMDs and made Afghanistan and Iraq partners in our fight instead of our enemies.

John Kerry is just plain wrong when it comes to North Korea. President Clinton did talk with North Korea and made a treaty with the nation, however North Korea threw this agreement out the window and continued to develop nuclear weapons. It is ironic that the Senator that criticizes unilateralism wants to handle North Korea in a unilateral method instead of with other nations by our side as Bush does.

The middle of the debate was a wash as neither candidate stood above the other in my opinion. The later part of the debate was won by George Bush. If the American viewing public was still watching the debate after the first hour, Bush would have won them over with his candor and his bewilderment of Kerry’s ideas concerning North Korea and Iran.

Senator Kerry tonight was in direct contrast with what he has been saying on the stump this past week even agreeing that Saddam Hussein needed to be removed. Kerry has said as of late that he would not have approved the war knowing what we now know regarding WMDs. If you would not support the war Saddam Hussein would still be in power. It’s clear cut.

Overall, Bush seemed Presidential tonight as he should have been and Kerry played the role of the attacking incumbent. It shows the stark contrast of the two men who want to lead this fine nation. It is in this contrast that I believe the American public will opt to take the presidential candidate versus the naysayer. Time will tell though.

Bush controlled the debate when it mattered at the end and this should be the what is remembered by American voters. In Bush’s closing argument, he hounded Kerry on Kerry’s comment that a preemptive strike would have to be approved by the world. As I have not seen a transcript of tonight and going strictly off of memory, I’m not 100 percent positive Kerry said this. By Bush insisting his opponent did say this along with Kerry’s previous statements concerning similar things, Bush drove the point home that will resonate with the American public that he will not put America’s security in front of other nations while Kerry will.

Update:
In my last paragraph above, I mentioned Kerry’s take on preemptive attacks. I missed the quote but I will leave it up above to stay consistent. The correct quote according to Hugh Hewitt is “But if and when you do it Jim, you have to do it in a way that passes the global test…” Wow! I’m sorry, but Kerry seriously blew it with this reponse and this is the soundbite that will be played over and over in Bush commercials.

Update:
I don’t think I made my points above clear enough. Both candidates looked sharp at certain times tonight and both seemed to have the confidence needed, however to me it appeared as if Bush was more resolute and didn’t seem to backtrack while at times Kerry gave me that impression. To the average viewer though that doesn’t follow the campaign every day like I have, I’m not sure if this will be what is remembered in the debate.

Bush hammered home his talking points while Kerry seemed to try to put too many into the debate. With the attention span of viewers, Bush will probably win the game of talking points based on the number of times he hammered them home.

Update:
The consensus around the internet is that the debate was a draw. If the debate was a draw, it will go into the favor of John Kerry as he is trailing in the polls. I maintain that this was not a draw and that Bush won the debate if the viewing public watched the entire debate. Bush did very well towards the last half, much like his convention speech. There’s no other way of putting it other than Bush is a strong closer.

The winner of the debate however will not be known until November 2 not just because this is election day, but because there is a month of spin and soundbites that will reverberate throughout the internet, radio and television.

I feel that there really is one soundbite that will come out of this debate and that is of John Kerry saying a preemptive war must pass the “global test.” This is pacifism and appeasement folks. This is the anniversary of Neville Chamberlain’s appeasement towards Adolf Hitler right before Germany went on the offensive yet again. The Bush campaign could have a field day with this if they use the two methods of appeasement in the right context in advertising and new talking points.

Update:
The more I think of the debate and read some quotes that I either missed or forgot, I believe the two tied tonight but it will translate down the road much better for Bush. There are several soundbites that came from Kerry that discuss his desire to let the UN approve of any U.S. action. I do not believe Kerry feels this way entirely, however he has consistently (the only consistent) said that the U.S. should be more multilateral as well as there are now two mentions that the UN or other countries should approve U.S. action.

This is a 9/10/2001 methodology and not a post-9/11 one. Whereas Kerry and Democrats argue that Bush failed the UN, I argue that the UN failed not only the U.S. but the entire world. Bush made no mention of the Oil-for-Food scandal that kept France, Germany and Russia out of Iraq and he has not done so effectively enough thus far. The Bush Campaign however should force this issue to the voters as well as make the case of “How many UN resolutions are enough before you have to act on your threats?”

While the DNC will spin a few Bush comments that I do not see any being vulnerable, the GOP has some strong material to display the clear cut differences between the two candidates and they will help Bush out.

Update:

ABC News had the only instant post-debate poll, which it said was a random “scientific” sampling. It showed that 45 percent thought Mr. Kerry had won, 36 percent sided with the president and 17 percent deemed it a tie.

But another ABC poll result cut against that grain. Before the debate, 50 percent of respondents preferred Mr. Bush and 46 percent Mr. Kerry, said anchor Peter Jennings. Post-debate, the numbers were 51 percent for the president and 47 percent for his Democratic challenger.

- Dallas Morning News

Other Coverage:
Blogs of War
Allah
Poliblog
Right on Red
Outside the Beltway
The American Mind with a good football analogy on the debate
Blogs for Bush with 10 Impressions from the Debate
In Search of Utopia with a good roundup
Say Anything who comes to my conclusion, but has the opposite response I did in certain aspects

Say Anything linked with More Thoughts On The Debate
Ramblings' Journal linked with Friday Morning Quarterbacking
bLogicus linked with First Debate Round-Up Favors Kerry
Generation Why? linked with Post-Debate Wrap-Up... We Called It!
Allah Is In The House linked with
ISOU linked with Arround the Blogsphere.... The Debate V
RIGHT ON RED >> linked with My Reaction to Debate One