Well, if there were any pro-choice women in America who were still considering voting for McCain, he probably lost virtually every one of their votes with his startlingly insensitive, demeaning, and sarcastic dismissal of the need to take into account the health of the mother when considering abortion restrictions.
Am I mistaken or did McCain openly mock women's health and their competency to make these types of decisions as simply a manipulative tool of the pro-choice movement rather than as a legitimate concern for women for whom a pregnancy could be life-threatening?
Sarah Palin must be so proud right now.
Showing posts with label debate. Show all posts
Showing posts with label debate. Show all posts
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Other assorted thoughts post-debate
Some other thoughts that I jotted down over the 90 minutes of the debate...
Did McCain somehow or other just manage to sound like the aggrieved party when it came to negative advertising and seemingly skirt the reprehensible things that have been said on behalf of and by the McCain/Palin ticket? That's pretty ballsy.
The $3 million overhead projector makes a return visit! Does Mac realize this isn't something you use to show PowerPoint presentations?
Obama's explanation of Ayers and ACORN seemed to clarify things, not that it will stop them from being a rallying cry for Governor Palin.
Obama declined to criticize Palin when given a chance, saying that when it comes to her qualifications, that he'd "leave it up to the American people." My initial reaction was "aaarrghhh! why didn't he say something?". However, with a bit more distance, it was a wise call on his part. Why run the risk of headlines tomorrow saying he'd attacked her? Still, I'd love to hear his private conversations with Michelle about how he really feels!
OK, I get that "Joe the Plumber" is supposed to be the regular guy, McCain's version of Palin's Joe Six-pack/Hockey Mom but seriously, Bob Schieffer should have arranged for the guy to have a seat at the table, they spent so much time talking about him!
Speaking of Bob Schieffer, did it appear to anyone else that he allowed McCain to have the last word in the majority of the volleys?
Someone needs to remind the Big O to stop using the royal "we" and avoid starting all of his answers with, "Look...".
Case in point on the defense/offense thing -- Obama gets first crack at the health care answer and spends his time explaining his plan (so far so good) and then just stops. I'm sitting here knowing that the McCain plan to tax benefits is going to have to come up and that McCain will certainly raise the Obama plan's "fine." All I ask is that Obama end his response with "and that's why my plan is better for the people of America than John McCain's, which will tax your health benefits for the first time in history." Doing so would force McCain to start off from a position of weakness, trying to rebut Obama and any claim about fines would be seen as a "oh yeah, well he's not so cool, either" response. And here it comes...no!!! Obama declined to preemptively mention the tax cut, letting McCain start off with his nice heartwarming pitch then make the claim about Obama's fines (which we all knew was coming), leaving Obama no choice but to spend his rebuttal correcting McCain. I guess this is why I wasn't on the debate team in high school.
McCain's facial responses to Obama finally became laughable. His eyebrows were ready to leap off his face sometimes and his bug-eyed exclamation of "None?!" definitely scored high on the unintentional comedy meter.
Getting to the end of the debate, I realize why a lot of people are saying Obama won. McCain just seemed pissed. In his first debate, he didn't look at Obama. In his second, he wandered around. In this one, he stared at him like he wanted to reach across the table and throttle the Senator from Illinois for having the audacity to run for president when it was Johnny Mac's turn. I think I liked it better when he didn't look at Obama.
I think it's safe to say that none of the debate moderators did themselves proud recently.
Thank you, god. No more presidential debates for the next 4 years!
Did McCain somehow or other just manage to sound like the aggrieved party when it came to negative advertising and seemingly skirt the reprehensible things that have been said on behalf of and by the McCain/Palin ticket? That's pretty ballsy.
The $3 million overhead projector makes a return visit! Does Mac realize this isn't something you use to show PowerPoint presentations?
Obama's explanation of Ayers and ACORN seemed to clarify things, not that it will stop them from being a rallying cry for Governor Palin.
Obama declined to criticize Palin when given a chance, saying that when it comes to her qualifications, that he'd "leave it up to the American people." My initial reaction was "aaarrghhh! why didn't he say something?". However, with a bit more distance, it was a wise call on his part. Why run the risk of headlines tomorrow saying he'd attacked her? Still, I'd love to hear his private conversations with Michelle about how he really feels!
OK, I get that "Joe the Plumber" is supposed to be the regular guy, McCain's version of Palin's Joe Six-pack/Hockey Mom but seriously, Bob Schieffer should have arranged for the guy to have a seat at the table, they spent so much time talking about him!
Speaking of Bob Schieffer, did it appear to anyone else that he allowed McCain to have the last word in the majority of the volleys?
Someone needs to remind the Big O to stop using the royal "we" and avoid starting all of his answers with, "Look...".
Case in point on the defense/offense thing -- Obama gets first crack at the health care answer and spends his time explaining his plan (so far so good) and then just stops. I'm sitting here knowing that the McCain plan to tax benefits is going to have to come up and that McCain will certainly raise the Obama plan's "fine." All I ask is that Obama end his response with "and that's why my plan is better for the people of America than John McCain's, which will tax your health benefits for the first time in history." Doing so would force McCain to start off from a position of weakness, trying to rebut Obama and any claim about fines would be seen as a "oh yeah, well he's not so cool, either" response. And here it comes...no!!! Obama declined to preemptively mention the tax cut, letting McCain start off with his nice heartwarming pitch then make the claim about Obama's fines (which we all knew was coming), leaving Obama no choice but to spend his rebuttal correcting McCain. I guess this is why I wasn't on the debate team in high school.
McCain's facial responses to Obama finally became laughable. His eyebrows were ready to leap off his face sometimes and his bug-eyed exclamation of "None?!" definitely scored high on the unintentional comedy meter.
Getting to the end of the debate, I realize why a lot of people are saying Obama won. McCain just seemed pissed. In his first debate, he didn't look at Obama. In his second, he wandered around. In this one, he stared at him like he wanted to reach across the table and throttle the Senator from Illinois for having the audacity to run for president when it was Johnny Mac's turn. I think I liked it better when he didn't look at Obama.
I think it's safe to say that none of the debate moderators did themselves proud recently.
Thank you, god. No more presidential debates for the next 4 years!
Taking the ego out of it
The Hofstra Hoedown concluded a short time ago and parts of it left me shaking my head.
I checked out a bunch of the post-debate snap polls that have Obama winning and I am somewhat mystified. My wife came into the room toward the end and asked how it was going and I replied, "I think Obama's losing."
