Don’t Shoot the Messenger . . ’cause this assessment’s grim

National Review ^ | 10/01/04 | Jay Nordlinger

[LesbianThespianGymnasticMidget]

I see his points but I just don't buy it. Like many media critics, he's micro-examining this, when people will get the impression, the feel of it.

The problem is the feel sucked, even though the substance rocked

[ChocChipCookie]

Is that for real, Howlin? If I wasn't so darn tired, I'd tune in and watch for myself. :o)

I do think Bush was fatigued, and maybe that made it harder for him to disguise his irritation with Kerry's lies.

[BonnieJ]

How many people actually stayed with the entire debate, with so many other options available to watch?
My guess is not very many. They would watch 30 minutes or so and feel they had seen quite enough.
This is NOT a disaster, folks. I am SO tired of the gloom and doom over this stupid debate, with Kerry up there like a peacock lying about everything, in collusion with the moderator.
I don't think the average guy is voting for Kerry based on the debate this evening. If so, they were already. Or they will forget to vote entirely on November 2.

[Prince Charles]

The author seems to have drunk the Klintoon Kool-Aid a wee too many times last evening. Lurch's undoing will be the manner in which he so glibly spewed lies and half-truths throughout the question and answer session (it wasn't a debate). His guile won't stand up to thinking people.

[Arkinsaw]

again I will say that the questions posed were designed to put Bush on the defense, none were posed to put Kerry anywhere but on the attack.

Indeed...Mr. Bush what do you admire about Sen. Kerry? Mr. Kerry in what ways do you think Mr. Bush sucks?

But that being said, the analysis is correct in many ways. The President passed up many opportunities. On the question of 1,000 combat deaths in a year and a half why did he not mention the 3,000 we suffered in an hour and a half.

When Kerry said that the war in Iraq is not tied to terrorism he mentioned Zarqawi. But he did not point out that we are dealing with people who cut off heads and that those people are now fighting our bravest, brightest, most dedicated, best trained, and most well-armed men and women OVER THERE rather than sitting somewhere drinking tea and planning to bring down the Sears Tower.

President Reagan did badly in his first debate with Mondale. But it made no difference. We have two to go.

[Howlin]

I don't make stuff like that up.

[CyberAnt]

But .. another Freeper has said that his wife (who's not a newz junky) thought Kerry was way too agressive and critical of Bush and she felt that was offensive. Their two kids didn't like Kerry either.

I've taken from this that although the supposed "critics" may say this was a draw or Kerry won .. the TV viewer didn't like Kerry at all. I guess the polls will eventually tell us if that analysis is correct.

[Arkinsaw]

This is NOT a disaster, folks. I am SO tired of the gloom and doom over this stupid debate, with Kerry up there like a peacock lying about everything, in collusion with the moderator.

Lets face it, if Bush had clearly won we would be crowing that it was over. The President didn't perform as well as he has in the past tonight and thats bad and we ought not to put on the rose colored glasses and call it sweet victory as so many are prone to do here. But Reagan lost his first debate also. We have two to go and Kerry expectations will be sky high now.

[goldstategop]

I think Jay is overreacting. He didn't mention John F*ckin's gaffes: 1) higher taxes, 2) global test, 3) shutting down bunker-buster bomb production and 4) giving Iran's Mad Mullahs an atom bomb courtesy of Uncle Sam. I'm really disappointed Jay came down so hard on the President. Yeah he could have done a better job but he didn't make any fatal mistakes. On the hand, Kerry committed four Big Bloopers. They'll be remembered on Election Day.

[Just mythoughts]

Wow this guy rambles just like JFKerry, no wonder he thought he won with all those lies.

[itsinthebag]

Frankly, I think that Bush will lose the election.

Did you think Bush would lose the election before the debate?

[anglian]

Just as I'd expected since the style of the debate was to consistently pressure President Bush to defend his policies while leaving Kerry's decades long record of shame off-limits.

