recent posts

A New Number One!

SBC : The Reason This Blog Exists

Just in Time for the Debate

Dateline Crawford

DSL

Mustafa Osman Ismail : A Real Sack of Crap

Schwarzenegger Vetoes Minimum Wage Bill

LAUNCHcast Spam

Damn, This Guy Is Angry

LAUNCHcast

archives

May 2014

May 2012

February 2012

November 2011

September 2011

August 2011

July 2011

June 2011

May 2011

March 2011

February 2011

January 2011

December 2010

November 2010

October 2010

September 2010

August 2010

July 2010

June 2010

May 2010

April 2010

March 2010

February 2010

January 2010

October 2009

September 2009

June 2009

April 2009

February 2009

January 2009

December 2008

November 2008

October 2008

September 2008

August 2008

July 2008

May 2008

March 2008

February 2008

January 2008

December 2007

November 2007

October 2007

September 2007

August 2007

July 2007

June 2007

May 2007

April 2007

March 2007

January 2007

December 2006

October 2006

September 2006

August 2006

July 2006

June 2006

May 2006

April 2006

March 2006

February 2006

January 2006

December 2005

November 2005

October 2005

September 2005

August 2005

July 2005

June 2005

May 2005

April 2005

March 2005

February 2005

January 2005

December 2004

November 2004

October 2004

September 2004

August 2004

July 2004

June 2004

May 2004

April 2004

March 2004

February 2004

January 2004

December 2003

November 2003

October 2003

September 2003

August 2003

Saturday, October 02, 2004
David Brooks today in the New York Times:

In weak moments, I think the best ticket for this country would be Bush-Kerry. The two men balance each other out so well.

Kerry can't make a decision; Bush makes them too quickly. Kerry changes his mind by the month; Bush almost never changes his mind. Kerry thinks obsessively about process questions, but can't seem to come up with a core conviction; Bush is great at coming up with clear goals, but is not so great about coming up with the process to get there.

That was the striking thing about the debate on Thursday night. It wasn't so much a clash of ideologies, or a clash of cultures. It was a clash of two different sorts of minds.

You could say it was a hedgehog (Bush) debating a fox (Kerry), if you want to use that tired but handy formulation.


No, we much prefer your tired bullshit formulation: the decisive commander-in-chief vs. the waffling flip-flopper.

There were two minds on display Thursday night: an knowledgeable, well-trained one. And one that cycles repeatedly through a playlist of about 8 sound bites.

It was good to see the Kerry team learned its lesson from Gore's debates in 2000 (though in retrospect, it's obvious we all should have been sighing in exasperation as we listened to Bush's bullshit that night.) Bush is going to have to try to cram a few more platitudes into that underpowered mind before the next debate. Can't wait to see the results. I'm already cringing.
Blogger Tomohiro Idokoro comments:
E. J. Dionne from his Washington Post column:

Bush is a gifted and disciplined stump speaker who can stir and amuse his carefully screened crowds and produce sharp, clean sound bites that are a producer's dream. But the Bush of Thursday night looked nothing like the Bush of the campaign trail. Ill at ease and often halting, he turned in one of the worst public performances of his presidency.

At times, he looked like he was ransacking his mind for stray facts. He kept leaning on his stump rhetoric even when it seemed inappropriate. A couple of times, he seemed to be hoping that time would run out because he had run out of things to say.

And the debate revealed the hollow core of the president's one-note campaign: The argument Bush really cared about pushing -- over and over and over -- was that Kerry sent "mixed messages" and that, as the president told Kerry, "you keep changing your positions on this war." Bush appeared obsessed with reminding people that Kerry had called the Iraq conflict "the wrong war at the wrong place at the wrong time," a phrase he repeated at least seven times.

Bush clearly hopes that the flip-flop argument and his increasingly unreal claims that all is well in Iraq will be enough to allow him to hang on through Election Day. He's assuming that no one will ask hard questions about the narrative he's weaving.

But Kerry did, and the narrative began unraveling.
full text