I know Obama is ahead in the polls so he didn't need to go out on a limb or try anything crazy. Conventional wisdom says play it safe with a prevent defense -- no gaffes, no explosions, etc. But honestly, I watched the whole thing wondering why I kept feeling like McCain repeatedly put Obama on the defensive over and over again. That doesn't mean that I think Obama was rattled -- I don't think he really ever was -- but so often throughout the debate, I felt like Obama was forced to spend his time in the weeds explaining himself. He also let some fat pitches go by and never lifted his bat off his shoulders. Was this part of the plan...to be calm, cool, collected, absorbing shot after shot, and seemingly above the fray while McCain flailed about? From the post-debate responses, it apparently worked.
I suppose I was just hoping that Obama would conveniently slide a shiv in between McCain's ribs every now and then because I find this new John McCain, his running mate, and his campaign appalling. On the other hand, that's the emotional response, the response driven by ego and pride. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why I'm not the front runner for President and Barack Obama is.
I checked out a bunch of the post-debate snap polls that have Obama winning and I am somewhat mystified. My wife came into the room toward the end and asked how it was going and I replied, "I think Obama's losing."
I know Obama is ahead in the polls so he didn't need to go out on a limb or try anything crazy. Conventional wisdom says play it safe with a prevent defense -- no gaffes, no explosions, etc. But honestly, I watched the whole thing wondering why I kept feeling like McCain repeatedly put Obama on the defensive over and over again. That doesn't mean that I think Obama was rattled -- I don't think he really ever was -- but so often throughout the debate, I felt like Obama was forced to spend his time in the weeds explaining himself. He also let some fat pitches go by and never lifted his bat off his shoulders. Was this part of the plan...to be calm, cool, collected, absorbing shot after shot, and seemingly above the fray while McCain flailed about? From the post-debate responses, it apparently worked.
I suppose I was just hoping that Obama would conveniently slide a shiv in between McCain's ribs every now and then because I find this new John McCain, his running mate, and his campaign appalling. On the other hand, that's the emotional response, the response driven by ego and pride. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why I'm not the front runner for President and Barack Obama is.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
McCain bails at the end & people noticed
A follow-up to last evening's entry – it looks like I'm not the only one who noticed that McCain and Cindy took off immediately after the debate:
Both women, as well as the third audience member, were especially emphatic about their feelings on the two men’s performance after the debate. All three said that Mr. McCain shook hands with several audience members and then left fairly quickly. Mr. Obama and his wife, Michelle, stuck around to shake far more hands, pose for pictures, sign autographs, and answer more questions, including from people who had been on stage but did not get a chance to ask their questions. Only when Secret Service agents told them it was time to go did the couple leave (upon which they headed for a post-debate fundraiser at Al and Tipper Gore’s house nearby).
“McCain leaving right afterward was pretty shocking to me – even some of the big McCain fans among us were really surprised he did that,” Ms. Jackson said. “I thought the Obamas came off like real people much more in the end.”
Ms. Trella added: for, “I was very impressed that the Obamas stayed til the very end, shook everyone’s hand, and just seemed very accessible. I think they won some people over by just sticking around and seeming happy to talk more.”
An excerpt from "Debate Audience Members Talk About Candidates"
- NY Times Caucus Blog, 10/8/08
John Dickerson from Slate also noticed this and points to it as a big reason Obama won in the end:
After their second debate, both Barack Obama and John McCain shook hands with the Nashville audience of 80 uncommitted voters. Both were well-received. But Obama stayed longer, and with McCain out of the room, the affection from the swing voters increased. He was mobbed, patted, beamed at, embraced. One woman wiggled up next to him. At one point, about 15 voters posed for a group picture like it was the last day of camp. The "Nashville '08 Debate" T-shirts are in the mail.
These uncommitted voters wanted to be next to Barack Obama, and the adulation from the audience helps explain why he won the debate. In the post-debate polls on CNN and CBS, he was the clear winner, and he also won Fox's focus group.
I wonder how much not taking an extra 10 minutes to hang out might have cost McCain...
Both women, as well as the third audience member, were especially emphatic about their feelings on the two men’s performance after the debate. All three said that Mr. McCain shook hands with several audience members and then left fairly quickly. Mr. Obama and his wife, Michelle, stuck around to shake far more hands, pose for pictures, sign autographs, and answer more questions, including from people who had been on stage but did not get a chance to ask their questions. Only when Secret Service agents told them it was time to go did the couple leave (upon which they headed for a post-debate fundraiser at Al and Tipper Gore’s house nearby).
“McCain leaving right afterward was pretty shocking to me – even some of the big McCain fans among us were really surprised he did that,” Ms. Jackson said. “I thought the Obamas came off like real people much more in the end.”
Ms. Trella added: for, “I was very impressed that the Obamas stayed til the very end, shook everyone’s hand, and just seemed very accessible. I think they won some people over by just sticking around and seeming happy to talk more.”
An excerpt from "Debate Audience Members Talk About Candidates"
- NY Times Caucus Blog, 10/8/08
John Dickerson from Slate also noticed this and points to it as a big reason Obama won in the end:
After their second debate, both Barack Obama and John McCain shook hands with the Nashville audience of 80 uncommitted voters. Both were well-received. But Obama stayed longer, and with McCain out of the room, the affection from the swing voters increased. He was mobbed, patted, beamed at, embraced. One woman wiggled up next to him. At one point, about 15 voters posed for a group picture like it was the last day of camp. The "Nashville '08 Debate" T-shirts are in the mail.
These uncommitted voters wanted to be next to Barack Obama, and the adulation from the audience helps explain why he won the debate. In the post-debate polls on CNN and CBS, he was the clear winner, and he also won Fox's focus group.
I wonder how much not taking an extra 10 minutes to hang out might have cost McCain...
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Win, lose, or draw
Well, I didn't think I'd be awake at this point but the new medication I'm on for this lingering #$%^& cough (can anyone say "bronchial spasms" and "inflamed bronchial passages"? I can't because saying it makes me cough too much) knocked me out and then woke me up so I ended up watching tonight's debate through a prednisone buzz and can't fall asleep now. Woo hoo. I guess I should write up my notes and then take my cough medicine with codeine to knock me out again. Better living through chemistry. And I disavow any responsibility for anything wacky I say below...it's the medication talking (unless it's legitimately amusing and then I take full credit).
So here are some thoughts jotted down during tonight's debate between Barack Obama and John McCain...
Is Obama serious about AIG's execs going on a luxury retreat after the bailout? How dumb can these numbnuts be?
McCain's proposal to buy back bad home loans and renegotiate mortgages to new, lower value of homes. Is this another "Hail Mary" pass? I don't remember hearing this before. How does this fit in with McCain's avowed desire to limit government intervention in our lives? Should we have held off on refinancing our house? Probably not.
