VP Debate
I’m not sure Edwards got buried, but I am confident that Cheney won. Usually VP debates don’t matter, but my inkling is that this one might. To the extent that he called Edwards (and, by proxy, Kerry) on the stuff Bush should have called Kerry on last week, Cheney might well have retroactively won last week’s debate for Bush. Too bad we don’t have a Cheney-Edwards follow up to each of the next two debates
Silliness of the day: Xrlq Jarvis thinks Edwards won because Cheney got the TLD for FactCheck.ORG wrong. Please. If mixing up Lubyanka Square with the Treblinka death camp was small beer, this was a half a swig of warm Diet Coke.
October 6th, 2004 at 8:35 am
Well the difference is a lot of Americans have no idea what Treblinka or Lubyanka is (and probably still don’t), but many people may actually go to that website and be in for a surprise since it will take them to Soros’ website. :)
October 6th, 2004 at 11:16 am
I don’t think Cheney forgot about his three prior encounters with John Edwards, so that leaves me with wondering if Cheney deliberately lied in order to score a point.
October 6th, 2004 at 2:12 pm
Well I don’t think anyone doubts Cheney’s willingness to lie in order to get what he wants. Why should this be any different? According to many Democratic senators, they said they are surprised Cheney would notice him anyway since when Cheney comes to the Capitol on Tuesdays, he only meets with Republican senators. Some folks could turn the tables on Bush and ask him how many security meetings he meets or isn’t as involved as he could be in because he’s campaigning. It’s just a fact. Senators running for President are absent a lot of the time. Presidents running for reelection are out on the road a lot and not in focusing 100% on the job they are elected to do.
October 6th, 2004 at 11:43 pm
Britton: you may be right, but I take little solace from the thought that few Americans know what Treblinka is.
Joel: I don’t know the details of Cheney’s prior encounters with Edwards, but from what I gather, they were outside the context of regular Senate meetings. If so, Cheney could just as easily have said that, and his rhetorical point about Edwards’s mediocre attendance record would have been every bit as forceful. If not, why didn’t Edwards call him on it? Is it your position that Cheney has a perfect memory but Edwards doesn’t?
October 7th, 2004 at 7:45 am
XRLQ,
I think that Cheney tried to leave the impression that on most of the Tuesdays he was “up there” that he was presiding over the Senate. The record indicates that Cheney rarely presides and that his Tuesday trips were to meet with Republicans, where Democrats weren’t invited.
My point is that you believe that it is this big huge point that Kerry brought a pen – A PEN! – into the debate against the rules. If you don’t care to give Kerry a pass for a lapse on a small thing, I’m not going to give Cheney a pass, either.
I have a lot of friends who tell me that it is God’s will that Bush be re-elected. I’ve been telling them it is God’s will that Cheney directed the audience to a Soros site.
October 7th, 2004 at 8:40 am
Joel: just for the record, I don’t give a crap about Kerry smuggling a pen into the debate. I gave a crap about the issue when it was clear he had smuggled something, and unclear what that something was.