If I held up an apple, and said “what is this?” would you say apple, or would you answer with a discussion on the origins of the apple, the evilness of the individual that created the apple, and what you’re going to do about the apple? See, all I want to know is what it is, but if you add enough dross to the conversation I may be confused enough to not realize that you don’t know what an apple is.
While the Republicans express their desire to make sure all American’s speak English, the Democrats are trying to prove that English comprehension is unnecessary in the leader of the “free world.” I think it’s quite possible that they are drunk on the heady wine that is victory 14 months early, and don’t feel a need to respond to the questions that are asked. I know if my children answered questions the way this pack of over-educated nitwits do they’d be grounded until the second coming.
Thats probably a good standard to set while watching these things. “Would I accept that sort of answer from my child.” I’m a fairly gentle fellow, but I think if John Edwards talked over me the way he did Stephanopolous I’d take him out behind the barn, and see if he really remembers his roots in the textile mill.
Faux Bonhomie does not an informative debate make, and the inability to directly challenge the viewpoints of their fellow nominees is becoming bothersome. While they all do resemble each other on the issues, the fact is their are differences and it is cowardly not to stand up and describe your opponent as erroneous if you think they are. Cowardice…write that down…it may well be a new standard for being elected to the presidency.
John Edwards failed to answer any questions that were asked of him without additional prompting, and it’s probably best that he didn’t. I think his coffee this morning was of the Irish variety, and he appeared decidedly unpresidential. I know that his campaign is struggling, but the Eddie Haskell oiliness isn’t going to help resuscitate it. If this were baseball, he was wiffing at bad pitches.
Whoa, how’d Hillary lose ten years? It wasn’t just the beige pantsuit, she had a whole lot of lines missing from that mug of hers. She looked, dare I say it…radiant. Probably botox. If it was makeup her face would have resembled a pancake being cooked on a horizontal surface by the end. Her smoke and mirrors act worked very well when confronted by her high negative numbers, and all things considered she’s still the cream of this objectionably average crop.
Mike Gravel: something has happened to this guy. I think it could be alzheimers. He used to be funnily relevant, now he’s just sad.
Dennis Kucinich: He’s the genuine article. He confronts each issue head on, and in this field that makes him unique. Apparent;y he’s also mildly retarded, and would advance his cause best by not telling people to much about what he is thinking.
Bill Richardson: He tries to play Washington outsider, but the fact is you don’t become a senior diplomat without riding a lot of jock , and owing a lot of favors. Nothing in his agenda sounds reasonable or feasible. It is fun to watch that big fat neck waddle sway as he talks though.
Chris Dodd: The high point of his debate was when the fly walked on his starched hair at the end. I’m being serious. Another no hoper looking for a worthy exit.
Joe Biden: I like Joe, but his ire doesn’t get up before noon, and it put him at a decided disadvantage. He’s just not as inviting when he isn’t railing against the machine. He’s still the guy for me, but he has no hope.
On the issues:
Health care…I’m not sure what they are thinking, but it’s certainly not how can we pay for this.
education… No support for setting standards for teaching. This hearkens back to the no accountability Democratic party of yesteryear, and all that stood for crumbled into dust in less than half a century. We hold dishwashers accountable for making clean dishes, we should hold teachers accountable for creating students that can at least read and write. We’re not asking for astrophysicists, just peole who can count change and balance a damn checkbook. pathetic stance by all.
Iraq War: there was so much equivocation on this issue that I’m beginning to think someone set these people down and explained to them the global ramifications of the current conflict. For the most part, they intend to withdraw slowly….verrrrrrrrrrry slowly. The only thing I’m absolutely certain of is that if liberal voters use Iraq as a benchmark they are going to be sorely disappointed in our next president, regardless of party affiliation. One more thing, a quick quiz…who was the last democratic president to get us out of a war? Who was the last to get us into one? chuckle…I love that…liberal warmongers.
I left out Barack above because I wanted my feelings on his position to be seperate from the rest. Do not make a back of the bus analogy. I think he is onto something, that though the others toy with incessantly, they never put it all the way into play. Barack appears to be the one who understands just how incredibly ignorant the voting public is concerning world events. He gets that they don’t understand why he is wrong, so he can feel free to continue being wrong to his hearts content. He’s planning on skipping most debates and forums between now and the primaries, which will sorely limit peoples ability to question his message. Smart move barack. When you seek the dummy vote, promise anything, and explain nothing. Kudos to your campaign planners.
As a group they look very confident, and why not? They are so far out in front they’ve practically slipped into pep rally mode.
Unless it happened in the first few minutes I heard nothing about immigration reform.