Wow, he's hit this mortgage renegotiation message on 3 straight answers. Still doesn't sound terribly plausible to me even after the third time but what do I know? Personally, I think having the Secretary of the Treasury become my mortage broker makes sense. And Fed Chair Ben Bernanke will shortly be available for personalized retirement planning.
Good question – what in the bailout will actually help me and other people I know?
Better answer – Obama steps in after McCain's discourse on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and attacks on Obama, and actually answers the audience member's question, riffing on the credit freeze and the ripple effect it has through companies, payrolls, and potential layoffs. I've got a friend or two with their own business and the credit freeze terrifies them - they depend on their line of credit to meet payroll when clients take their time paying the bill. Obama nailed this one. It actually made sense to me but I think it helped that I listened to a similar, excellent explanation this weekend on NPR's "This American Life".
Interesting question – how can we trust either of you with our money after both parties got us into this mess. As you might expect, the answer from both candidates is..."you can't trust the other guy!" Ouch, Obama started his response with "Look...", which makes it sound like its a mild scolding or he's exasperated.
OK, I'm getting tired of McCain's constant use of "my friends." I'm not the only one who has noticed this. Slate's Paul Collins actually examined this at the time of the Republican Convention.
Brokaw is riding them about taking too long on answers. It's amusing when he points out the timing lights, etc., but after two warnings, hasn't really reined them in.
Does anyone else think that the combination of that bright red floor and blue walls makes you feel like you're in a circus? Or is the red carpet so the bloodstains from shots McCain and Obama are taking don't stand out too much?
"Nailing down Obama's tax proposals is like nailing jello to the wall." What the hell does that mean? Is this the prednisone buzz talking or did McCain just say that? (Coming back to this after the debate - MSNBC just showed their live audience response tracking for when McCain said this and the Democrat and Independent viewer lines just plummeted like the value of my 401K over the last 2 weeks while the Republicans didn't even like that line very much.)
Obama doesn't seem to be willing to take any crap from McCain who keeps misrepresenting his tax policies and plans. McCain keeps trying to correct the record too but doesn't seem to have a defense or correction as often, instead relying on repeating claims about Obama, occasionally the one that O just shot down.
Oops, Obama missed an opportunity to skewer McCain on Mac's plan to tax your employer-paid tax benefits.
Ah, the solution to the Social Security issue is "easy" but no details from McCain. And the solution for Medicare...a new commission! Obama touches on some concrete steps to at least rein in Medicare costs and abuse. No details on Social Security either.
I wonder how are they playing with the home audience? Obama is very serious, not severe, and managing to avoid the professorial tone most of the time. McCain, as advertised, seems to like this venue – he's smiling more, walking over and leaning on railings, patting a veteran on the back when thanking him for his service. However, he's not smooth in his movements, sometimes appearing to lurch a bit. Did someone forget to lube his joints? However, I don't get the sense that he's winning over or connecting with the audience at the event. I see more people nodding thoughtfully as Obama speaks than as McCain does. I think this goes to the level of detail Obama is providing – not overwhelming but clear and usually concise.
Hmmmm...signals from the crowd? McCain just went wandering across the stage behind Obama as O is speaking. Mac is gesturing and making facial expressions like Cindy is on the other side of the supermarket and Mac can't tell if she wants him to pick up a cantelope or a honeydew.
Bang! Obama just nailed McCain on his plan to tax your employer-paid health care. McCain tries to come back with a claim that you'll get fined for not buying health care under Obama's plan but does not deny or even touch the tax claim, leaving it out there unrebutted. Is that a word?
I think McCain just made a joke about hair implants, health care and his receding hairline. I can't be sure...his delivery on jokes is awful but I think he was also going after Biden on that one. Oooo, going after a man's hair...low blow!
So does anyone care that McCain isn't wearing an American flag pin and Obama is? Or is McCain innoculated due to his military service and by association with that massive Christmas tree ornament Governor Palin was wearing at her debate?
Health care - right, privilege, or responsibility? McCain? It's a responsibility. Obama nails it by declaring forcefully that it's a right of all Americans, candidly describing his mother's travails with the insurance companies as she was dying of cancer in her mid-50s, and talking about child health care as critical. Ouch...just skewered McCain again, this time for Mac's vote against S-CHIP and children's health insurance.
I'm flagging a bit during foreign affairs. McCain is clearly more at ease now than he was during the economic questions though his answers are wandering a bit (do we really need the Teddy Roosevelt story again?) and he seems to be getting even testier. Obama is cool, calm, and presidential. He's direct and showing more fire when it comes to going after Osama and defending Israel than he was in his primary debates, I think.
OK, I can't take the "my friends" thing anymore. I want to jab a pencil in my ear.
I'm curious...McCain always says that when it comes to wars, he knows how to win them. When, exactly, did he get this experience and how has he ever actually demonstrated this? Same thing with his "I know how to get Osama bin Laden" and "I know how to fix Social Security." He must be keeping it a secret until he becomes president and can reveal his superpowers.
I think John McCain has a bit of a man crush on General Petraeus.
Closing question - what don't you know and how will you learn it? Obama hit some humor with Michelle in the audience (she can give you a longer list; I usually go to her when I need to find it out) and then talked about his upbringing, American dream, and the need to offer everyone that opportunity to learn and succeed. I wish he'd mentioned Joe Biden here and his experience as a resource, thereby making the contrast with Palin.
With the exception of the insipid "I don't know the future" comments, McCain's response to this question is forceful, patriotic, and personal ("I know what it's like when your comrades extend a hand and help you back up; I know what it's like when people around you don't give up hope."). It didn't really answer the question but it was a solid end to a final 30 minutes that McCain handled a bit better than the first 60.
Debate is over and Obama and Michelle are working the room, chatting with audience members, posing for photos. McCain and Cindy are nowhere to be found.
Hey, I just realized that I didn't hear "maverick" at any point? What's up with that? I expected McCain to have it written on his forehead with indelible marker. He also dropped that dumb "Miss Congeniality" line.
And how did it turn out? The "town hall" concept was weak. I was expecting more interaction with the audience, not this "Joe in seat C12, please read your index card, sit down, and be quiet" program. As for the debate itself, it was not a game changer – no blockbuster punches, no major screwups. McCain certainly presented himself more effectively than in the first debate though he seemed a bit desperate at times to scare people about Obama.
Obama came across, again, as very presidential, ducking some of McCain's punches and slapping back with a rebuttal when needed. Still, he could have connected a bit more with the audience. However, whether you agreed with their answers (or avoidance of) or not, they each seemed to handle it well. The 2008 general election debates now seemed to have hit upon a new strategy for debating: ignore the moderator and answer the questions you wish had been asked, not the one that actually was asked.
