Blogging the Debate

So, starting a little late, but here’s my thoughts on the debate, as they happen (uh, both my thoughts and the debate).

Warning: I will try to counter it, but I am heavily Obama-biased, especially after reading _The Audacity of Hope_.

On the battle of the ties, Obama wins, but just barely. I’m wondering if McCain’s purpose in choosing the stripey tie was to hypnotize the audience into buying his meandering and rather off-topic responses.

McCain’s talk about money corruption, Obama’s lack of ability to think of an amount as a lot of money, and other statements that place him with the middle class seem rather out there, given the number of houses he owns.

McCain really doesn’t want to address Obama directly. Poor Lehrer. He’s really trying…

I don’t have time to go out and purchase my own health care, McCain. No tax cut is worth that headache.

If you look at every major economic revival in the 20th century (China, Japan, Ireland, Germany, etc.), the success has been directly related to a strong investment in technological education and subsidizing of new technological innovation. Obama 1; McCain 0

I’m not sure what Lehrer is trying to ask, either. My lovely co-blogger, sapphohestia, believes that he’s looking for one of them to step up as the next Roosevelt (FD, not T)

Oh, and spending freeze? For everything except veterans, defense and (hmm. forgot the third). Still, scary. What about education? Infrastructure? Technological development? Tons of other things I’m not thinking of…

Oh, and Maverick? Was a cattle-rustler who hid his thievery under the rhetoric of avoiding animal cruelty.

Sorry, McCain, the next president of the U.S. WILL need to address us going into Iraq, because the Iraqis and others in the world will expect reparations for the warrantless violence and over 1 million deaths that we perpetrated against those people. Attention must be paid.

There’s no winning. There’s only mitigating the incredible damage that we’ve done. And McCain is trying to claim that what’s going on now, the “winning” that is not winning at all, was the strategy the entire time?

It looks like McCain is lying. In a transcripted interview, Admiral Mullins cautiously supported Obama’s Iraq withdrawal agenda.

Uh, the Taliban wasn’t an unfortunate result of our washing our hands. We put them in place! They’re our puppet government, and they are a result of our Cold War tensions with the USSR. Remember when the Soviets were the evil ones? Well, soon to be so again. Palin can see Russia from her house.

One of the things I love about Obama is that he has the ability to say (and does so regularly): ” ^So-and-so^ is right on ^such-and-such^ point, but here’s where we differ…” I love that he can acknowledge when somebody has a point without diminishing himself as a person.

I have such an intellectual crush on Obama. His brain is teh sexy.

Oooh. Iran. This should be interesting…

A “League of Democracies”, a group of people who share values, morals, and who are the economic powerhouses of the world, that can impose sanctions. French, British, Germans, and us.

Um… Because that whole League of Nations/United Nations had too many brown people and poor countries, I guess, and the Reds and the Japs have invaded the G8

Oooh. Kissinger snap ftw!

Oh, and for the record, in the Middle East, Iran has in the recent past had a bad reputation as being a U.S. lapdog with too many affiliations. Bush’s “Axis of Evil” and the villification of Iran over the past few years have been big factors in causing that to change.

McCain’s getting snarky.

The average South Korean is 3 inches taller than the average North Korean. Now that’s one oppressive regime.

Putin has had laser engraving into his retina?! Wow, they are so much more advanced technologically than we are. McCain is just getting more and more florid as we go along. Its the kind of language that bothers me, but I worry that it’s evocative, especially to people for whom the Cold War was a major aspect of their life (I was in my late teens when it ended).

Again, Obama is able to say that he agrees with McCain in the main, and takes issue only with McCain’s misrepresentations.

I know of conservative (neo) republicans who hate McCain because he’s against torture. Which is hilarious, cause it’s one of the places where I liked him.

A suitcase nuke is the biggest threat to us in the U.S., which we’ve all learned by watching 24. And we all know that President David Palmer never let that happen…

Oh… wait.

Where’s Jack Bauer when you need him?

And on a more serious note, we are definitely less-respected in the world, and this is definitely the source of greatest threat.

My lovely co-blogger, sapphohestia, points out that Obama has demonstrated in this debate that he is more able to “reach across the aisle” and take good ideas where he finds them than McCain is.

Dayam! McCain comes out and says it. Obama is naive and inexperienced. But then he goes on further and compares Obama to Bush in that he’s not willing to admit when he is wrong or to see other perspectives.

Those are some adamantium balls.

We inspire the world. That, also, is true. Obama is a little wrong here. It’s still true, which is why people around the world tend to be so disappointed when we fall short of those ideals.

Next Thursday, Mr. Foot-in-Mouth dukes it out with the Lipsticked Pitbull!

Now, that’s gonna be some fun blogging.

Peace out.

kitsunealyc and sapphohestia

14 thoughts on “Blogging the Debate”

  1. I didn’t notice the camera cut, but I stand by my opinion that Lila made a conscious choice to use her grief and pain as a means of striking back at the people she holds responsible; it’s not like Moore had ambushed some unsuspecting woman and forced her into a breakdown. There was emotional manipulation going on (though not as bad as if Moore had gone and hugged her on-screen) — and I don’t blame them for it. Calm, rational, emotionally flat persuasion is not nearly as effective as something that grabs you by the heartstrings, and this is a documentary very definitely designed to affect.

    1. See, I wouldn’t call it a documentary. I would call it propaganda. Propaganda I agree with, but propaganda nonetheless. Speaking with academics, I wouldn’t say that there is any such thing as an objective documentary, but one designed purely to achieve political goals seems less designed to document information and more to propagate faith.
      I’m not saying it wasn’t a valid point, but I’m also saying we should read everyone suspiciously, not just those with whom we disagree.

