Category: America

Mr. Bush, please try to answer the question. Out of thousands of decisions you’ve made in the last four years, you can’t come up with three examples, no matter how small, where you made a mistake, other than appointments? Don’t tell the citizen the meaning behind her question and then answer that meaning.

Did Bush just bring in Dred Freakin’ Scott in an answer to the Supreme Court question? Way to show you were paying attention in history class, Mr. Bush, but relevance?

I didn’t think Bush’s performance in debates could be worse than it was in the last debate. I was wrong. If anyone thought that Bush could connect better with the people in a town hall format, they were living in a dreamworld.

I came in after the debate started. But there are some fantastic liveblogging exercises at Fury (example 1, 2, 3) and at Scott Rosenberg’s blog, and even at Wonkette.

Last night’s VP debated is being fact-checked everywhere, most impressively in the New York Times. Jeff Jarvis thought Edwards won; most other bloggers in the room with him thought it was a draw. Tony Pierce thought Cheney lost it, as did Scott Rosenberg, who says Cheney was “tired and repetitious… [had a] tone of exasperation… [and] went down snarling.”

Anyone else think the moderator should just bitchslap both candidates and get it over with? Edwards fails to answer the last question, and it’s all over. Better commentary by far on Fark.com for this debate than for any other source I’ve seen. Even the redoubtable Oliver Willis appears to be MIA.

Interjected question: how will the administration go after Osama in a second term? Cheney completely refuses to answer the question, slipping in hits on the Kerry/Edwards defense record as he does so. Edwards redirects to the Veep’s distortion on the “global test” question. Cheney makes an interesting comparison between El Salvador in the 80s and Afghanistan today. Edwards brings up Cheney’s support for lifting sanctions on Iran and North Korea.

The moderator gives Edwards an opportunity to clarify the “global test” remark from the last debate. He says, “For America to lead…it is critical that we be credible. It is critical that when America takes action, they [our allies] can believe…that the word of the President of the United States is always good.” Right on, John.

Next question: “Will the US be in greater danger from terror attacks if John Kerry is elected?” Cheney claims that Kerry and Edwards were swayed by Dean’s anti-war platform. Edwards hits Cheney for hypocrisy on the weapons systems issues. Halliburton enters the fray, but Cheney reiterates on the flip-flop point—and to be fair, Edwards didn’t hit it well.

Edwards is doing a pretty good job of pointing out places where the US could internationalize. Cheney hits weakly on the “wrong war, wrong place, wrong time” point, and makes an interesting point about the casualties of the Iraqi allies.

With the opening question, Cheney comes out swinging against the Kerry campaign’s positions, trying to make the case and sounding reasonably cogent despite speaking a mile a minute. Edwards responds, sounding less than solid—“Iran” for “Iraq,” though he corrects himself. On the rebound, Edwards attacks hard on the connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda with no chance for response.

Follow up question is a hard one: Would Saddam still be in power if Kerry had been in power? Edwards reiterates the point about subcontracting the hit on Osama to the Afghani warlords. Response: “I have not suggested that there is a connection between Iraq and 9/11.” Oh really? How about a year ago? How about this week?

Whatever would we do without Wonkette? Just in time, she’s posted a Vice Presidential Debate Drinking Game. Highlights in the bonus round:

• Edwards calls himself the “son of a mill worker”: Chug a bottle of moonshine.
• Edwards refers to Cheney’s six deferments: Have sex without using birth control.
• Cheney mentions “family values”: Do a shot with your gay daughter.
• Cheney refers to Edwards’s lack of foreign policy experience: Look for a WMD.
• Edwards talks about “fighting for people just like the ones I grew up with”—sip expensive drink while thinking nostalgic thoughts about the people you grew up and their Budweisers.
• Cheney tells Edwards to go f___ himself: Watch him try.

John Robb thinks that Kerry lost this first debate, given that all Bush needed to do was hold Kerry to “tactical victories,” but he also provides much needed context for Kerry’s “global test” remark. At the time, I thought Kerry was just foolishly playing into right-wing paranoia about new world orders. It turns out that, according to Robb, he’s referencing part of Col. John Boyd’s “grand strategy” concept, the moral connectivity vector:

A key test of moral connectivity is proper conduct within alliances.  If a member of an alliance takes independent action that puts the other alliance members at risk, it needs to have a strong moral justification for that action.  If it fails that test, the alliance will melt away, and the independent actor will become isolated.

The post points to a fascinating article on Boyd’s strategic thought at Global Guerrillas. Thought provoking.

Interesting staking out of positions while position to the extreme facets. The president’s slipping in the World Criminal Court was telling, as was Kerry’s mention of the Kyoto Protocol.

Hmm. Good clarification from Lehrer. Bilateral vs. multilateral. Interesting clarification leaving Kerry looking slightly foolish, with Bush’s correction about “enriched uranium” vs. “plutonium.”

