In consideration of the woman's feelings, I'm trying very hard not to laugh.
Posted on 10/01/2004 3:46:07 AM PDT by LS
Ever watch one of those boxing movies where the hero belts the loud-mouthed opponent right in the kisser, but to no apparent effect? Then, the villain wobbles a little, develops that funny look in his eyes, then tumbles like an rotten oak?
Last night in Miami, the President delivered one of these delayed-reaction shots to John Kerry.
Reading the posts of Freepers was both funny and horrifying. "We lost the election tonight," moaned one. "It's over," said another.
That's probably what "Rocky's" trainer was thinking right before Clubber Lang hit the mat.
The fact is, Kerry is finished.
The post-moretms today---from Seattle to Albuquerque, from the Fox All Stars to the human catfish, Susan Estrich---all agree that while Kerry scored minor points early, no opinions changed.
That, my friends, is the knockout blow for Bush. It's now October 1, meaning that foreign policy will not come up in the subsequent debates. Put another way, had Kerry delivered a right uppercut, Bush would still have had a 30-day-standing count to recover. But Kerry did no such thing, His minor style-sheet debate point "wins" will fade by early next week, while Bush's seriousness---yes, at times, anger at having to even deal with such nonsense---will continue to shape public opinion.
Leave the boxing metaphor for a moment and use that of a roller-coaster: Kerry pegged everything on Iraq---his "high point," if you will. Now, that "momentum" (or lack thereof) has to sustain him for 30 days. It ain't gonna happen.
While Terry McAuliffe smirks and thinks he can run videos of Bush "being angry and perturbed," he's missing the fact that his coaster is already losing momentum, and his boxer is already out on his feet.
I not only look for polls not to change, but for Bush to continue to gain in Maryland, New Jersey, New Hampshire, Maine, Pennsylvania, and Michigan. Two lines in particular will reverberate after the Kerry condescension evaporates: the one about asking allies to fight for a "diversion," and the one about leaders needing to be steady and consistent.
It was a huge mistake for Kerry to allow the foreign policy debate first. Even if he had won decisively, it allowed Bush more than a month to regain his footing. But as matters stand, the coaster is already pulling into the station, and there won't be any more runs this year.
ping
In consideration of the woman's feelings, I'm trying very hard not to laugh.
Fascinating point. As Rush always says, it's much better when you reach a conclusion on your own.
Just stay away from that mouth!
I'll say it was disgusting, and scary. I am a new FReeper and former long time lurker. I avoided officially joining Free Republic for the longest time primarily because of the negative attitude a FEW members regularly display. I finally joined a few weeks back because I felt I NEEDED you people to get me through this election. I still feel like I need you all, don't get me wrong. But as I was reading the live thread last night, I found the attitude of a very few so unsettling that I left.
I have a very positive attitude and opinion about President Bush and I know he prevail in November. I couldn't allow the aptly described "fair weather, chicken-little FReepers" affect my positive feelings about President Bush. A constructive critique of Dubya's performance would have been fine, but the remarks of the few made reading that thread most unsettling.
Guys, there are times when we need to WAIT a while, take a few steps away from an event we feel hasn't gone the way WE think it should have gone, and view the WHOLE picture. President Bush did fine. Yes, I think he missed some opportunities to really nail that arrogant jerk down, but he was true to who he was. Kerry didn't win anything. He showed himself to be the self-obsessed disaster most of us here know he is.
pattyjo
And should the country be blessed with a Republican president in the future, when the media monkeys come clamoring for debates, he should just laugh and say, "No, thank you." There is nowhere in the Constitution that demands debates, and any president who is ahead is only giving the challenger a shot by having them. And since Bill Clinton only had TWO, why did James Baker agree to three of these fiascos? This is all media hype and bluster. They have their pro-Democrat reviews written before the debates begin.
Kerry would have a mini-mosque built in the white-house for the God fearing muzlimbs terrorists. Kerry is really skerry and actully looks like a swish-boy named Mary. Bush/Cheney 2004
It's hard to do this, but at some point a GOP President is going to have to take on the media head-on---not outflank them like Reagan and Bush have done.
