| « Asymmetric opinion on first presidential debate- Obama, McCain 2008 | Asymmetric State of the race: McCain finally wins one » |
Asymmetric state of the race: Listening to the debate from the Angel game
09/26/08
1. I'm going to take my dad and two sons to the Angel game. I spoke to McCain and he feels confident that he can debate without my guidance.
2. I have no joy in saying this, but my feeling is that the Palin bubble has burst. Yes, the media has had it in for her, but she's just a little too girly in those interviews, not like Thatcher or even Clinton, vindicating my live in focus group's opinion, Mrs. Guirado's original opinion. I hope things change- the debate will be her last chance to change the Dan Quayle-like (Unfair though that was- Quayle was an elder-statesman compared to Obama.)
3. Why does Obama, who knows about as much about things as any Columbia dorm denizen with a subscription to The Nation, get away with it? In some ways, his weaknesses are also his strengths. While he can't come up with the pithy common-sense things like Palin's "They're [Iran] the bad guys," or McCain's "at conception," Obama knows how to conduct a vague, fact-less, or plain wrong college bull session. He sounds cool and like he knows what he's talking about. While some non-political people are impressed with direct answers (that agree with them, of course), some are blown away by people who sound as though they see both sides of things.
Obama just sounds cool when he speaks. Palin sounds perky and sound-bitish.
4. Who knows what will happen? McCain needs to point out how the Democrats are behaving towards him, trying at every opportunity to make him look bad. It sounds like a risk, but the 50 million people watching (and one listening at the baseball game) simply won't hear it anyplace except from the maverick's mouth.
2 comments
Dude,Warning - this comment is not kind.
Of late I've been reading your blog - for amusement, contrariness, and sometimes downright outrage. It's a choice opportunity for me to see just how deluded the other side is. Sometimes I'll read the most downright cussed entres to the wife, who always says, "How can you STAND reading that stuff??"
( Quick stylistic hint: the paragraph numbers in your posts take away from, rather than contribute to, the overall effect. In general, numbers in text are used to prioritize - and the sequence of paragraphs already takes care of that. )
The most peculiar thing is that you seem like the sort of fella that we used to refer to as "Otherwise Intelligent" - in other words (we speculate), you can tie your shoes, hold down a job, raise your family, and string words together into sentences somewhat better than McCain's pick for VP - BUT...
But sometimes the elephant in the room is just too big to ignore, and I find I must call it to your attention. The set of funhouse mirrors through which you view reality seems too distorted to believe. In this case I refer to Sarah Palin.
Frankly, any republican who doesn't seriously question McCain's judgment on the selection of Sarah Palin as his VP - perhaps the most crassly political decision of a modern candidate for national office - has so completely deluded him- or herself that no vestige of objectivity remains in the ability to evaluate ideas. (What happened to "country first", John???)
We all gave her the benefit of the doubt - just long enough to allow her to hang herself in a few pathetic interviews with the hand-picked "journalists" most expected to toss slow-pitch softballs.
Yet you and your ilk continue to whistle past the graveyard - actually having the audacity to compare the preparedness of Palin and Obama! Have you READ Obama's BOOKS ????
I'm sure you haven't - and I doubt you will - but I highly recommend it. (They were written by the man himself, by the way - not by ghost writers, like McCain's books.) If you can find some objectivity, your republican "reality distortion field" may suffer some damage.
But let's look at the bigger picture.
Why are the christian virtues so lacking in modern-day republicans and "stepford" catholics?
As a recovering catholic (stopped seeing that peculiar light around age 15, but the recovery is a lifetime process) it's especially difficult for me to appreciate the way in which the worldview of "blindly obedient" catholics is so corrupted by their faith - or, more accurately, by a massive, hierarchical, WORLDLY, yet anachronistic organization whose pronouncements on worldly issues have been provably, shockingly WRONG for TWO MILLENIA.
Would that the Jesus Christ of the new testament could pay us a visit - for he would be NO FAN of the catholic church, and would likely recommend it be dismantled, one gold brick at a time... (didn't that get him into trouble the last time?)
The Republican Party's platform - YOUR party's platform - is an embarrassment to humanity. The sort of person who could willingly sign his or her name to it is the sort of person who, in another age, saw no moral conflict in killing the enemy in god's name, owning Africans, depriving women of property or the vote, or throwing away "excess" while neighbors starve.
I say shame on your side's belligerent war-mongering, selfishness, greed, and foolish cultural politics - fiddling while Rome burns - using your religion as a bludgeon to deprive others of basic rights while solutions to important problems go unaddressed.
The unavoidable news, though - borne out by the history of man - is that in spite of your efforts, any future world will have contraception, abortion (hopefully not much), LOTS of gay people, and LOTS of atheists and agnostics.
Sadly, and partly because of your efforts, the day when humans will be able to observe with pride that every single person on the planet is well fed, healthy, and able to avail themselves of limitless opportunities grows increasingly distant.
I feel sorry for you.
----------
At this point, the electoral numbers are not looking promising for your dynamic duo (forget the national tracking polls - they're not relevant). In a few weeks it will all be over, and barring some big surprise, Obama will be president.
I'll be looking forward to at least eight years of outraged, manufactured rants from you and the Limbaugh noise machine...
I don't expect that, eight years from now, you'll be able to look yourself in the mirror, honestly, and admit that the world really is in better shape than it would have been under a republican.
I don't equate being able to write a book with being a good leader. Churchill aside and a few others, I think the two are inversely proportional. Wilson wrote popular books. I think liberals confuse being able to sling crap for wisdom. Palin ran a state and people there love her. Obama has shown an ignorance of human nature, economics, and other lapses of judgment.
Would Palin have been best friends with William Ayers? Would Obama have ever been against oil drilling before reversing himself?
As for books: Have you read the Pope's books? St. Augustine? Aquinas? Chesterton? This is silly as is your assertion that wanting more economic freedom is like supporting slavery (You know that only Christians really opposed it, right? What other reason would people, morally, at least?).
Wanting to tax 5% of the population so that you can get some of their money is unselfish? Being in a union and voting for Democrats is unselfish?
And, sin will always be with us. That doesn't mean we should stand up and applaud it.
I'm glad you read my blog and most of my friends happen to be liberals so I'm familiar with the astonishment some feel at speaking with one. Really, though, bring up specific stuff instead of "noise machine?" Like, why did Democrats refuse to do anything about Fannie and Freddy?