Overall, I think Obama won on substance and presentation. While it wasn't a knockout, he came across as informed, respectful, and in command. McCain certainly improved but still came across as a bit desperate and peevish at time. I think Obama took this one again. And realistically, even if you want to call it a draw, that doesn't help McCain reverse the trends in the polling. He needed to knock Obama off his game and really present a difference. I don't think it happened and Obama came out of it looking more presidential.
Oh, and I figured it out. The "my friends" thing must be a drinking game. Across America, overworked livers are crying out for universal health care.
So here are some thoughts jotted down during tonight's debate between Barack Obama and John McCain...
Is Obama serious about AIG's execs going on a luxury retreat after the bailout? How dumb can these numbnuts be?
McCain's proposal to buy back bad home loans and renegotiate mortgages to new, lower value of homes. Is this another "Hail Mary" pass? I don't remember hearing this before. How does this fit in with McCain's avowed desire to limit government intervention in our lives? Should we have held off on refinancing our house? Probably not.
Wow, he's hit this mortgage renegotiation message on 3 straight answers. Still doesn't sound terribly plausible to me even after the third time but what do I know? Personally, I think having the Secretary of the Treasury become my mortage broker makes sense. And Fed Chair Ben Bernanke will shortly be available for personalized retirement planning.
Good question – what in the bailout will actually help me and other people I know?
Better answer – Obama steps in after McCain's discourse on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and attacks on Obama, and actually answers the audience member's question, riffing on the credit freeze and the ripple effect it has through companies, payrolls, and potential layoffs. I've got a friend or two with their own business and the credit freeze terrifies them - they depend on their line of credit to meet payroll when clients take their time paying the bill. Obama nailed this one. It actually made sense to me but I think it helped that I listened to a similar, excellent explanation this weekend on NPR's "This American Life".
Interesting question – how can we trust either of you with our money after both parties got us into this mess. As you might expect, the answer from both candidates is..."you can't trust the other guy!" Ouch, Obama started his response with "Look...", which makes it sound like its a mild scolding or he's exasperated.
OK, I'm getting tired of McCain's constant use of "my friends." I'm not the only one who has noticed this. Slate's Paul Collins actually examined this at the time of the Republican Convention.
Brokaw is riding them about taking too long on answers. It's amusing when he points out the timing lights, etc., but after two warnings, hasn't really reined them in.
Does anyone else think that the combination of that bright red floor and blue walls makes you feel like you're in a circus? Or is the red carpet so the bloodstains from shots McCain and Obama are taking don't stand out too much?
"Nailing down Obama's tax proposals is like nailing jello to the wall." What the hell does that mean? Is this the prednisone buzz talking or did McCain just say that? (Coming back to this after the debate - MSNBC just showed their live audience response tracking for when McCain said this and the Democrat and Independent viewer lines just plummeted like the value of my 401K over the last 2 weeks while the Republicans didn't even like that line very much.)
Obama doesn't seem to be willing to take any crap from McCain who keeps misrepresenting his tax policies and plans. McCain keeps trying to correct the record too but doesn't seem to have a defense or correction as often, instead relying on repeating claims about Obama, occasionally the one that O just shot down.
Oops, Obama missed an opportunity to skewer McCain on Mac's plan to tax your employer-paid tax benefits.
Ah, the solution to the Social Security issue is "easy" but no details from McCain. And the solution for Medicare...a new commission! Obama touches on some concrete steps to at least rein in Medicare costs and abuse. No details on Social Security either.
I wonder how are they playing with the home audience? Obama is very serious, not severe, and managing to avoid the professorial tone most of the time. McCain, as advertised, seems to like this venue – he's smiling more, walking over and leaning on railings, patting a veteran on the back when thanking him for his service. However, he's not smooth in his movements, sometimes appearing to lurch a bit. Did someone forget to lube his joints? However, I don't get the sense that he's winning over or connecting with the audience at the event. I see more people nodding thoughtfully as Obama speaks than as McCain does. I think this goes to the level of detail Obama is providing – not overwhelming but clear and usually concise.
Hmmmm...signals from the crowd? McCain just went wandering across the stage behind Obama as O is speaking. Mac is gesturing and making facial expressions like Cindy is on the other side of the supermarket and Mac can't tell if she wants him to pick up a cantelope or a honeydew.
Bang! Obama just nailed McCain on his plan to tax your employer-paid health care. McCain tries to come back with a claim that you'll get fined for not buying health care under Obama's plan but does not deny or even touch the tax claim, leaving it out there unrebutted. Is that a word?
I think McCain just made a joke about hair implants, health care and his receding hairline. I can't be sure...his delivery on jokes is awful but I think he was also going after Biden on that one. Oooo, going after a man's hair...low blow!
So does anyone care that McCain isn't wearing an American flag pin and Obama is? Or is McCain innoculated due to his military service and by association with that massive Christmas tree ornament Governor Palin was wearing at her debate?
Health care - right, privilege, or responsibility? McCain? It's a responsibility. Obama nails it by declaring forcefully that it's a right of all Americans, candidly describing his mother's travails with the insurance companies as she was dying of cancer in her mid-50s, and talking about child health care as critical. Ouch...just skewered McCain again, this time for Mac's vote against S-CHIP and children's health insurance.
I'm flagging a bit during foreign affairs. McCain is clearly more at ease now than he was during the economic questions though his answers are wandering a bit (do we really need the Teddy Roosevelt story again?) and he seems to be getting even testier. Obama is cool, calm, and presidential. He's direct and showing more fire when it comes to going after Osama and defending Israel than he was in his primary debates, I think.
OK, I can't take the "my friends" thing anymore. I want to jab a pencil in my ear.
I'm curious...McCain always says that when it comes to wars, he knows how to win them. When, exactly, did he get this experience and how has he ever actually demonstrated this? Same thing with his "I know how to get Osama bin Laden" and "I know how to fix Social Security." He must be keeping it a secret until he becomes president and can reveal his superpowers.
I think John McCain has a bit of a man crush on General Petraeus.
Closing question - what don't you know and how will you learn it? Obama hit some humor with Michelle in the audience (she can give you a longer list; I usually go to her when I need to find it out) and then talked about his upbringing, American dream, and the need to offer everyone that opportunity to learn and succeed. I wish he'd mentioned Joe Biden here and his experience as a resource, thereby making the contrast with Palin.
With the exception of the insipid "I don't know the future" comments, McCain's response to this question is forceful, patriotic, and personal ("I know what it's like when your comrades extend a hand and help you back up; I know what it's like when people around you don't give up hope."). It didn't really answer the question but it was a solid end to a final 30 minutes that McCain handled a bit better than the first 60.