"The KGB was on Lubyankaya Square."
I thought it's address was No.2 Dzherzhinsky square. Maybe that's the Kremlin or something.
If you look at John Kerry here, you will notice he looks like a French woman. Have you ever seen so much makeup? Look at his lips, they have lipstick on them, he has blusher on his cheeks and his eyebrows have been penciled in where he is missing hair, to keep him from looking like Stan Laurel. He probably even had a French Manicure.
Wonderful photo! LOL. My apologies in advance, but I'm going to steal it and post it on another thread or two. :-)
coop....you are welcome to post it anywhere...
In the next debate, the President can be better rested and smile more and the memory will be of Bush's message, not of his so-called "tired" look.
And, right now I will recount my rendition of just about everything Kerry said. I will do in a format that I am most familiar with: business.
Jim Leher: Question to your Mr. Kerry. Two minutes. Tell us how you think businesses can improve their ability to improve profits, thereby improving the economy?Now, I haven't had my coffee this morning and perhaps you think this is a bit rambling. However, John Kerry has very convincing rhetoric and his delivery is firm, but he really isn't saying anything.John Kerry: Organizations capable of double-loop learning, presentation of the process flow should culminate in idea generation, through the adoption of a proactive stance, the astute manager can adopt a position at the vanguard. In a collaborative, forward-thinking venture brought together through the merging of like minds. The strategic vision - if indeed there be one - is required to identify by adopting project appraisal through incremental cash flow analysis, to ensure that non-operating cash outflows are assessed.
To ensure that non-operating cash outflows are assessed. An important ingredient of business process reengineering in order to build a shared view of what can be improved, benchmarking against industry leaders, an essential process, should be a top priority at all times. Whether the organization's core competences are fully in line, given market realities to experience a profound paradigm shift, exploiting the productive lifecycle. To focus on improvement, not cost, empowerment of all personnel, not just key operatives, combined with optimal use of human resources. An important ingredient of business process reengineering presentation of the process flow should culminate in idea generation, the three cs - customers, competition and change - have created a new world for business.
Jim Leher: Mr. President, your rebuttal? Ninety seconds.
President Bush: You improve profits by increasing revenues and cutting costs. Hard work will go a long way to selling more --increasing revenues; and human innovation will find a better way to do business --cutting costs. That's the plan, let's get to work.
Bush is simple in his explanation and seemingly repetitive. But, repetition creates recall. Now, Bush does have to be careful not to be too repetitive, but pounding the message home will be key to making voters remember his message.
I was getting as pissed as the Prez when Kerry was repeating Michael Moore's talking points. I think he had every right to be ticked off while this fop was carrying on next to him.
Welcome to the other side of the lurking divide. Great comment.
Why? Because what he said was obviously political rhetoric -- even my kids could tell that. My wife (who is apolitical, but tends Democrat) began heckling him -- she had him spotted as a poser. Which is to say, Kerry didn't win the folks he needed to win.
I think in the long run this debate probably hurt Kerry a lot more than it helped him. Now he's had a national audience for his foreign policy stuff, and Bush has got 30 days to run ads about what he said.
Lets not overlook Kerry's Flip-Flop!
First he says that it's important for America to not go it alone. He says that we need to build an international group of allies to help us in the war on terror and that if we do it alone we're doomed.
Then he says we need bilateral talks with North Korea and we need to get rid of the conferance talks with China, Japan, South Korea, etc. Did that strike anyone else as being flip-floppy?
Yes.
OTOH, it was in fact "consistent" with what Kerry's position has been all along -- he disagrees with whatever George W. Bush is doing.
zarf, I've seen this talking point a few times, and I have a question: Without regard to whether or not we should have bunker-busting nukes - how is it "unilaterally disarming" to say you won't continue to develop a weapon that (1) we don't have and (2) no one else has?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.