Politics: Where we struggle to kneel in the muck.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Well, I'm just relieved that President Bush won't appoint a Supreme Court justice who believes Dred Scott is good law.

[SlaveNoMore]

Tyrone Slothrop
At least I'm not yelling. Then you'd know I was toast.

And not Vlad. He didn't suck.

I'm not saying crap. Something about the fat lady.

And I mean baseball...not the Effete Liberal Snob*

* where is that sock? where Penske, where?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
I'm not saying crap.

Now this is something new.

[Diane_Keaton]

Both were really strong and I think it was partly due to the format of the debate. The way the questions were asked (this guy over there wants you to explain....) made them seem like challenges and so we got more fiery responses. I like when the judge hearing your motion asks you pointed questions and you have to really argue your points, as opposed to a judge that lets you drone on. It always works out better.

Bush highlights:

Getting up off his chair quickly and decisively to answer a question. No more long delays and mumbling.

Pointing out BOTH thought there were WMDs and both wanted to bring Saddam down.

Santions were not effective and the UN had not been effective.

The Kerry Plan sounds familiar b/c it's the Bush Plan (train troops, etc.).

Recognizing unpopularity -- "I have made decisions that caused people to not understand our values and I know it's been unpopular internationally". Noting his Israel decisions (dissing Arafat) also aren't popular in Europe.

Warning that we may not WANT to necessarily be "popular" in Europe.

North Korea: we are acting multi-laterally which is what Kerry has been saying he wants us to do.

Suggeting Kerry wants socialized medicine.

You want to cut punitive damages, Kerry? Then you should have showed up and voted on the bill; instead you put a trial lawyer on the ticket.

Deficit -- levelling with people: look, we had a stock market downturn and we're at war, for chrissakes.

It looked to me that Bush gained confidence by doing well, and the confidence let him go even further. And made him more relaxed....so he could do that bit about "I own a timber company? Ya need some wood?" I do think Bush got mostly cake walk questions. (Question: were audience participants warned not to react or show facial expressions when the debaters talked? That would be hard to do).

I wish Bush took Kerry to task when Kerry answered the question, "What would you do about Iran?" and he droned on but his only direct answer was "I'd get tough." Bush should have said something to the effect -- do you see how he answered the question? Where's the beef?

Overall, although I think both did well, Bush was able to shine brighter possibly because it was such a change from the last debate. Kerry did well, but his performance was essentially the same (i.e., excellent) as the last debate.

Just my $.02.

[Secret_Agent_Man]

I think that Kerry did very well, and came across well to the viewers. Bush was _much_ better than last time. The format suited him, but who would have guessed that it suited Kerry too?

It seemed to me that Kerry handled the issue of contradictions well, and handled some of the difficult domestic policy questions well and sensitively (stem cell research and abortion rights).

Bush obviously hates being challenged though. I'm pretty sure Kerry oftem looked directly at Bush and spoke at him while answering to try to provoke a reaction. He got some. At least three times Bush practically jumped out of his chair, spoke over the moderator, and seemed angry during his 30 second extensions.

I suppose I'd give the debate to Kerry, if I had to pick. Bush may have done well enough to enable his side to claim victory, but I can't see it. The most important thing, at this point, is that the debate surely did not hurt Kerry, and probably helped -- and that's what he needs right now.

S_A_M

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Well, I'm just relieved that President Bush won't appoint a Supreme Court justice who believes Dred Scott is good law.

The only way anyone will appoint a Supreme Court Justice ever again is if the Senate balance slants. that means that if it goes like its looking, you'll have people on the Supremes who think Dredis bad law, but for the opposite reason you think so. When you look in the mirror tonight, thank yourself.

[Diane_Keaton]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Why does Senator Kerry acknowledge only one of our internets?

Because the second one is still a "multi-lateral" effort in progress. Technically speaking we still only have the one Comrade Gore created.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
I think that Kerry did very well, and came across well to the viewers. Bush was _much_ better than last time. The format suited him, but who would have guessed that it suited Kerry too?