Debate is over and Obama and Michelle are working the room, chatting with audience members, posing for photos. McCain and Cindy are nowhere to be found.
Hey, I just realized that I didn't hear "maverick" at any point? What's up with that? I expected McCain to have it written on his forehead with indelible marker. He also dropped that dumb "Miss Congeniality" line.
And how did it turn out? The "town hall" concept was weak. I was expecting more interaction with the audience, not this "Joe in seat C12, please read your index card, sit down, and be quiet" program. As for the debate itself, it was not a game changer – no blockbuster punches, no major screwups. McCain certainly presented himself more effectively than in the first debate though he seemed a bit desperate at times to scare people about Obama.
Obama came across, again, as very presidential, ducking some of McCain's punches and slapping back with a rebuttal when needed. Still, he could have connected a bit more with the audience. However, whether you agreed with their answers (or avoidance of) or not, they each seemed to handle it well. The 2008 general election debates now seemed to have hit upon a new strategy for debating: ignore the moderator and answer the questions you wish had been asked, not the one that actually was asked.
Overall, I think Obama won on substance and presentation. While it wasn't a knockout, he came across as informed, respectful, and in command. McCain certainly improved but still came across as a bit desperate and peevish at time. I think Obama took this one again. And realistically, even if you want to call it a draw, that doesn't help McCain reverse the trends in the polling. He needed to knock Obama off his game and really present a difference. I don't think it happened and Obama came out of it looking more presidential.
Oh, and I figured it out. The "my friends" thing must be a drinking game. Across America, overworked livers are crying out for universal health care.
Saturday, October 4, 2008
Charting the Unknown
Take a look at the "Sarah Palin Debate Flow Chart." I might have to get a t-shirt with this on it. I think my mother-in-law would definitely appreciate it!
Conservative standards
In the last few weeks, I've been dumbfounded by conservative commentators who defend John McCain's choice of Sarah Palin as well as Palin's own qualifications to be VP or even president. Did they really believe what they were saying when they tried to justify the "Alaska is next to Russia" standard for foreign policy experience several weeks ago? Were they serious over the last day or so when claiming that Governor Palin won the debate on any other level than being more telegenic and attractive than Senator Biden?
These are smart people, I assume. If that's the case, do they really believe what they're saying? If so, then my assumptions were way off. However, if they don't believe it and are shoveling these rationalizations because they're so blinded by a desire to win that they'll say anything, I just have to wonder how deep they had to bury their standards to willingly go along with this.
There are a lot of things I don't agree with about the view of political, fiscal, or social conservatives. However, I've known a few and with only a few exceptions, have been able to respect their beliefs because they were honestly held and they respected mine. Sometimes, we simply made the decision that there were certain topics about which we shouldn't speak because we knew we'd butt heads and that was fine. There were plenty of other things to discuss – the Red Sox, movies, new books, TV shows, etc. I also know that Independents, Democrats, and those of a liberal ilk don't always have the best ideas.
But the willingness of conservative pundits, commentators, and writers to throw aside their standards of competence and qualifications in the name of the ideological imperative to make sure a Republican, any Republican, is in the White House and (god forbid) one heartbeat away, is baffling to me. I guess I'm too naive in this way, too trusting, or too hopeful that people make choices based on rational, grounded, and firmly held beliefs, upon ethical standards, or by drawing on a well-grounded moral code. I just don't see how conservative commentators can honestly claim to be doing that here.
Joe Conason's new essay in Salon, "The Dumbing Down of the GOP", asks some great questions, including: Why aren't more conservatives disgusted that their party nominated a person devoid of qualifications for the vice presidency (again)?
Conason writes:
There was a time when conservatives lamented the dumbing down of American culture. Preservation of basic standards in schools and workplaces compelled them -- or so they said -- to resist affirmative action for women and minorities. Qualifications mattered; merit mattered; and demagogic appeals for leveling were to be left to the Democrats.
Not anymore.
.....
Palin's phony populism is as insulting to working- and middle-class Americans as it is to American women. Why are basic diction and intellectual coherence presumed to be out of reach for "real people"?
And why don't we expect more from American conservatives? Indeed, why don't they demand more from their own movement?
And the conservatives who do raise questions and concerns? They're vilified as traitors.
The most prominent example so far has been Kathleen Parker, a conservative columnist for the Washington Post. Her September 28th column, "The Palin Problem," took a candid look at the Palin Phenomenom and its appeal. After supporting Govenor Palin at the outset, Ms. Parker took the time to reassess Palin's capabilities as well as the potential for a McCain/Palin ticket to succeed on November 4th. Her conclusion?
If Palin were a man, we'd all be guffawing, just as we do every time Joe Biden tickles the back of his throat with his toes. But because she's a woman -- and the first ever on a Republican presidential ticket -- we are reluctant to say what is painfully true.
What to do?
McCain can't repudiate his choice of running mate. He not only risks the wrath of the GOP's unforgiving base, but he invites others to second-guess his executive decision-making ability. Barack Obama faces the same problem with Biden.
Only Palin can save McCain, her party and the country she loves. She can bow out for personal reasons, perhaps because she wants to spend more time with her newborn. No one would criticize a mother who puts her family first.
Do it for your country.
Clearly, Parker is not morphing into a Democrat. Calling for Palin to remove herself from the ticket isn't "Sarah-bashing", it's a belief that competency is something that Republican Party shouldn't simply cast aside. She's taking a stand on what's best for her party. Her goal is to make sure that the Republicans hold the White House because she believes its the right way for the country to move forward. I can respect that.
Some of her readers apparently can't, as she discussed in "The Omen in My Mail", her October 1 follow-up column.
The fierce reaction to my column has been both bracing and enlightening. After 20 years of column writing, I'm familiar with angry mail. But the past few days have produced responses of a different order. Not just angry, but vicious and threatening.
Some of my usual readers feel betrayed because I previously have written favorably of Palin. By changing my mind and saying so, I am viewed as a traitor to the Republican Party -- not a "true" conservative.
Partisanship is the operating principle in our political system now. Jon Stewart had it right when he mocked Senate leaders who congratulated themselves on actually accomplishing something that required a modicum of cooperation...also known as what they're supposed to be doing all the time! In our political discourse now, dissenters are faced with death threats simply for having a different opinion.
Believe me...I'm not so unsophisticated, gullible, or innocent not to realize that people across the political spectrum aren't like this. Democrats can be just as fanatical and vicious in their response to attacks. They can be just as willing to overlook flaws when necessary to advance their agenda.
