I was out this evening, so I watched the debate on tape.

I'd say Cheney made it clear that you can win a thing like this without losing your composure or lowering yourself to the other guy's level.

Kerry and Edwards are coming across as guys who have no better ideas than to attack everything the President does. And Edwards was painfully scripted tonight, repeating the same phrases over and over. When Cheney needed to underscore a point, he generally found fresh ways to express his most important ideas. (With the exception of his verbal tick, "the fact of the matter is." If Cheney were ever again to be in a public debate, that would be the drinking phrase.)

Note that on several occasions Cheney declined to use up all the seconds allotted to him, and on a few he "threw away" entire half minutes. He was selective about what he resonded to, and was entirely willing to wade out of the mud, as when he said his piece about gay marriage, heard that Edwards' rebuttal included an allusion to his own daughter—and when the spotlight came back to him simply thanked the senator "for his kind words about my family." This was an intensely classy way to avoid defending the one area where I suspect there is a policy disagreement with the course the administration has taken, and where there really wasn't anything left for him to say.

I was also struck by the fact that he listened closely to the instructions for the question about what they each brought to the table as potential VPs. He shared biographical material while also confessing his discomfort in talking about himself. He talked about why his working relationship with the President was so good, and what made it effective. And when it was Edwards' turn he couldn't even remember that he wasn't supposed to say his running mate's name, and shared nearly nothing about his own background. It was as if the prefabricated script had taken over, and the man himself had simply left the stage.

I'm hearing "first half to Cheney, second half to Edwards." The people who say that are grading on an age-adjusted curve. This one was Cheney's, in large part because people are not voting for a litigator: they want a Chief Executive. Someone who doesn't just poke holes in others' records, but gets things done.

Finally, the VP went on the attack early on when he felt he had to. Offered another opportunity to kick the senator in the teeth, he didn't do it. Another example of restraint.

I don't want to send anyone into a tizzy here, but I'm thinking of voting Bush-Cheney this November. Leaning that way.

Update: Joyner has his own analysis, plus a roundup-by-trackback.

Posted by: Attila at 01:08 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 470 words, total size 3 kb.

1 Cheney blew one big time!!! In telling Edwards to check his facts he referred him to Factcheck.COM which is an anti-Bush site. George Soros must be thrilled!

Cheney meant to say Factcheck.ORG but don't expect an admission of fault from Cheney. Maybe he did mean Soros's site - Freudian slip sort of thing.

Posted by: littlemrmahatma at October 06, 2004 10:01 AM (BZ0tI)

2 Could have sword he said ".net," but then I know the URL and might have just heard what I expected to hear. No need to ask you which one you go to more often

Posted by: Attila Girl at October 06, 2004 12:34 PM (SuJa4)

3 He didn't say NET, though you obviously frequent that site for your facts. The URL is mentioned in the transcripts which you can find on the Web. Yep, Cheney was right on the money on that one.

Posted by: littlemrmahatma at October 06, 2004 01:23 PM (BZ0tI)

4 Wow. "Sword" for "sworn." How did I even manage to do that? (The n key is nowhere near the d key.)

Posted by: Attila Girl at October 11, 2004 04:46 AM (SuJa4)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Protein Wisdom has the list of affirmations John Edwards will be using today to prep himself for the Big Night. Including

3. "When you mention ‘tax cuts for the wealthy,’ try not to giggle like you did that time with Kennedy over a pitcher of Bombay Sapphire martinis.

UPDATE: I'm taking input on whether I should delete the spam comment on this entry. It's kind of hilarious, and it clearly wasn't written by the person whose blog it's attributed to. Your thoughts?

UPDATE 2: The spammer is apparently stalking another blogger. I was asked to remove the spam, but I couldn't bear to—it's so . . . refreshing. So I've removed the web address of the blogger who's a victim of his/her efforts. For more information on the most bizarre stalker I've ever heard of, go here, and of course do check out the actual blog.

UPDATE 3: It's a Kate-a-lanche! Welcome, Small Dead Animals readers.

Posted by: Attila at 03:42 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 164 words, total size 1 kb.