And here is the real point, on the Sudan: we’re overextended, straining the National Guard, holding people in who want to leave. But both candidates want to answer questions on Iran rather than the Sudan.

I think Kerry was a little overconfident, slipping “Mission Accomplished” into his reply on Korea and Russia. His closing is OK—not a barnraiser, but it is after all a debate moderated by Jim Lehrer. Bush: same talking points.

Post-debate spin: Giuliani gets checked by Tom Brokaw on the assertion of the leader of Pakistan that the war made things worse by America, not better, but calls Bush’s stalling on the same two talking points a “strength.”

The sum of the President’s point right now appears to be, “Don’t change horses in mid-stream. We won’t succeed if we send mixed signals to the world.”

Hmm. A free Iraq and a free Afghanistan will send a powerful signal. Hard to get to that signal if we are losing ground there daily.

Did Bush’s prep people give him any points other than “Wrong war, wrong time” and “grand diversion”?

The enemy attacked us, and I’m committing troops…in Iraq. Where the enemy wasn’t. Oh, and let’s slip “mixed messages” into our reply.

Good of Kerry to pounce on Bush’s slip there.

Homeland security. I think this could be the hidden strength of Kerry. This is the untold story of the Bush presidency—the strong emphasis on homeland security while adding no funding. Bush: “How are you going to pay for all those promises?” Hmm. Perhaps by not slashing taxes on the rich and the corporations. Bush sounds like an imbecile by comparison to the senator.

—What the hell? “We’ll never succeed until the Iraqis take responsibility for protecting themselves.” Is that a cover signal to the gun lobby—here’s a new market? A free Iraq is essential for the security of this country. True, now.

Interlude: New York Times is also live-blogging.

Kerry let Bush get away with the $87 billion again. Probably again wise to not try to explain the fine points of how Congress works in a 30 second rebuttal.

Watching on NBC, who are getting around the “no cutaway” rule by doing splitscreen reaction shots of the candidates. Meaning that Bush shared the screen with Kerry the whole time that Kerry was speaking, while Bush had the screen to himself during the response. But it looks like they’re keeping it fair by doing split screens for the initial respondent to each question.

Second question, about the reprehensible comments of Cheney about the safety of the country should Kerry be elected. Bush ducks by saying that’s not going to happen and refuses to answer the question, which Lehrer lets him do. But Kerry zings him on the rebuttal about the diversion in Iraq—then bobbles it with his military referrals—then makes an allegation about outsourcing the fight for Bin Laden.

Third question. Anyone else notice how Bush is a frowner, not a smirker, when he’s waiting to respond? Was Saddam ten times more important than Bin Laden? Rebuttal: flip-flop allegation.

Interjection: DNC fact checkers fact checking the RNC fact checkers, here.

Hmm, in the fourth question, Bush said, “Saddam Hussein,” then mumbled and corrected himself, “Osama Bin Laden.”

Bush’s response? “Flip flop.” Kerry, wisely, isn’t trying to explain the nuances of his decisions, which I don’t think are flip flops; he’s driving on the fact that this was a mistaken decision by the president.

A federal judge has ruled that key parts of the PATRIOT Act, those provisions which grant extended surveillance powers to the FBI and impose gag orders on those who receive subpoenas to turn over records, are unconstitutional. Surprise, surprise, surprise.

I’d just like to pause for a second, as tonight’s first Presidential debate looms, and place my own bet on the least likely question to be asked George Bush: “Can you reconcile recent court rulings declaring major parts of the PATRIOT Act unconstitutional, as well as recent court challenges to the holding of uncharged ‘enemy combatants,’ with your oath to protect and defend the Constitution? If not, why should we vote for you for a second term? Shouldn’t we be prosecuting you instead?”

This is my month to stop taking things for granted, starting with today’s holiday. Labor Day, if it means anything to most Americans, probably means the last cookout, back-to-school shopping, and time to watch out for drunk drivers. It’s all too easy to forget that the holiday, which originated as an annual march by the Knights of Labor, reflects both workers’ efforts to secure saner working conditions from management and the government’s attempts to appease them while avoiding an official celebration of May Day. The benefits secured by the workers include the establishment of the eight-hour work day and 40 hour work week, overtime pay, and the ability to organize to improve working conditions—which sound awfully nostalgic to this tech worker who’s never seen any of them.. See also the Department of Labor’s official page on the holiday.

Incidentally, out of my 250 news feeds, I only found 26 mentions of “Labor Day”, including:

• The Monster Blog’s Labor Day resources (courtesy Fast Company)
• Boston Globe: Bitterness shadows Labor Day breakfast
• NY Times, From Now Until Then: “Coming in the thick of political battle, this Labor Day is a good day to survey what we hold in common.”
• Slate: Why do we get Labor Day off?