We DVR'd tonight's debate, and finished watching a little while ago, so I thought I'd type out some thoughts and observations.

This is out of order, but I was struck by something Senator Obama said near the end of the debate. He thought everyone would agree that America's standing in the world -- how citizens of other nations perceive us -- has fallen, and that as President he would "restore" that standing. No doubt via his wild popularity in areas of the globe where anti-Americanism is rooted.

What's astounding about that statement is not so much the observation that the united States may well be less "popular" among our fellow citizens of the world, but the implicit assumption in Obama's statement that it is our fault. This is a staple of left-wing thought that goes back decades, to the 1960s: "If only America stopped behaving so badly, more people would like us and then we'd be safer." One more exhibit in the chain of evidence that below the surface, Barack Obama is a run-of-the-mill left-wing liberal politician - an old liberal wine in a new wine skin.

It's hard to say who "won" the debate. Both sides claim victory. Neither candidate committed an embarrassing gaffe in the sense of a damaging soundbite that could be played over and over. And the format is a huge improvement over the modified joint press conference that has become the norm.

Neither McCain nor Obama were particularly impressive on the subject of the financial crisis rescue place, despite Jim Lehrer's valiant efforts to get a straight answer out of them. Certainly, neither of them said anything, but stylistically Obama came off better. He has a gift for sounding intelligent and informed without actually saying anything at all. McCain seemed kind fo disjointed here.

I think McCain committed a mini-gaffe here that may grow into a bleeding sore. Pressed by Lehrer, McCain did, in an off-hand, throw-away manner, say he'd vote for the Bush plan. I don't think he really meant the specific Bush plan, because it is DOA and there is no final language for the Senate. But still, it could come back to haunt him if he balks at the final bill.

I'd also debit McCain for a big mistake of omission by not mercilessly hammering Barack Obama's plan to tax America into prosperity. McCain mentioned it but never followed up hard. I think that's symptomatic of his relative weakness as an expositor of the free market economy, as opposed to his self-assuredness talking about national security and foreign policy.

While Obama wasn't as open in his embrace of government as the solution to our problems as he was at the 9/11 Columbia University forum, tonight he fairly sneered at the free market. When Obama brought up the Great Depression, that was a opening for McCain to point that Obama's advocacy of tax increases and hostility to free trade in a weak economy mirror the policy errors that turned the Great Depression into the Great Depression.

When Obama compared $300 billion in McCain tax cuts to the $18 billion in earmarks, thye Illinois Senator left himself wide open to admonishment on the difference between a tax cut -- letting Americans keep more of their money -- and earmarks -- taking Americans money and spending  it on pork.

Liberals think of tax cuts as government expenditures, flowing from the assumption that government has a prior and preceding claim on our wealth and any attempt to let us keep more of it is a "cost" to government. I was waiting for McCain to pounced on Obama's comparison and hold it up as an prime example of that tired liberal thinking, but he just let it slide.

So while Obama got the better of the first segment -- the economic portion of the debate -- I think he was generally on the defensive for the rest. Why? I'll explain in a subsequent post tomorrow.