![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
~
In the Blogsphere, anent last night's presidential debate, done in the 'Town Hall Meeting' conceit, Monk sees the pro-Kerry people exultant in the notion that their man beat Bush into a figurative pulp. Although Mr. Kerry is doubtless better spoken and much more intellectual, Mr. Shales' point is well taken:
"In America, sadly or not, eloquence may not win you a lot of support. People seem to like Bush's insistently folksy, down-homey approach, forgetting he is worth a fortune and likin' the way he insists on droppin' g's at the end of words like "workin'."
Moreover, Americans who aren't Kerry supporters probably don't think much of that chastisement about how we shouldn't use labels, in response to Bush bringing out the old Republican stick about tax & spend liberals. It is quite a title to be the most liberal Senator in a country as conservative as America. Nor are non-Kerry supporters as likely to be moved in the same way by Kerry's fiat that he has been entirely consistent, which may have made some undecideds choke a little.
The moment that most struck Monk was when Kerry pledged, in response to an audience member's challenge, that he would not raise taxes on those earning less than $200,000 per year. One was reminded of that classic pledge made by Bush the Elder, "Read my lips: No new taxes!" It's an irresponsible pledge to make.
When Monk saw a re-play of that Kerry pledge, he was hoping to hear Kerry qualify it by saying that he won't raise the income taxes of the less affluent. But, no, it was a blanket statement. Considering the deficit, in addition to raising the taxes of the highest earners, we might need to do something like collect a gas tax - a policy that not only restores some fiscal sanity to our house but which also serves our Middle East policies by lessening the wealth that goes to the oil tyrants of that region, as well as fostering more energy efficiency at home.
It's funny. Before the debate, Monk was depressed about the tight strictures on the debate, with all questions carefully screened, with the promise of yanking the microphone from anyone who strayed from the accepted script. One was even going to post about our ever more Orwellian world of control - where democracy is only a show - but one no longer cares to play the role of the shocked virgin, being too damn old for that.
Now Monk wishes that they would add one more restriction. It is essentially a broadening of a restriction that the campaigns placed on themselves: No asking for pledges! The need to pander is too strong, and such pledges make for bad statesmanship.
.
In the Blogsphere, anent last night's presidential debate, done in the 'Town Hall Meeting' conceit, Monk sees the pro-Kerry people exultant in the notion that their man beat Bush into a figurative pulp. Although Mr. Kerry is doubtless better spoken and much more intellectual, Mr. Shales' point is well taken:
"In America, sadly or not, eloquence may not win you a lot of support. People seem to like Bush's insistently folksy, down-homey approach, forgetting he is worth a fortune and likin' the way he insists on droppin' g's at the end of words like "workin'."
Moreover, Americans who aren't Kerry supporters probably don't think much of that chastisement about how we shouldn't use labels, in response to Bush bringing out the old Republican stick about tax & spend liberals. It is quite a title to be the most liberal Senator in a country as conservative as America. Nor are non-Kerry supporters as likely to be moved in the same way by Kerry's fiat that he has been entirely consistent, which may have made some undecideds choke a little.
The moment that most struck Monk was when Kerry pledged, in response to an audience member's challenge, that he would not raise taxes on those earning less than $200,000 per year. One was reminded of that classic pledge made by Bush the Elder, "Read my lips: No new taxes!" It's an irresponsible pledge to make.
When Monk saw a re-play of that Kerry pledge, he was hoping to hear Kerry qualify it by saying that he won't raise the income taxes of the less affluent. But, no, it was a blanket statement. Considering the deficit, in addition to raising the taxes of the highest earners, we might need to do something like collect a gas tax - a policy that not only restores some fiscal sanity to our house but which also serves our Middle East policies by lessening the wealth that goes to the oil tyrants of that region, as well as fostering more energy efficiency at home.
It's funny. Before the debate, Monk was depressed about the tight strictures on the debate, with all questions carefully screened, with the promise of yanking the microphone from anyone who strayed from the accepted script. One was even going to post about our ever more Orwellian world of control - where democracy is only a show - but one no longer cares to play the role of the shocked virgin, being too damn old for that.
Now Monk wishes that they would add one more restriction. It is essentially a broadening of a restriction that the campaigns placed on themselves: No asking for pledges! The need to pander is too strong, and such pledges make for bad statesmanship.
.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-10-09 06:31 pm (UTC)From:And you were saying Kerry was dead in the water...
It's not over yet, and I still have no idea how it will end up. The point is still that you needn't have been so glum!
no subject
Date: 2004-10-09 06:34 pm (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 2004-10-09 07:23 pm (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 2004-10-09 07:39 pm (UTC)From:I'm going to now take the simple pleasure of going out on some rounds with Little Bear...
no subject
Date: 2004-10-09 09:55 pm (UTC)From:Glad to see you here. :-)
no subject
Date: 2004-10-10 05:22 am (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 2004-10-10 05:29 pm (UTC)From:Including my father who is majorly pissed off at Republicans for being so anti-lawyer. And, of course, damage caps for tort reform is a rather uninformed way to go.
But I think, surprisingly, the label of "most liberal" hasn't stuck with Kerry. People seem to have bigger fish to fry this election plus Bush is a very conservative conservative so there is little room to talk. Plus, it doesn't help that the label came mainly from a partisan group.
One of the highlights of the night really was Kerry's promise. Which I doubt will be remembered quite the way Bush I's was. This was less for the pledge and more for the fact that it countered the common assumption that Kerry is a "tax and spend liberal" with a good deal of the polls saying his actual further tax cuts for the middle class are coming off as quite impressive. And people are believing him mainly, I believe, because he's being honest that none of his plans are gonna get done unless he rolls back the tax cut on those over $200,000. I don't know if he is really gonna cut the red ink in half in 4 years, but he certainly can't do much worse than Bush has done on spending and budget woes.
no subject
Date: 2004-10-10 07:20 pm (UTC)From:I suppose we know that Kerry is liberal and Bush is conservative, and our nation is pretty evenly divided along those lines. Going to the wire. Maybe the difference will be how many conservatives become turned off on Iraq...
no subject
Date: 2004-10-11 01:09 pm (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 2004-10-11 02:10 pm (UTC)From:I love that icon more!!