Dean Esmay is running an excellent interview with Van Odell of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. I know you're all tired of hearing about the Swifties, but this does have some fascinating material in it, and it clears up a few common misconceptions about the SBVfT and their assertions. Odell served with John Kerry in Vietnam longer than anyone else did.

Here's a teaser:

DW: Do you consider the members of Kerry's crew, who have backed his version of the story, to be liars? If not, why do you believe their perceptions of the events in question differ so widely from your own?

VO: No I don't consider them liars. I consider them led by Kerry right now. One of the incidents that I can talk about, why I think their story differs, is that Rassman said he heard gunfire from the bank. I didn't see any gunfire and I was at the highest point of the field. I think Rassman just heard our gunfire, and when we realized we weren't under fire we stopped.

You would otherwise have to ask them why they think their memories are different. So far only Del Sandusky has been allowed to talk to reporters, so we really don't know what the others have to say.

I don't know why these guys' memories differ, you will have to ask them. I only know that over 60 who served in An Thoi--and we had about a hundred men in our division at any one time--we've got 60 people from there who say his service was questionable in Viet Nam and who take him to task for lying about us as murderers and war criminals when he came back in 1971. That stacks up to only 7 of his own swift boat people that follow him.

Read the whole thing; it's fascinating.

In other news, it's no longer called the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. The organization has merged with the POWs for Truth, and it's now Swift Boat Vets and POWs for Truth. A new commerical has come out that concentrates on the experience of POWs; you can watch it here, and you might note that the site now uses four different video players, so those of us who weren't able to watch the ads before can see them now.

The POWs for Truth also produced a long-running video, Stolen Honor, which you can see clips of and order here.

Posted by: Attila at 02:48 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 414 words, total size 3 kb.

I always forget what a genius he is, and that I have to read him every day, or regret it. Some snippets of his post-debate analysis:

I could talk about the blogger party tonight where the luminaries of the Northern Alliance gathered to watch the debate, and peck out snark and insight. It was quite a sight: bloggers on the sofa, laptops open, family and friends gathered behind, all eyes and ears on the big TV. Behold the ankle-biting pajama-clad ticks!

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

I was standing behind the sofas, pacing, reading the blog entries before they were posted. (The very definition of having upper echelon access, perhaps.) But I had to leave early, and while I regretted leaving the party, I was also glad. I hate the debates. I have a vision of 65 million undecided Americans tuning in and making a snap judgment for all the wrong reasons. Wow, he pounded the podium to emphasize each word - but the other guy pounded each syllable. WhatÂ’s this about sealing Fallujer? Is it leaking? Did they have a flood?

But mostly I hate the debates because I simply cannot abide hearing certain statements I’ve been hearing over, and over, and over again. I can’t take any more talk about bringing allies to the table. Which ones? Brazil? Mynmar? Microfrickin’nesia? Are there some incredibly important and powerful nations out there whose existence has hitherto escaped me? Fermany? Gerance? The Galactic Order of the Belgian Dominion? Did we piss off the Vulcans? Who? If we mean “France and Germany,” then please explain to me why the reluctant participation of these two countries somehow bestows the magic kiss of legitimacy. They want in? Fine. They don’t? Fine. At this point mooning over France is like being that sophomore loser dorm pal who spent his dateless weekends telling his loser roommate about a high school sweetheart who stood him up for the prom. Give it up. Move on. I understand; they are wise and nuanced, we are young and dumb. We’re the cowboy leaning with his back against the bar, elbows on the rail, watching the door; we need our European betters to teach us how to ape the subtle forms of Nijinsky, limbs arrayed in the exquisite form of the Dying Swan. Understood. But I don’t want to be the Dying Swan. And I don’t want posture lessons from a country that spent the last 20 years flopping on its back and grabbing its ankles when Saddam showed up waving stacks of Francs in exchange for bang-sticks. Don’t you think I know about France’s relations with Saddam? Surely the advocates of the French Touch must know, and don’t care. Or they don’t know – in which case their advice is useless.

Germany? Whatever.

And it took lots of dead Americans to be able to say that.

