Posted on 10/09/2004 2:57:51 AM PDT by maryz
ANNANDALE, Va. -- The story line this weekend will be that President Bush did a lot better, and John Kerry not as well, in their second debate. The only worry now is that in Arizona Wednesday the two will again be behind lecterns, which will once again play to Kerry's advantage and Bush's distinct disadvantage.
The Washington Post's often astute, sometimes maddening TV critic Tom Shales has already declared Bush the St. Louis winner on style, Kerry on the winner on substance. Coming from a Dan Rather liberal, that's saying something. Specifically, that Kerry lost on both counts. In liberal eyes the fix is always in on substance -- by definition there's no way a nonliberal can win here. What's more, the superiority on that front is supposed to go hand in hand with stylistic command. When it doesn't, it's a dark day indeed.
Poor Kerry. Without a lectern to tower over, he was a freak show. Perhaps John Edward can sue the television camera manufacturers. But exposed in his thin tallness on the stage floor, particularly when caught in profile, Kerry came across as some sad mix of scarecrow and arthritis sufferer, unable to bend his back at all or even take an unstiff step.
Bush by contrast thrived. No longer short he was in his sauce -- because he was among people. It's no accident his best performances have always seen him in a sea of humanity. (Yes, even on the USS Lincoln.) He was made to be seen with others. He easily leads because he likes and is liked by those he serves.
Kerry is another matter entirely. As someone has said, he can't help but treat people like help, and even to remind them they're help. Has anyone ever said anything more revealing than Kerry Friday night, apropos his tax hike promises on higher income brackets, when he said: "And looking around here, at this group here, I suspect there are only three people here who are going to be affected: the president, me, and, Charlie, I'm sorry, you too."
And looking around here, in this tacky auditorium? At this group of obvious nobodies? That's what he meant. By the way, he forgot to include his wife among the high rollers in the room. Or to convey any understanding of the American dream, more importantly.
There were some surprises. The awfulness of the town hall format was mitigated by the participation of some fine and serious citizens. The few dolts gave themselves away, usually by not having the good grace to wear a tie to such an event or being able to read the question they themselves had composed. The pointed questions seemed mainly directed at Kerry, and they all came from women. In response to Ann Bronsing's question about why no further attacks on U.S. soil since 9/11, Kerry stumbled badly, his practiced smoothness suddenly giving way to confusion ("…it's not a question of when, it's a question of -- excuse me -- not a question of if, it's a question of when. We've been told that") and lots of filler about the need for good intelligence. Before he was done he jumped back to answer an earlier questioner. (He did that several times in the evening, picking up on John Edwards' bad habit.) Two pro-life questions just about finished him off, in part because they allowed Bush to drive home some key points, but also because they brought out the NARAL side of Kerry which requires him to use the mother's health excuse as his reason for backing partial birth abortion and to oppose parental notification because all teen pregnancies apparently stem from incestuous rape.
Charlie Gibson will hear it from his colleagues for allowing those questions through. But has there been a lovelier and sweeter young American at such an event than Sarah Degenhart, who asked the second pro-life question? You have to wonder what tax bracket she'll end up in when she gets to heaven.
Bush did a lot better at this debate, but I think Kerry beat him. Bush obviously has the upper hand, because he is right, I just dont think he is showing it enough.
Agreed 100% on that tiredness. He was out all that day surveying the hurricane damage. Which translates to me, he was doin' his job. Good man.
There were a lot of reports in the week before the debate that he was being coached in preparation for the debate so I'd tend to think over-coaching because of that. But, I do also wholeheartedly agree with you about that noncombativeness. Not sure if that was some advice he got or what but it just doesn't work well for him. I like to see the same guy who said he was accused of swaggering but in Texas we call it walkin'.
I think our president has a natural, comfortable way with people myself and when he lets the assertiveness come through his humility shows also. I am hoping to see that next week also.
