Real quick, because it's 3 AM in Brasil:

1) Obama started well, and scored with comments on taxation and the bailout.

2) McCain did not convincingly explain how he would shrink the deficit while denouncing Obama's tax ideas.  Merely cutting spending would be a noble goal, but a difficult accomplishment with a Democratic congress and government jobs at stake during a recession.

3)  Obama calling McCain "John" during the debate WAS disrespectful.  While not the most important thing, it was a mistake.

4)  McCain was more authoritative in explaining his strategies for engagement/eventual disengagement from Iraq.  You may not agree with all of his points, but he did a decent job of explaining his logic.  His long-winded answers prevented Obama from jumping in and counter-punching as he seemed to want to do.

5)  Obama was not as strong in the second half of the debate, but he held his own.  Both were light years ahead of George W. Bush in actually addressing questions with coherent, supported answers. 

All the things I've already written about the Republicans needing to be turned away from power this time still apply.  So in the absence of a complete home run for McCain, the advantage goes to Obama.  I still think he'll win.

I will say that McCain was more measured and more in command of his thoughts on the issues than I expected him to be.  We'll see if that extends into the next debate, which should focus on more domestic issues. 

There were a few occasions where Obama's inexperience showed, but there weren't any disastrous gaffes.  He shouldn't have tried to use Henry Kissinger as a reference.  I saw Kissinger's discussion with the other Secs. of State on CNN today, and McCain's characterization of his comment was a lot closer to what he actually said than what Obama claimed.  Obama doesn't get points for stretching the truth.  (And I think Kissinger is right:  Iran talks at Sec. of Stat level, rather than presidential level, would be the way to start.  Just as in the Nixon/China years.)

Good night.