The format of this particular debate struck me as a problem, and Brokaw's rigid enforcement exacerbated it. There was no opportunity for rebuttals, and whoever went last in a given segment could get away totally unchallenged with some pretty outrageous statements.

"#4b" in your post was your observation that McCain was "hardly sleazy". Well, ahem, as I saw it, McCain caught on to the format's unfair advantage pretty early, and when he was in the final position, he fell back on some of his most obnoxious and thoroughly discredited attacks. Like the lie that's been disproven over and over about Obama wanting to raise taxes on small businesses. Or that he's voted 94 times for tax increases.

You could tell Obama was getting frustrated at being unable to defend himself. He gracefully worked in a couple of rebuttals later in a way that still answered the current question. If anything, McCain's blunt attacks gave Obama a chance to demonstrate a level of mental agility and grace under fire an order of magnitude beyond McCain. Still, it clearly wore on Obama, and I'm sure that's why he rebelled there near the end and demanded some extra time for a rebuttal.

I have to call McCain's tactics sleazy. He must know he's lying, but he seems so desperate that he'll resort to anything. McCain's known to be extremely sensitive to having his integrity and honesty called into question. so as the debate dragged on I found myself praying that Obama would find his spine and call McCain a liar to his face. No such luck; no volcanic eruption of Mt. McCain. But there's one more debate to go, and maybe both of them are holding back for that one.

One can only hope. A civil debate reveals nothing and lets the politicians stick to their scripts. We need a rough debate that provokes the ad-libs that reveal the truth.