You are so absolutely right about that. Would be nice for a few pro-life politicians to grasp that in response to some of these abortion questions.
Ya right troll...nice try.
You weren't watching the same debate I was watching. The John was flushed.
Or -- now that we all know he's a timber tycoon -- he can just show up right from clearing brush (and I'm sorry I can't find the picture!).
But then again, you were a Kerry supporter from the outset and never had any intention of considering the falsehood of anything said by your man Kerry or the truth of anything said by Bush. How does it feel to support the murdering of the innocent child partially outside of the womb? Isn't it about the same as supporting the murdering of the innocent by suicide bombers based on obscene beliefs put forth in the name of the Almighty?
When we see the president with normal people, our affection for him increases. Conversely, John Kerry reminds us, even more, of the smart-aleck president of the high school debate club. We might admit that Kerry can win a debate on points, but we dislike him more each time he scores a point.
But President Bush is not there to score points. He is there to explain his reasonable positions. When John Kerry opens himself up to a knockout punch, the friends of the President root for a quick 1-2 combination.
But W doesn't aim for the chin. He's not there to fight; he's there to talk to people.
A great example of this last night was Kerry's answer to the abortion question. He mentioned Teresa's "counseling". I was hoping with all my might for Bush to say to the questioner. "I believe that John Kerry just told you to 'shove it'." But Bush would never be that impolite.
I believe that President Bush wins by not winning.
Sheesh, it's early. Omit "He even" from above. My apologies.
Nice try.
OH, how very wrong you are.
On the first debate Bush had spent all day in Florida wandering through a disaster area and dealing with hurricane victims. It was hot and humid, in the 90's, and there was no air.
Anyone who lives here can tell you it gets to you more than you think - that kind of heat really wipes you out. Also the pain and distress of the victims. The heat dehydrates you and makes you exhausted. Now Bush is an "early to bedder" - I would bet anything he overestimated his ability to withstand it, and it all kicked in at night, at that late 9 pm debate.
Kerry, on the other hand, spent the day having a nice manicure. He did look nice and fresh, didn't he?
While Kerry was resting and having a manicure.
Following the first debate, did you hear ANY talking head mention what President Bush had been doing all day?
I didn't. It infuriated me.
St. Louis University is Catholic, too.
I think that some of the Catholic students might have been repelled as they witnessed Kerry turning his back on the innocent victims of partial birth abortion.
No I think he presented Kerry to America for what he is a LIBERAL on the wrong side of the major issues...Kerry wants to appear moderate but can't hide behind his record because it is extreme liberalism... Bush did very well and set the record straight tonight....
The more you watch the first debate the more Kerry sounds like an empty suit ... all talk ... blah bla blah... no substance no stand.. He is wishy washy... This election should never be a referandum on Bush... This president held the light of Liberty for this country when it was wounded... 3000 dead... If we let the memory of 911 dissolve ... if we forget what it meant and where we came from at that moment in time than we are truly lost...You have to context 911 in everything that is taking place in these debates... assuradly Kerry believes that America has forgotten.... and many Americans have forgotten and that is the problem... You cannot lead this country in these historic times if you are afraid to go against world opinion... Because we don't lamely follow the worlds suggestions is exactly what makes us Great.
Isn't that something that's stressed over and over in those "how to win friends and influence people" books and courses. Of course, those who aren't genuinely interested in the person they're addressing tend to overdo it (like the early computer-generated form letters, and with much the same effect!).
BTW -- thanks for the pic!
I'm an early-to-bedder myself, and there's no way I could function at 9:00 p.m. Personally, I'd like to the see the third debate scheduled for 9:00 a.m. (probably before Kerry's even -- you know those idle rich!).
I admit I'm not up on current debating rules, but I don't quite see how not answering the question and dumping three or four unrelated topics into an "answer" should count for anything.
Did you notice that immediately after debate the President made a bee-line for this lovely young woman and you could see that his interest was very real
.
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.