http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/27/AR200809...

David Broder has this column in today's Washington Post where he says that McCain "won" the debate "on points" and that McCain established himself as the "alpha male" between he and Obama. His reasoning for this is based on the fact that Obama actually said that he agreed with McCain when he did and McCain never said once that he agreed with Obama. What world is Broder living in?

Broder is one of these washed up long time insiders that has taken our country down the road of ruin. His word should be rejected as part of the problem. He's sticking up for his generation of older white males that have ruled the U.S. since it's beginning, and he, like McCain, can't stomach the truth that our country is changing and there's nothing they can do about it.

While I don't agree with everything that Obama is saying, especially when it comes to war-mongering and pushing nuclear, coal, and biofuels, clearly Obama established himself, even on the topic of foreign affairs, which is supposed to be McCain's strong suit, as being the one that is controlled and able to handle the pressure. McCain came off as angry, hateful, and partisan. Even Chuck Todd, NBC political director, (hardly a flaming liberal) characterized McCain as "disdainful" of Obama, and it was probably worse than that. He wouldn't look at Obama, he used hateful tones and expressions, and he didn't once say that Obama had anything good to offer. Is this what Broder is saying is a "winner" in our country? I don't think so.

While Broder did mention the fact that McCain actually proposed a "freeze" on federal spending "except for defense" spending, which I give him credit for, because it was one of the major disclosures of the debate I thought, (and the network morning news shows for the most part also brushed over it) Broder shortchanged Obama's very skilled answer, and perhaps the soundbite of the debate in my opinion, when Obama retorted strongly that this was "using a hatchet when a scalpel was required." This response showed that Obama was going to try and rein in spending but not with a dogmatic precondition. And Obama provided a specific example of a category of spending that should be increased, preschool education, to show what he meant. But Broder failed to mention this - a huge omission, and to me a sign that he just doesn't get it.

But even more is the real implications of a "freeze." A freeze isn't a freeze at all. It's a cut, because of inflation. So, does that mean McCain is advocating for no COLAs for social security or medicare and medicaid? What about veterans benefits? Yet, where is Broder and news media on this? What would a true "freeze" on all federal spending other than "defense" really mean? What about our roads and bridges? What about our attempts to retool our energy and transportation sectors to combat record CO2 increases in the atmosphere and the growing impacts of global warming? What about the drag on the system from ill people that don't have insurance or enough insurance but don't have enough money to pay for needed treatment? What about making college more affordable for the poorer people in society? How is that going to be accomplished with a spending freeze? Broder brushes all of these aside and by his column, leaves himself open to all kinds of accusations, which I will think silently to myself but won't write over and above what I have written.

David Broder, if you, and McCain, can't do better than that, it is time for you to get out of the way and let the younger people lead. It's your type - with money and influence for decades - that have screwed things up. You aren't as smart or powerful as you think! And while the country may have a credit problem, your type has a credability problem.

As being a white person with roots from E. St. Louis, Illinois, and living most of my life well within a small circle around where I was raised, I just wonder how much of Broder and McCain's disdain isn't due to a deep seeded belief that in their older age, with all their experience, their acclaim and honors they have accrued over the years, their upbringing, and the like, shouldn't have to answer to the younger generations - especially from a "upstart" politician who thinks he's smarter and has more power than he should. I really get that feeling - and I've been around those kind of "alpha' males all my life. Broder, like McCain is out of touch.