Also dead Russians. Is Russia the great ally weÂ’ve dissed? If we invite Russia to help, then we have to tell them things. I donÂ’t want to tell them things. At least as they relate to the battlefield.

Perhaps the “ally” is that big blue wobbly mass known as the UN, that paragon of moral clarity, that conscience of the globe. You want to really anger a UN official? Tow his car. Short of that you can get away with anything. (Sudan is on the human rights commission, to cite a prominent and amusing detail. It’s like putting Tony Soprano on the New Jersey Waste Management Regulation Board.) I don’t worry that the UN is angry with us. I’d be worried if they weren’t. And I find it interesting that someone who would complain about outsourcing peevishly notes that we hired HALLIBURTON to do the work instead of throwing buckets of billions to French and German contractors who sold them the jets and built the bunkers.

. . . . . . . .

I’m not enthused about a [Arab] summit, unless we get to set the agenda. Item one: get over the frickin’ Jews, people. They’re not going anywhere, and if they do they’re taking all of you with them. Item two: You poke the hornet’s nest one more time and the skies of Tehran and Riyahd will darken with 747s, which will disgorge a fleet of Jeeps. We will ride around with bullhorns and announce that all women are free to leave, with their children, so they can live in a society where they get to show some shin without having some gynophobic wanker whip them with sticks. Your choice! Madrassas and no women, or a live-and-let-live world with women, and cable TV and the odd cold beer now and then, if you like. Beer will not be mandatory. We’re not the sort of people who impose beer on the unwilling. But you know, on 9/11 we recognized the downside of coexisting with societies that want to hang people for having a Pabst after a hot day. Your choice. Item three: we’re going to play a video of the events of 9/11. And then we’ll have a discussion. We’re willing to entertain all sorts of commentary, with one proviso: the moment you use the word “but,” you’re escorted from the building and put back on a plane home. You can never come to the US again. Your nice condo in the new Trump building will be sold for five dollars to a nice Jewish lesbian couple we met the other day at parent’s night at our school in Park Slope. One’s an artist, the other’s a lawyer.

. . . . . . . .

So, I get it. We are wrong and bad and stupid and stupidly wrong-bad. We failed to make France act as though it wasnÂ’t, you know, France, a militarily insignificant nation that is understandably motivated by self-interest, and we havenÂ’t convened a summit so we could be castigated for ignoring the extralegal use of Israeli helicopters to turn Hamas kingpins into indistinct red smears. YouÂ’d think we nuked Paris and converted everyone to Lutheranism.

HereÂ’s the thing. IÂ’d really like to live in John KerryÂ’s world. It seems like such a rational, sensible place, where handshakes and signatures have the power to change the face of the planet. If only the terrorists lived there as well.

That was a longish quote; hope he doesn't sue me. And, for crying out loud, go read the whole thing.

Posted by: Attila at 03:20 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1088 words, total size 6 kb.

The Commissar quotes a Gallup poll that brought to his mind the saying, "one more such victory, and I am lost."

Dean Esmay points out that sometimes the person who appears to have "won" in the first few days after a debate isn't the same person who's supposedly "won" a few weeks later. History sometimes behaves differently than that weekend's Sunday shows.

Posted by: Attila at 03:18 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 68 words, total size 1 kb.

Here's the transcript of last night's debate.

Posted by: Attila at 01:18 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 17 words, total size 1 kb.

Allah has the master roundup.

One issue no one has raised: who gets the better soundbites. The Bush team is going to win on that, because Kerry said plenty tonight that can be thrown back in his face in terms of substance. (Bush was awkward, but the Kerry people are going to look silly if they just show Bush struggling to think of a phrase.)

But Kerry lived to fight another day.

Posted by: Attila at 09:46 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 76 words, total size 1 kb.

Green is drunk; Joyner isn't. Goldstein is having fun with Photoshop.

Bush and Kerry were both wearing bitchin' suits. And Lehrer did a nice job.

