Master Debater - heraldblog

Master Debater

It's common knowledge among political handlers that the first Presidential debate attracts a large national audience, that debate number two doesn't do quite as well, and that debate number three does only slightly better than Telemundo soccer matches. So why, oh why, did the Bushies do such a miserable job of prepping their man for debate number one? After all, the debate topic, international affairs, played to the President's supposed strengths. And the subsequent debate on domestic affairs, which plays to Kerry's strenghts, doesn't attract such a large audience. So you would think Karl Rove would at least tell Bush stand up straight and try not to scowl.

Why oh why indeed? Or did we see the real Bush last night, in what Andrew Sullivan calls the President's "man behind the curtain moment"? Stripped of his adoring, loyalty-oathed crowds, and softball questions from Fox News, did we at last see the man who led the US into what has to be the dumbest war in the last 100 years (Remember the Maine, anyone?).

Wolcott nails it, as usual:
Frankly, I'm amazed by this reversal of fortune. Bush let Kerry get to him. I truly thought Bush would stick to the Reagan playbook and genially shrug off Kerry's criticisms with a grin and a quip, but he's a greater mass of insecurities and arrogant entitlements than even I imagined. I pity the fools who have to prep Bush for the next debate. Because they're sure going to have one pissy pupil on their hands.
It's a sign of monumental arrogance that Bush thought he could get away with playing fast and loose with the truth the other night. Or was it confidence that the Republican echo chamber would drown out the namby-pamby liberal fact checkers who point out that the US has not trained 100,000 Iraqi security forces? Or that Poland plans to pull out altogether by the end of the year?

How out of touch is this guy?

2.10.04 02:12

Permalink

To date 3 Comment(s) TrackBack-URL

Neill / Website (2.10.04 18:29)
Harold - do you use AIM?

(2.10.04 19:06)
Instant messaging, right? No, I don't. How does that work?

Neill / Website (2.10.04 21:19)
I think it uses technology...but thats over my head. and so is toaster