      1. I’m not so sure I would go as far as to call Fahrenheit 9/11 propaganda and not a documentary, because there was plenty of information embedded in it. For me to call something propaganda, it has to have a much higher proportion of hot air and sweeping, unfounded generalizations. “Jews are conspiring to take over the world” is propaganda; “the Bush family has the following links to the Saudis and the bin Laden family” is documentary. At least in my view. The fact that it had political goals and (more to the point) wore them openly on its sleeve does not, for me, make it propaganda — not in the pejorative sense, anyway, and in the non-pejorative sense, I’d say that anything designed to persuade you to a certain point of view is propaganda. (And that includes advertising.)

        Which is not to say that we shouldn’t look critically at the information contained in Fahrenheit 9/11 (or anything else, for that matter) — we should. We always should.

      2. My biggest issue was the “haves and have mores” scene form the film. The whole $1000-per-plate dinner was real. That really did happen. Bush really did say that but it was YEARS AGO while he was running for governor. Moore fails to bring that up.

        I think that makes a big difference. It’s *not* a presidential faux pas. Moore doesn’t think it’s a big deal becuase it’s all about Bush and Bush’s attitude.

        As a consumer, I just wonder how much else of the movie really needed date/time stamps on it. I hate feeling skeptical, as I loved the movie.

        And kitsune? Thank you. I feel better now about Lila. 🙂

      3. Right on all counts; it is indicative of Bush’s attitude (since I don’t think it’s changed much since then), but it would have been good to see more date/time stamps, as you say. As I said, I’m in favor of thinking critically about what we saw.

      4. Good point. So…

        …does anyone know whether the ‘protester’ who accused Moore of staging the scene has been identified yet?

        I say this because… {ahem} Well. We’re dealing with someone awfully manipulative, who regularly _does_ stage incidents in order to make his point, and who will add things to scenes to ramp up their impact (like fictitious mental voice-overs).

        The sceptical side of my mind asks whether this is a guy we should be trusting to deliver valid information and analysis.

        I’m sure I can’t be the first person to wonder whether the ‘protester’ was a plant. Any info on this yet? Interviews with the protester via a reputable source, now that the film is in theaters? Anything like this to verify the scene wasn’t a Moore setup all along (except in reverse)?

        Even if Lila was herself set up by Moore, that wouldn’t by itself nip his points, of course. I’m just thinking: as long as we’re being sceptical about information and opinions being fed to us by the media–why should we be so willing to trust Moore, of all people?

        Myself, I think propaganda is less in the quality of the data given, than in the tones of the presentation. The basic facts in most American WWII propaganda films were correct; it was how they were delivered that rendered them propaganda:

        namely, without charity and justice to the opposition.

      5. And yes… {wry g!}

        …that includes me being charitable and fair to Michael Moore. {proactively hoisting myself on my own petard}

        Who, by the way, I have very mixed feelings about. Rather like Mel Gibson, earlier this year. I substantially agree with the basic message in both films. I admire both filmakers for being talented at doing what they do, and for having the guts to try. I have serious problems with the ways in which the messages are presented, nonetheless.

        (The types of things being said before and after by both films’ releases, are quite similar, too–just reversing the general groups. {ironic g!})

      6. (editing blip! {wince})

        ‘before and after’ should have replaced ‘by’.

        Come to think of it, I have no idea what ‘by’ is doing in there at all… {staring increduously}

        I certainly don’t think the same types of things are being said _by_ both films. Whatever–need a nap, probably… {wry s}

  2. totally unrelated and welcome home

    I really like your new *BOOM!* icon.

    I also decided that you (being the more-badass-than-mom, 33% cooler than everyone I know, amazingly wonderful and beautiful woman that just got back oh-my-god-how-was-the-seminar! chiquita that you are) needed the ability to have more pretty things. If you want them. Or not.

    But now you have the option. Enjoy.

    You’re amazing.


  3. I only listened to the debate, which is a very different experience than watching.

    What is with McCain’s obsession with Regan. Is it an age thing? I know that I am worried that McCain’s old ass heart will give out and we will be stuck with Palin.

    Obama does seem more able to reach across the aisle.

    McCain has launched some very nasty ads. He also seemed snarky, condescending, and elitist in this debate.

    Still, I felt that Obama got a bit flustered during this debate, he is really smart and he wants to reason out what he is going to say but it often sounded like he was stalling and did not know what to say.

    1. Body language helped, I’m told — Obama kept meeting McCain’s eye, while McCain seemed unable to even accept that he was being forced to share the stage with this peon. In that comparison, Obama came off secure and confident, while McCain seemed petulant. (A grumpy old man, as one pundit called him.)

  4. The great thing is that, of the post-debate polls I’ve seen, in all but one case (that being the Drudge Report), Obama has anything from a modest to an annihilating lead on the question of “who won/performed better.” Which, as I saw described elsewhere, has the potential to shape the election narrative when it appears in headlines tomorrow — to become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

  5. This is awesome, thanks for posting a play-by-play. I only got to watch a little bit of it, but I pretty much agree, Obama gets the “Works Well With Others” badge. Did you say next week is the VP debates? That should be interesting. I was watching some clips of Biden on the Daily Show and…o_0 is about all I can say. Mr. Foot in Mouth indeed. And, well, Palin’s always interesting to hear talk.


  6. Oh yeah! How’s life in th’ greater Beltway area? Settling in, wending through crazy traffic (well, crazy people in traffic anyway)? Made fun of Deleware yet? Sometimes there’s this really silly rivalry between No. Va. and Maryland, but at least we can all agree that Deleware is silly. Hope you’re doing well!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s