Saturday, October 16, 2004

Quick shots

Okay, sorry for the lack of blogging lately--but posting for me will be done fairly infrequently until after the election, I'm afraid to say. Call it geographical, technological and rhetorical difficulties--or call it a welcome break, if you like. But I will try to find a second here and there to compile my thoughts. Starting now:

- Debate #3: the debate itself was a draw as far as presentation goes, but I have to tell you that Bush came across as a "regular" person to a much larger degree than he had before, even the very warm performance he gave at the town hall meeting--and I'm guessing that will play well to the middle American voters. Kerry was good, but not as good as he had been in DI and D2. Bush got HUGE points from me for using a re-direct very well with regards to Kerry's vote against the first Iraq war--it couldn't have been scripted any better. I think the "style" points of the night come out about even. However, in the category that I think matters most--the "legs" of the debate--there is no question who wins. Kerry doesn't really have anything to work with from Bush's performance, but Bush does. And I think he will. And I think it's going to be good. Overall, the debates probably helped Kerry more, but Bush really didn't do himself too much harm. A tightening of the race was expected--I just hope it isn't the final movement in this campaign.

- Much is being written by folks much smarter than me about the "outing" of Mary Cheney by John Kerry in the debate the other night. The mentioning of her by Kerry was followed by a round of responses, from Mary Beth Cahill (Kerry spokesperson--Mary Cheney is "fair game") to Lynne Cheney (Kerry "isn't a good man") to Elizabeth Edwards (Lynne Cheney must feel "shame with respect to her daughter's sexual preferences") to Vice President Cheney (who pointed to Kerry's mentioning of his daughter as an example that Kerry is a person who "will say anything to get elected") ((Total wrap-up of soundbites available here)). Here's my take on it: Kerry wasn't necessarily in the wrong, although he probably shouldn't have used her name. I didn't like it when he did it, but name-dropping is one of Kerry's smallest flaws (as long as Mary Cheney doesn't meet her fate this week, I think we'll all feel better for her than others that Kerry has invoked in this campaign). His overall answer to the question was pretty poor--it sounded like Kerry was saying that homosexuality wasn't a choice, which I'm pretty sure isn't going to play well in the proud neighborhoods of the gay/lesbian communities OR in the moderate neighborhoods throughout the rest of the land--but this is off the point. No, I didn't think it was a huge blunder for Kerry to have mentioned her name--BUT for his spokesperson to say that Mary Cheney was "fair game" AND for John Edwards' wife to play pocket psychology with Mrs. Cheney was dispicable. Cahill should be fired for that outburst--it associates with the lowest kind of political discourse, and it shouldn't be tolerated, ESPECIALLY from someone who holds such a vaulted position in the campaign. Mrs. Edwards should apologize for thinking she can read anything at all into the very difficult relationship that all mother-grown daughter relationships are--why don't you get there first before you speak about it, okay? I won't be there to see it personally, but I sure hope this little development gets a lot of play in the media soon. It appears that the left doesn't think that anything is wrong with it all, so their pawns (the media) might even run with the story to some degree. If it does, Kerry can kiss the heartland goodbye.

That's all for now. More later--I just don't know when.


Post a Comment

<< Home