Still, the sheer audacity of Conservatives' willingness to raise Governor Palin up while allowing their standards for leadership to drop so precipitously is truly remarkable. I can only hope that the American voters are willing to look beyond the pundits. The challenges facing the United States right now are too grave, too broad, to risk on a presidential candidate who is willing to choose a running mate so stunningly ill-equipped for the role.
****Update****
It occurred to me after writing this that a conservative reader might wonder if the Democrats were ignoring the same lack of qualifications in Barack Obama. I don't believe so. An excerpt from The New Yorker's recent endorsement of Obama spells it out far better than I could:
It is perfectly legitimate to call attention, as McCain has done, to Obama’s lack of conventional national and international policymaking experience. We, too, wish he had more of it. But office-holding is not the only kind of experience relevant to the task of leading a wildly variegated nation. Obama’s immersion in diverse human environments (Hawaii’s racial rainbow, Chicago’s racial cauldron, countercultural New York, middle-class Kansas, predominantly Muslim Indonesia), his years of organizing among the poor, his taste of corporate law and his grounding in public-interest and constitutional law—these, too, are experiences. And his books show that he has wrung from them every drop of insight and breadth of perspective they contained.
The exhaustingly, sometimes infuriatingly long campaign of 2008 (and 2007) has had at least one virtue: it has demonstrated that Obama’s intelligence and steady temperament are not just figments of the writer’s craft.
These are smart people, I assume. If that's the case, do they really believe what they're saying? If so, then my assumptions were way off. However, if they don't believe it and are shoveling these rationalizations because they're so blinded by a desire to win that they'll say anything, I just have to wonder how deep they had to bury their standards to willingly go along with this.
There are a lot of things I don't agree with about the view of political, fiscal, or social conservatives. However, I've known a few and with only a few exceptions, have been able to respect their beliefs because they were honestly held and they respected mine. Sometimes, we simply made the decision that there were certain topics about which we shouldn't speak because we knew we'd butt heads and that was fine. There were plenty of other things to discuss – the Red Sox, movies, new books, TV shows, etc. I also know that Independents, Democrats, and those of a liberal ilk don't always have the best ideas.
But the willingness of conservative pundits, commentators, and writers to throw aside their standards of competence and qualifications in the name of the ideological imperative to make sure a Republican, any Republican, is in the White House and (god forbid) one heartbeat away, is baffling to me. I guess I'm too naive in this way, too trusting, or too hopeful that people make choices based on rational, grounded, and firmly held beliefs, upon ethical standards, or by drawing on a well-grounded moral code. I just don't see how conservative commentators can honestly claim to be doing that here.
Joe Conason's new essay in Salon, "The Dumbing Down of the GOP", asks some great questions, including: Why aren't more conservatives disgusted that their party nominated a person devoid of qualifications for the vice presidency (again)?
Conason writes:
There was a time when conservatives lamented the dumbing down of American culture. Preservation of basic standards in schools and workplaces compelled them -- or so they said -- to resist affirmative action for women and minorities. Qualifications mattered; merit mattered; and demagogic appeals for leveling were to be left to the Democrats.
Not anymore.
.....
Palin's phony populism is as insulting to working- and middle-class Americans as it is to American women. Why are basic diction and intellectual coherence presumed to be out of reach for "real people"?
And why don't we expect more from American conservatives? Indeed, why don't they demand more from their own movement?
And the conservatives who do raise questions and concerns? They're vilified as traitors.
The most prominent example so far has been Kathleen Parker, a conservative columnist for the Washington Post. Her September 28th column, "The Palin Problem," took a candid look at the Palin Phenomenom and its appeal. After supporting Govenor Palin at the outset, Ms. Parker took the time to reassess Palin's capabilities as well as the potential for a McCain/Palin ticket to succeed on November 4th. Her conclusion?
If Palin were a man, we'd all be guffawing, just as we do every time Joe Biden tickles the back of his throat with his toes. But because she's a woman -- and the first ever on a Republican presidential ticket -- we are reluctant to say what is painfully true.
What to do?
McCain can't repudiate his choice of running mate. He not only risks the wrath of the GOP's unforgiving base, but he invites others to second-guess his executive decision-making ability. Barack Obama faces the same problem with Biden.
Only Palin can save McCain, her party and the country she loves. She can bow out for personal reasons, perhaps because she wants to spend more time with her newborn. No one would criticize a mother who puts her family first.
Do it for your country.
Clearly, Parker is not morphing into a Democrat. Calling for Palin to remove herself from the ticket isn't "Sarah-bashing", it's a belief that competency is something that Republican Party shouldn't simply cast aside. She's taking a stand on what's best for her party. Her goal is to make sure that the Republicans hold the White House because she believes its the right way for the country to move forward. I can respect that.
Some of her readers apparently can't, as she discussed in "The Omen in My Mail", her October 1 follow-up column.
The fierce reaction to my column has been both bracing and enlightening. After 20 years of column writing, I'm familiar with angry mail. But the past few days have produced responses of a different order. Not just angry, but vicious and threatening.
Some of my usual readers feel betrayed because I previously have written favorably of Palin. By changing my mind and saying so, I am viewed as a traitor to the Republican Party -- not a "true" conservative.
Partisanship is the operating principle in our political system now. Jon Stewart had it right when he mocked Senate leaders who congratulated themselves on actually accomplishing something that required a modicum of cooperation...also known as what they're supposed to be doing all the time! In our political discourse now, dissenters are faced with death threats simply for having a different opinion.
Believe me...I'm not so unsophisticated, gullible, or innocent not to realize that people across the political spectrum aren't like this. Democrats can be just as fanatical and vicious in their response to attacks. They can be just as willing to overlook flaws when necessary to advance their agenda.
Still, the sheer audacity of Conservatives' willingness to raise Governor Palin up while allowing their standards for leadership to drop so precipitously is truly remarkable. I can only hope that the American voters are willing to look beyond the pundits. The challenges facing the United States right now are too grave, too broad, to risk on a presidential candidate who is willing to choose a running mate so stunningly ill-equipped for the role.
****Update****
It occurred to me after writing this that a conservative reader might wonder if the Democrats were ignoring the same lack of qualifications in Barack Obama. I don't believe so. An excerpt from The New Yorker's recent endorsement of Obama spells it out far better than I could:
It is perfectly legitimate to call attention, as McCain has done, to Obama’s lack of conventional national and international policymaking experience. We, too, wish he had more of it. But office-holding is not the only kind of experience relevant to the task of leading a wildly variegated nation. Obama’s immersion in diverse human environments (Hawaii’s racial rainbow, Chicago’s racial cauldron, countercultural New York, middle-class Kansas, predominantly Muslim Indonesia), his years of organizing among the poor, his taste of corporate law and his grounding in public-interest and constitutional law—these, too, are experiences. And his books show that he has wrung from them every drop of insight and breadth of perspective they contained.
