[Kätzchen]

I wish I could distill into simple sets of information what is on my mind concerning serious debates of this nature, but I am not that skilled yet in doing so. I process information in relatively very slow ways and one of the reasons I am not so good at that yet is because I largely think in abstract terms and ways and it takes me a while to narrow items of consideration down to a point where I can make sense of these sorts of things.

I know who I will be casting my vote for in the upcoming election but aside from that, to me the larger part of the story rests upon extended and ongoing national and international unrest. Not only is it terribly important that the US have a leader who is capable of making reliable executive decision, that takes into consideration the health of our own society, but there needs to be a concentrated effort in demonstrating a capacity to take into consideration the health of other societies and social issues of extreme paramount of importance: For example, the recent markers of global unrest in Libya, Egypt, Syria (Middle East participant societies) and items of unrest residing on the global stage of economic unrest (the Euro affair, etc) - all to say that our own Presidential election issues affect not only us, but others who work cooperatively on a global stage. In my mind, leadership is not a singular act - it is cooperative by design.

To me, this is why - as an observer to the debates or other issues recieving wide media attention - we (the general 'we') may not see items publicly addressed, or items that we feel need public redress, in timely ways; as there might be more at stake than can be given a public accounting for.

(eta: Where was Gwen Eiffel? Does anyone know why she was not appointed to facilitate the debate? I like her style as a facilitator, moderator.)