Kerry is more polished, as you might expect. Sometimes it's painful to watch Bush struggle to find a word. But it's more painful to watch Kerry selling his service in Vietnam, particularly in light of the scrutiny he's received for all the things that happened during that time—both in Southeast Asia and here in the States. (And how much rouge was he wearing, anyway?—or is all that color from the infamous fake tan? He managed to negate his height advantage with that.) Bringing that up several times within the same debate is tantamount to hooking.

One of the most dramatic moments was when Lehrer gave Bush the chance to comment on Kerry's character, and he didn't take the bait. Bush is making it clear that he doesn't want to make personal attacks, and he doesn't want this campaign to be about events that took place 30-35 years ago.

There seemed to be a role reversal of sorts going on: Kerry is acting dispassionate, and even tries to smile as the President hammers him. Bush, who often appears to be above the fray, was clearly annoyed as Kerry made his own points. I suspect this was a decision that Bush and his advisors made, and that the intention was to show how engaged his was. To underscore that he's a regular guy.

And, as I've said before, he is now the master of that smirk. He owns it; it doesn't own him like it used to. And he didn't hesitate to play up his real strength, which is the fact that he's doing the job of President now. At every turn he was willing to remind Kerry and everyone else that he's actually doing the work, making the tough choices, and so forth. That it's easy to Monday-morning quarterback the leader of the free world.

The debate was probably a draw, but I don't think it'll change many minds. Most of the people who watch these kinds of things are political junkies to begin with. And there is still the sizzle vs. steak question: what matters at the end of the day is how people will respond to the underlying message. Bush's messages: 1) the President needs to be steady, and not vascillate; 2) we need to stay the course, in Iraq and elsewhere. Kerry's message: George W. Bush has been fucking things up.

What I love though is that we had this debate in the first place. It's essential to Democracy that the President be required to defend his record in this way. And we're alone in doing it in this way, placing our leader on the spot to this degree.

Each guy held his own.

Posted by: Attila at 09:18 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 477 words, total size 3 kb.

. . . not to pick Kerry? But you didn't listen to Aunt Attila, did you? And it's too late, and there you are crying into your Kool-Aid.

Posted by: Attila at 02:29 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 38 words, total size 1 kb.

Points out that Kerry is hangin' out around The Daily Show,where he can reach the stoned slackers who form his most natural constituency.

Oh, do let's. Let us rock that vote, shall we? Otherwise it'll be Chimpy and his Halliburton advisors, who will come up with more ways to give blood for oil; see if they don't.

Posted by: Attila at 04:10 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 61 words, total size 1 kb.

Is up over at Protein Wisdom. I may do a scene for it later, but don't miss out on Jeff's comments section, which contains a few soliliqies from Omelet that pertain to the situation.

The goal is to finish the entire play, of course. Each blogger does one scene.

Me, I want to do the scene wherein the forest starts moving . . . Oh, wait.

Posted by: Attila at 03:46 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 80 words, total size 1 kb.

WaPo: Among likely voters, 52-43. Some of this could be bounce, of course—but we were supposed to be living in an era wherein bounces were no longer really possible. At least, that's what we were told.

Via James.

Posted by: Attila at 02:33 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 54 words, total size 1 kb.

. . . the President used to drink, and may even have used drugs, in his youth. I'm shocked, shocked.

For crying out loud: it sounds like everythiing in the Kitty Kelley book is either beating a dead horse (the National Guard business; Dubya and booze/drugs) or is obviously made up (crooked business deals by Laura Bush, suspicious deaths, and the like). Some of it is reminiscent of that stuff Kelley made up about Nancy Reagan.

Even Dubya's former sister-in-law, Sharon Bush, maintains that, no, she didn't confirm this notion that G.W. used to do lines of coke at Camp David. And she's no fan of the Bush family at all.

This is just silly. Any "news outlet" that has this woman on it as a guest is just discredited, in my mind. Go. Dig. Fact-check. If you find something true, then talk to her—but giving her credibility before you've done your research is asinine.

Posted by: Attila at 04:48 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 159 words, total size 1 kb.

Jay at Wizbang! discusses the virtues in having a President who says funny things, and doesn't take himself too seriously.