The exhaustingly, sometimes infuriatingly long campaign of 2008 (and 2007) has had at least one virtue: it has demonstrated that Obama’s intelligence and steady temperament are not just figments of the writer’s craft.
Friday, October 3, 2008
Best post-debate comment yet
"I always wondered what a wolverine would sound like chewing through plywood. Now I know: like Sarah Palin “debating” Joe Biden." - Howard Fineman, Newsweek's Politics Blog
I have no idea why anyone would wonder about that but I love it!
I have no idea why anyone would wonder about that but I love it!
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Affecting the Impacts
"I don’t want to argue about the causes. What I want to argue about is how are we going to get there to positively affect the impacts." - Gov. Sarah Palin during the October 2, 2008, vice presidential debate
You know, the sad thing is that a lot of people are going to make the case that Sarah Palin exceeded expectations and reassured the American people that she is a worthy candidate for vice president during tonight's debate. In truth, she cleared a bar set so low it was a chalk outline on the sidewalk.
The only way she could have failed to meet the ridiculously low expectations set for her in this debate would have been if she stood drooling by the podium saying "wow, thems a lot of cameras" before admitting that she thinks Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a hottie and that the McCain campaign is really just an extended version of "Weekend at Bernie's" with her new boss as the titular character.
On second thought, I would have been much more interested in watching THAT debate.
As it was, she was able to speak in moderately complete sentences that presented a series of programmed messages and damn it, she was going to get through them all, even if it meant ignoring the questions being asked of her. Well, not really ignoring so much as "knowing better what the American people really want to hear." That'll teach the elitist mainstream media!
Sadly, moderator Gwen Ifil came across as spineless and entirely lacking control over the procedings tonight, either as a result of the rules negotiated by the two camps or because she backed off in the face of of the ridiculous pre-debate "concerns" by the McCain camp that Ifil was biased (clearly a case of "working the ref"). It didn't help that the debate format let Palin get away with it. There was no pressure to actually answer what she was asked, few if any follow-ups, and no coming back to her after she finished spouting inanities or sweeping generalities to press her for specifics (where's Katie Couric when we need her!).
It made me long for the 2000 VP debate when it was Cheney, Leiberman, and their moderator sitting at a table having at it. (I'm talking about the debate format, not the actual meeting between the Crown Prince of Darkness and Droopy Dog...I think that might have been one of the signs that the End Times are coming but we'd need to ask Governor Palin for confirmation on that one).
However, the Dems didn't want that format this year because they didn't think their candidates had been able to go after Darth Vader effectively enough the last two times. Personally, I think that was the fault of the Dem's VP candidates in '00 and '04, not a flaw in the format. That table discussion debate style would have prevented the speechifying that we saw this evening (and yes, Biden did some of his own) and would have instead created more opportunities to press for details through a true conversation.
At least we weren't treated to another round of "Thanks but No Thanks" bridge building and "Buy My Jet on eBay" mythmaking. On the other hand, we did witness Governor Palin state her wish to have even more expansive powers as VP than Dick Cheney, a horrifying thought when you consider exactly how much damage Vlad the Impaler has wrought during the last 8 years while pulling W's strings in Washington.
Joe Biden, to give him his due, was very solid, especially once the tranquilizer wore off following the first 30 minutes. As expected, he had facts at his command. He avoided the verbal diarrhea that has always been a weakness of his. The Senator managed to slip a few traps that Palin sent his way ("so can I call you Joe?"; "the white flag of surrender") and took advantage of some clever openings (stressing the value and importance of an Obama presidency when asked what a Biden presidency would look like if her were to ascend to that post).
On the attack, he made strong statements denying McCain's claims to maverick status, effectively tied McCain to Bush, and sought to define how an Obama/Biden administration would differ from Bush (and McCain by association). In fact, if the camera didn't keep cutting away to her, you might have assumed he was debating McCain, not Palin. This was a solid if not flashy strategy. Ignore her, don't attack her, and focus on the real target - the top of the opposing ticket. In essence, exactly what a vice presidential candidate is supposed to do in this situation.
His most powerful moment came when he wrested away the "I know what it's like to be a regular person" mantle from Palin as he emotionally touched on his heartwrenching experience losing his wife, daughter, and praying for the lives of his sons shortly after winning election to the Senate. He choked up and while it was only a brief interruption, I'm willing to set aside my cynicism about politicians and believe that he wasn't, couldn't have been faking that. It was honest, it was heartfelt, and it disarmed Palin, who was left flat with a frozen smile and with her rote maverick line. As the dust settles over the next few days, I think we'll see that most viewers will agree that Senator Biden won this debate.
That won't stop the talking heads and pundits from crowing over Governor Palin's "performance". That's exactly what it was, of course, spearheaded by her "I may not answer the questions the way the moderator or you might like 'cuz I'm going to talk straight to the American people" strategy. No polished diction here because she's just a normal, regular working stiff from Alaska with message points that may or may not have any relevance, doncha know?
It didn't hurt her standing with conservatives that she channelled a bit of Ronald Reagan tonight...yes, she actually dusted off that 1980 crowd pleaser "there you go again". Oops...no, wait, I think it was actually "There ya go agin." Ah, Reagan by way of Marge Gunderson.
In case you're interested, her actual quote was:
"Say it ain’t so, Joe! There you go pointing backwards again ... Now, doggone it, let’s look ahead and tell Americans what we have to plan to do for them in the future. You mentioned education, and I’m glad you did. I know education you are passionate about with your wife being a teacher for 30 years, and God bless her. Her reward is in heaven, right?”
Time was running out on the debate and I think she'd forgotten to get her canned "Say it ain't so" and "There you go" into play so she mashed them together in this bunch of blather.
Throughout the rest of the debate, she dropped names of foreign leaders, avoided the deer in the headlights reactions seen in 2 out of 3 of her national interviews so far, and came out swinging. Once again though, she never went beyond platitudes and generalities, generic claims, and at times, some largely incoherent (see quote above) or totally off-topic statements. Basically, she was substance-free tonight and, if you really listened to what she said, illustrated again that she still knows little about foreign policy or the economic system that is failing so spectacularly.
I think that is what we have to expect from Governor Palin over the next five weeks. She can cram for the test, memorize the superficial facts, but when it comes down to it, she's a folksy pitchman for a campaign with no ideas. Nevertheless, she may have stopped the bleeding and there might be fewer conservatives calling for her to step down from the ticket. Please Lord, let her hang around so we can hear her gritting her teeth and congratulating Obama and Biden when they win this thing (oh please, oh please, oh please...I hope I didn't just jinx it).
