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.
If I only had a brain!
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.
Re: Post 28. Hey, you found proof of Bush's timber company! The one he said he didn't know anything about. This picture will be all over DU (probablyh CBS and ABC, as well) proving that Bush was lying when he said he didn't own a timber company.
Sarah wanted to be assured that none of her tax dollars would be used to perform abortions and how would Senator Kerry ensure that.
It wasn't his best. But I thought Kerry's was worse, and it was a question to him -- that he didn't answer. The woman asked (and I wish she hadn't been so nervous, because it's a question that has to be asked a lot more than it is) why, when adult stem cell research has yielded so many great results and embryonic cell research -- in addition to being morally reprehensible -- has yielded none, he wasn't more interested in furthering adult stem cell research. Bush apparently opted to answer Kerry rather than address the original question.
Kerry is a snob -- he wouldn't know how to hide it because he doesn't know he is; he just thinks people with money are practically a different (and superior) species from those who have less.
Howie Carr had a great column last Sunday about a speech of Kerry's deploring "suburban sprawl" -- you know, it makes cars necessary and is bad for the environment, blah, blah, blah; Howie noted Kerry's five boats, all the SUVs and Teresa's plane. He ended with a terrific line:
"Vote for Kerry -- he's better than you!"
Maybe at one time you could more than now (though even then not reliably), but not the past 40 years or so. My mechanic told me a story once about a guy he knows who looks and dresses basically like Joe Sixpack -- he went into a car dealership and bought new cars for himself and his four kids -- and paid cash.
I think Miss Manners notes in one of her books that years ago the really top of the line stores learned not to judge potential customers by their appearance.
No way Kerry won last night's debate! Bush smoked him on both substance and style. In fact, I'm now convinced that Bush won debate #1. The anti-Bush spin coming out of debate #1 was the result of an a priori strategy on the part of the paleomedia to crown Kerry the winner regardless, for if they wouldn't have done so, Kerry would now be toast.
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.
If I only had a brain!
LOL!
I have noticed that lately, anyone who is a recent signup gets called a troll if they don't agree with the mindset of a lot on this board.
God bless-and thank you for your service as well as your local report. Great to know that our military supports President Bush.
Welcome to FR.
If you think Kerry won last night you are either on the wrong site, or you weren't watching IMHO.
At one point during the debate Kerry started listing off the military support he has: Gen McPeak, Gen Clark, Gen Shinseki, Crowe, etc.
I was waiting for W to say, "You may have the support of a bunch of retired generals, Mr Kerry, but I have the support of probably 90% of the boots on the ground currently defending this nation."
Would've been classic.
Wow - I missed that. Pretty snobby.
Well said - any philosophy that sets itself up against a knowledge of God will eventually fail.
>> Mr. Gibson Going to go to the final two questions now, and the first one will be for Senator Kerry, and this comes from Sarah Degenheart.
Q. Senator Kerry, suppose you're speaking with a voter who believed abortion is murder, and the voter asked for reassurance that his or her tax dollars would not go to support abortion, what would you say to that person? <<
Maybe you can catch a replay. He was very kindly about it, in a lord-of-the-manor way. (I.e., insufferable!)
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.