Has anyone, by the way, tried to parse out what Bush actually meant when he committed his latest gaffe? I believe that instead of OB-GYNs practicing "their love of women," he meant something like "practice the work they love," and got snarled up as usual. But Jay's right: Kerry's idea of self-deprecating humor is to discuss his hair, and when you reduce those jokes down, they essentially mean, "yes, I do have great hair." There's nothing self-deprecating about it. No humility in this man.

"Isn't it funny that I'm perfect?"

"Well, a) no; and b) you aren't."

Via James.

Posted by: Attila at 01:25 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 123 words, total size 1 kb.

Protein Wisdom compares and contrasts the various John Kerrys.

Posted by: Attila at 10:15 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 41 words, total size 1 kb.

. . . is starting a syndicate of chick bloggers who support Bush, especially in light of his dynamite speech last week. If you're a chick, stop by and sign up. If you're a guy, go over and offer moral support. If you aren't a Bush supporter, rethink your position.

Thanks!

Posted by: Attila at 10:22 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 57 words, total size 1 kb.

has a thing or two to say about dirty campaigning—and how both sides have been doing it for decades.

Posted by: Attila at 05:33 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 21 words, total size 1 kb.

—Bush in particular—keep their mouths shut and the spotlight away from them during the Democratic convention?

That's classy. Too bad Kerry can't bring himself to do that.

Posted by: Attila at 02:21 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 33 words, total size 1 kb.

. . . decided to accept the nomination.

He did a very nice job. He really exceeded expectations with this address.

I didn't happen to mind all the liberal proposals in his domestic policy, because I have such a soft spot in my heart for all that is do-goodism, but it led me to reflect, once more, on how odd it is that Bush is so frequently described as a conservative, or as a conservative extremist. Reagan was a conservative. Bush is just right of center.

It's also worth noting that he's now the master of that infamous smirk, and it doesn't just flash across his face at inappropriate times. Now, when he's delighted with something his eyes light up, and his smiles have extra dimensions to them. I also think he was very effective when he seemed to be on the edge of tears—and that was so much more genuine than the old Clinton-biting-his-lip routine that we've all seen a dozen times or more.

The speech was beautifully written, and stirringly delivered. I simply can't imagine it being any better than it was. Even the protesters were terrific: nice to see the President have to work to keep his thread going. (And, as the husband points out, he may well have had to do this wearing a Kevlar vest, if our buddies in the Secret Service had their way.) And the Secret Service men were wearing baseball hats with their nondescript suits! Because they were in disguise, doncha know.

And the Texas delegates were sooooo cute in their matching outfits with the Lone Star on the breast, waving their ten gallon hats in the air. I swooned.

G.W. can phone in the rest of the campaign if he likes. Tonight he made his case to Middle America ("to the Reagan Democrats," as Rush suggested this morning), and he did it very well.

Sleep well, George. Thanks for making the world a safer place.

UPDATE: Steven Taylor live-blogged it. I was tempted, but had left the laptop upstairs.

UPDATE 2: James Joyner has a roundup of blogger reactions, minus his—since he was out last night and hasn't watched his TiVo yet. (I was wondering what was going on, and figured all the East Coast bloggers were just early-to-bed types.)

Posted by: Attila at 11:36 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 385 words, total size 2 kb.

Accuses me of being "in your face" on my blog lately. Hm. It is an election season, and the stakes are rather high this year. So one is going to hear about this stuff.

Still, I think "in your face" would be to post something like this:

Kerry and Edwards are dead in the water. Bush and Cheney are going to win this thing, and there's not a damn thing you can do about it. The slide has started.

Democracy has a beach head in the Middle East, and within a decade this will mean a more peaceful world. Al Qaeda will be vanquished. In a few decades you'll have the chance of looking back and recognizing that you backed the wrong horse. Or not.

Like Ronald Reagan, Bush is the right guy for the right time, and the future democracies of the Middle East will one day look upon G.W. as Eastern Europeans do Reagan, who destroyed the chokehold socialism had on their countries.

Just so you know what it looks like.

Posted by: Attila at 11:12 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 177 words, total size 1 kb.