And last but not least, what's with the winking? Did she think it made her look sassy? Was she trying to lock up the votes of the coveted post-adolescent "I want to have sex with a cougar" demographic? When she winked at the camera again and again, I felt...well...kinda dirty, like a good friend's mom just tried to hit on me. Ewwwww!
You know, the sad thing is that a lot of people are going to make the case that Sarah Palin exceeded expectations and reassured the American people that she is a worthy candidate for vice president during tonight's debate. In truth, she cleared a bar set so low it was a chalk outline on the sidewalk.
The only way she could have failed to meet the ridiculously low expectations set for her in this debate would have been if she stood drooling by the podium saying "wow, thems a lot of cameras" before admitting that she thinks Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a hottie and that the McCain campaign is really just an extended version of "Weekend at Bernie's" with her new boss as the titular character.
On second thought, I would have been much more interested in watching THAT debate.
As it was, she was able to speak in moderately complete sentences that presented a series of programmed messages and damn it, she was going to get through them all, even if it meant ignoring the questions being asked of her. Well, not really ignoring so much as "knowing better what the American people really want to hear." That'll teach the elitist mainstream media!
Sadly, moderator Gwen Ifil came across as spineless and entirely lacking control over the procedings tonight, either as a result of the rules negotiated by the two camps or because she backed off in the face of of the ridiculous pre-debate "concerns" by the McCain camp that Ifil was biased (clearly a case of "working the ref"). It didn't help that the debate format let Palin get away with it. There was no pressure to actually answer what she was asked, few if any follow-ups, and no coming back to her after she finished spouting inanities or sweeping generalities to press her for specifics (where's Katie Couric when we need her!).
It made me long for the 2000 VP debate when it was Cheney, Leiberman, and their moderator sitting at a table having at it. (I'm talking about the debate format, not the actual meeting between the Crown Prince of Darkness and Droopy Dog...I think that might have been one of the signs that the End Times are coming but we'd need to ask Governor Palin for confirmation on that one).
However, the Dems didn't want that format this year because they didn't think their candidates had been able to go after Darth Vader effectively enough the last two times. Personally, I think that was the fault of the Dem's VP candidates in '00 and '04, not a flaw in the format. That table discussion debate style would have prevented the speechifying that we saw this evening (and yes, Biden did some of his own) and would have instead created more opportunities to press for details through a true conversation.
At least we weren't treated to another round of "Thanks but No Thanks" bridge building and "Buy My Jet on eBay" mythmaking. On the other hand, we did witness Governor Palin state her wish to have even more expansive powers as VP than Dick Cheney, a horrifying thought when you consider exactly how much damage Vlad the Impaler has wrought during the last 8 years while pulling W's strings in Washington.
Joe Biden, to give him his due, was very solid, especially once the tranquilizer wore off following the first 30 minutes. As expected, he had facts at his command. He avoided the verbal diarrhea that has always been a weakness of his. The Senator managed to slip a few traps that Palin sent his way ("so can I call you Joe?"; "the white flag of surrender") and took advantage of some clever openings (stressing the value and importance of an Obama presidency when asked what a Biden presidency would look like if her were to ascend to that post).
On the attack, he made strong statements denying McCain's claims to maverick status, effectively tied McCain to Bush, and sought to define how an Obama/Biden administration would differ from Bush (and McCain by association). In fact, if the camera didn't keep cutting away to her, you might have assumed he was debating McCain, not Palin. This was a solid if not flashy strategy. Ignore her, don't attack her, and focus on the real target - the top of the opposing ticket. In essence, exactly what a vice presidential candidate is supposed to do in this situation.
His most powerful moment came when he wrested away the "I know what it's like to be a regular person" mantle from Palin as he emotionally touched on his heartwrenching experience losing his wife, daughter, and praying for the lives of his sons shortly after winning election to the Senate. He choked up and while it was only a brief interruption, I'm willing to set aside my cynicism about politicians and believe that he wasn't, couldn't have been faking that. It was honest, it was heartfelt, and it disarmed Palin, who was left flat with a frozen smile and with her rote maverick line. As the dust settles over the next few days, I think we'll see that most viewers will agree that Senator Biden won this debate.
That won't stop the talking heads and pundits from crowing over Governor Palin's "performance". That's exactly what it was, of course, spearheaded by her "I may not answer the questions the way the moderator or you might like 'cuz I'm going to talk straight to the American people" strategy. No polished diction here because she's just a normal, regular working stiff from Alaska with message points that may or may not have any relevance, doncha know?
It didn't hurt her standing with conservatives that she channelled a bit of Ronald Reagan tonight...yes, she actually dusted off that 1980 crowd pleaser "there you go again". Oops...no, wait, I think it was actually "There ya go agin." Ah, Reagan by way of Marge Gunderson.
In case you're interested, her actual quote was:
"Say it ain’t so, Joe! There you go pointing backwards again ... Now, doggone it, let’s look ahead and tell Americans what we have to plan to do for them in the future. You mentioned education, and I’m glad you did. I know education you are passionate about with your wife being a teacher for 30 years, and God bless her. Her reward is in heaven, right?”
Time was running out on the debate and I think she'd forgotten to get her canned "Say it ain't so" and "There you go" into play so she mashed them together in this bunch of blather.
Throughout the rest of the debate, she dropped names of foreign leaders, avoided the deer in the headlights reactions seen in 2 out of 3 of her national interviews so far, and came out swinging. Once again though, she never went beyond platitudes and generalities, generic claims, and at times, some largely incoherent (see quote above) or totally off-topic statements. Basically, she was substance-free tonight and, if you really listened to what she said, illustrated again that she still knows little about foreign policy or the economic system that is failing so spectacularly.
I think that is what we have to expect from Governor Palin over the next five weeks. She can cram for the test, memorize the superficial facts, but when it comes down to it, she's a folksy pitchman for a campaign with no ideas. Nevertheless, she may have stopped the bleeding and there might be fewer conservatives calling for her to step down from the ticket. Please Lord, let her hang around so we can hear her gritting her teeth and congratulating Obama and Biden when they win this thing (oh please, oh please, oh please...I hope I didn't just jinx it).
And last but not least, what's with the winking? Did she think it made her look sassy? Was she trying to lock up the votes of the coveted post-adolescent "I want to have sex with a cougar" demographic? When she winked at the camera again and again, I felt...well...kinda dirty, like a good friend's mom just tried to hit on me. Ewwwww!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)