Snozberry

Jenny and I had a lovely dinner with my Dad at the Bombay Curry Company but faitfully watched the debate (yes, it actually turned out to be a stripped down real debate, not just a "debate") when we returned home (thanks to TiVo).

I have to say, Kerry walked all over Bush. I was very concerned that Kerry would somehow mess it up by being overly confident, making stupid faces (he did make one or two), not repeating himself enough, not producing good sound-bites, not emphasizing that changing your mind due to new information isn't flip-flopping, or some other obvious shortcoming. He didn't mess up at all. Kerry came out fighting - strong and on the offensive. He said somewhat substantive things (which I appreciate, but acknowledge aren't necessarily of import in an event like this) and clearly stated his positions. He did a good job of keeping Bush on the defensive and even belittled him in subtle ways - my favorite of which was referring to "his father's" book.

I honestly don't think Bush did as well. One of the things he did all night was jump in and ask Jim Lehrer for a rebuttal period, which Kerry never seemed to do. This suggests to me that he felt more than comfortably threatened by what Kerry was talking about, which isn't a great thing to show to people. Bush had his strong moments, using his traditional set of rhetorical elements that appeal to "everday voters" well. One of the ones I noticed was where he slowed down and "read" back a quote that Kerry had just said, but in a different antagonizing voice - a voice implying that Kerry was too educated, speaking too formally and talking at a level above the "average viewer." Making other people look "bad educated" is something Bush is very good at.

One thing that Bush really messed up was his presentation of how to deal with North Korea. Jenny and I rewatched Bush's little answer two or three times and I swear he contradicts himself from the beginning of the answer to the end (starting off by saying discussions with Kim Jong-Il will work, but finishing by saying that discussions would be pointless). One of the CBS commentators (the Democratic Senator) also pointed out that China has actually requested the U.S. engage in bilateral talks with N. Korea. I have no idea if this is correct, but if so makes Mr. Bush look like a retard.

As for the general state of the press, they've all become shills. We had recorded CBS (by chance; I would've preferred PBS) and the commentary following the debates was so clearly slanted to help Bush it wasn't funny. The Republicans got to comment first, and that put two full sets of commercials before the Democrat got to go. The questions asked of the commentors were all clearly slanted to doing damage control on the President's poor performance. Who says Bush has to just "not lose" in order to win? That shit continues today on the CBS News site with such quotes as "There was no clear winner in Thursday night's first presidential debate, according to interviews with experts across the country" and "Going into tonight, President Bush won if he didn't lose."

That shit pisses me off. It's no wonder Bush is doing so well - all the major media outlets (on television, at least) are doing everything they can to prop up Bush! Repeatedly asking leading questions on how Bush did so well and treating Bush rhetoric (Kerry's "inconsistent positions," for example) when posing questions is not good journalism - it's tacit partisan politcal commentary. Eh. I'm rambling. I can only imagine what Fox aired as their "fair and balanced" analysis of the event. At least they flaunted the stupid rules that said you couldn't show reaction footage. That gives them a point and brings their score up to... let's see: -99. Go Fox (thick sarcasm).

I'll leave you with this good article that tries to actually present some facts surrounding each candidate's pitches. Whoa! Facts, you say! I know! It's not something most media outlets deem important, after all, who wants to spend all their time (and money) doing book-work? That's for boring nerds. Let's just ask this high profile Republican and this random liberal guy what they think! The factual analysis of misleading campaign claims.