[kingu]

I disagree. Bush might not have done his best, but overall I think he did well and it was a draw.

I think that the draw impression is what will come out in the long run, which is something for Bush to be proud of.. With his being off the track more than a few times, he kept up with Kerry the Debater. (Of course he's a great debater, he always believes both sides of every issue..)

But I can easily see the view from a few Bush supporters that he lost the debate -- too many times, Kerry was wide open for a knockout blow, and Bush wasted the opportunity. A few snap comments would have had Kerry trying for the next week trying to answer them.

In the final balance, Kerry lost the debate - he missed his goal. He had to perform wonderfully, Bush had to stumble. Neither happened, which puts Kerry still behind in the electoral college, and no where near the oval office.

[right way right]

Bang! I just shot him!

For choosing style over substance.
He thinks that Kerry will awe the sheeples in the debates.

Hope he's wrong.

Look for Bush to come out swinging in the next one.

[NilesJo]

My impression:

Kerry was at his best in terms of style, delivery and stateliness. Bush did not appear to be in command of the facts and did not seem well-prepared. He seemed to miss many opportunities to counter Kerry's arguments and often seemed halting and searching for something to say. At times, he even seemed a bit whiney in his responses. He just wasn't at his best -- Kerry was.

Hopefully, most people will vote based on their cumulative impression of "flip-flop" and their confidence in W's demonstrated ability.

[dahvid]

Kerry said he would dramatically increase the armed forces and send troops to Africa, etc..this saound like he wants a draft.

Also kind of scary was the freudian slip where Kerry said that he has been "fighting for proliferation of wmd", then correct to say "fighting against..."

[grey_whiskers]

"Think global test, providing Iran nuclear fuel, unilateral disaramament of our bunker busting program, no forward basing in Iraq, bilateral talks with Korea etc, etc."

I think you're right. I've been all around the net, had phone calls from friends who don't share my politics, and these things have been brought up. The DETAILS remembered from this night will be Kerry's damning positions.

My jaw dropped when I heard the disarmament line, and I said "Kerry's just lost the election."

This brings to mind the old Saturday Night Live skit (I believe during the Dukakis campaign) where someone sat down with a guitar and began singing "Unilateral disarmament, abortion on demand, condoms for the kiddies, all across the land..."

[gsrinok]

I'm sorry, but I have to pretty much agree with the author's assessment. Of course there was no substance in any of Kerry's blather - there never is. He was, however, much more polished than President Bush in his delivery. If you were simply to read the transcripts of this debate, you'd probably think that Bush came out slightly ahead. Under the unforgiving lights of live television, Kerry won on points.

There were some positives to come out of this debate. I have a feeling that people are going to hear the soundbite about the global test over and over up until the election. Karl Rove will do a great job of getting out the fact that Kerry's basic message was "Saddam Hussein was dangerous but we shouldn't have taken him out without making sure that the rest of the world didn't mind."

I'm not panicked in the least after the debate, but I do think this is still a tight contest. The Bush campaign needs to attack Kerry relentlessly, especially about Kerry's betrayal of American servicemen when he came back from Vietnam. Why isn't that message being pounded on every single campaign ad that we see?

[LiberalBassTurds]

Unfortunately this is a fair critique of tonight's debate. Sorry to disagree with fellow FR folks who I hold in high regard. But to not acknowledge a problem IMHO is a bad idea.

[Just mythoughts]

"Lets face it, if Bush had clearly won we would be crowing that it was over. The President didn't perform as well as he has in the past tonight and thats bad and we ought not to put on the rose colored glasses and call it sweet victory as so many are prone to do here. But Reagan lost his first debate also. We have two to go and Kerry expectations will be sky high now."

I did not hear one lie out of President Bush's mouth and that makes him the winner. JFKerry was a babel of lies and deception. He spoke more fondly of himself, the mental Il, and his fellow travelers than he did of any American citizen.

President Bush showed leadership by not jumping into JFKerry's quagmire of lies.