It seemed to me that Kerry handled the issue of contradictions well, and handled some of the difficult domestic policy questions well and sensitively (stem cell research and abortion rights).

Bush obviously hates being challenged though. I'm pretty sure Kerry oftem looked directly at Bush and spoke at him while answering to try to provoke a reaction. He got some. At least three times Bush practically jumped out of his chair, spoke over the moderator, and seemed angry during his 30 second extensions.

I suppose I'd give the debate to Kerry, if I had to pick. Bush may have done well enough to enable his side to claim victory, but I can't see it. The most important thing, at this point, is that the debate surely did not hurt Kerry, and probably helped -- and that's what he needs right now.

S_A_M

another take? the last time bush looked lost. this time not. the "looking lost" cost him big. does the "not lost" regain it for him? we will see.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Diane_Keaton
Bush highlights:

Santions were not effective and the UN had not been effective.

This would be a highlight if it weren't true, but it's wrong. The report released yesterday -- written by someone picked by the Administration -- makes clear that the sanctions were working. Iraq's WMD capabilities were "diminishing," not growing.

[SlaveNoMore]

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Now this is something new.

Be grateful that I reply to you so much.

You see, when I quote you [like this post], all of those people that have you on "ignore" get the opportunity to see your wry, underappreciated wit.

A "second bite at the apple," if you will.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
I think that Kerry did very well, and came across well to the viewers. Bush was _much_ better than last time. The format suited him, but who would have guessed that it suited Kerry too?

It seemed to me that Kerry handled the issue of contradictions well, and handled some of the difficult domestic policy questions well and sensitively (stem cell research and abortion rights).

Bush obviously hates being challenged though. I'm pretty sure Kerry oftem looked directly at Bush and spoke at him while answering to try to provoke a reaction. He got some. At least three times Bush practically jumped out of his chair, spoke over the moderator, and seemed angry during his 30 second extensions.

I suppose I'd give the debate to Kerry, if I had to pick. Bush may have done well enough to enable his side to claim victory, but I can't see it. The most important thing, at this point, is that the debate surely did not hurt Kerry, and probably helped -- and that's what he needs right now.

S_A_M

A good analysis. I think who won will come down to who people trust and who has credibility. Obviously, I give greater credibility to Kerry; I thought it was a slam dunk. I think Bush has become a broken record with shallow one-liners about flip-flopping, and that at this point they hurt him. Kerry was great at turning around the question on his voting record on healthcare and pointing, and much more in control of facts and figures. He more often answered the question and more often answered it more thoroughly - to hear Bush tell it, he still won't tell you anything he's done wrong and how he'll fix it. How about "No child left behind"? He isn't willing to fund when he pushed, so there must be something he thinks is wrong with it. So tell us, already!

But, I want to see data on the undecided -- they get to choose the winner. I'm expecting to see data going Kerry's way over the next 24-48 hours.

[Diane_Keaton]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
This would be a highlight if it weren't true, but it's wrong. The report released yesterday -- written by someone picked by the Administration -- makes clear that the sanctions were working. Iraq's WMD capabilities were "diminishing," not growing.

And Kerry's response that sanctions were working because there were no WMD's would be a highlight for him if only the response made sense. Did the sanctions cause Saddam to comply with UN resolutions? No they did not. The sanctions were not working.

[Diane_Keaton]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
I think Bush has become a broken record with shallow one-liners about flip-flopping, and that at this point they hurt him.

This, I will agree with. Even I rolled my eyes when I heard the same "flip flop" soundbite.

[SlaveNoMore]

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
I thought it was a slam dunk.

Further proof of the predisposition of the listeners.

I laughed aloud at Kerry's tough defense claims and his small government soundbites.

What the Left fails to realize, is that the ABK vote has grown so strong that it almost rivals the ABB vote.

[SlaveNoMore]

Diane_Keaton
This, I will agree with. Even I rolled my eyes when I heard the same "flip flop" soundbite.

It would get old, if he stopped.

But now he's flipped on the global test.