I was reassured but confused by President Bush’s forceful denouncement of the Dred Scott decision, and his pledge not to nominate Supreme Court Justices who would uphold the legal tenets of slavery. “Hmm”, I thought to myself, “that’s astonishingly liberal for him.” The moment was so bizarre – does he think the Democrats are painting him as someone who wants to return to pre-Civil War era plantations? I just can’t figure out where it came from. I thought there might have been a mioment where he decided not to go along some idea path, and suddenly had no where to go in his answer. So he fell back on the “oppose slavery” emergency reboot disk.
I was pained by John Kerry’s squirmy, weaselly unwillingness to clearly state his opinion on abortion and federal funding to pay for it if necessary. I think his position is that federal funds can be used to pay for abortions in at least some cases, which I agree with. Did I miss a wound? Did Kerry get his balls shot off in a firefight with the Cong?
At one point it was a popular device in cinema and literature that accountants, like poker players, would spend their days under bare lamps hunched over tables. The clear-green eyeshades allowed the worst of the glare to be filtered out while not actually restricting visibility.
At that point a mental image of Bush in his aviator uniform flashed through my mind and my mental imp began to repetitively whisper halfhardhalfhardhalfhardhalfhard
That “need some wood?” line made me cringe.
This one I still don’t get “we’ve got a great country. I love our values. And I recognize I’ve made some decisions that have caused people to not understand the great values of our country.”
His values are our values or our values are his values and what values are those exactly?
“Need some wood” was funny (since Bush either forgot that Kerry was right or was just lying), but Dred Scott was hands-down the most surprising comment of the night. Was that an attempt to court black voters? For that matter, Bush came up with a few talking points out of nowhere. But Dred Scott wasn’t a talking point, it seemed like he was seriously trying to answer the question and that was the best he could do.
What’s with Bush constantly bringing up the International Criminal Court during the debates? I don’t get it, is he afraid they might prosecute some members of his administration?
The President’s “need some wood?” comment immediately made me think of Bob Dole, Viagra and inappropriate images of the President. Where did Kerry get that “fact” from, anyway?
From Factcheck.org, the site that Cheney mistakenly referred to as Factcheck.com during his debate with Edwards (Check out “the facts about factcheck.com” at the top right of the page).
My take was that the Dred Scott comment was that it was a memory remnant of a briefing/practice run that was designed to show Bush had a grasp of history, was intelligent and understood, better than you Average American, the traditional scope of the Supreme Court and would weigh his choices wisely and make a decision against the sweeping backdrop of** HISTORY**. Of course, He mangled it and ended up sounding weird.
As weird as Kerry sounded when Bush laughed at the timber company stuff – whatever the “truth” afterwards.
Even though I’m a Kerry/Edwards supporter, I was a bit taken aback when Mr Edwards made reference to “leaders of other worlds.” Is this another thing our government isn’t telling us? We’ve made Contact?
“First, the National Journal named Senator Kennedy the most liberal senator of all. And that’s saying something in that bunch. You might say that took a lot of hard work.”
" That’s what liberals do. They create government-sponsored health care."
It was George W. Bush channeling Archie Bunker. Maybe somebody wired an old episode of All In The Family through that device on his back. Here come the Liberals! Oh, no, the Liberals are invading! Hide the women and children! I was waiting for Mr. Bush to start calling Kerry a Commie Pinko. I’m glad Kerry’s not falling for this old trick.
Somebody should tell Mr. Bush that Liberals are responsible for some significant advances in American history that Conservatives fought tooth and nail, among them civil rights, social security, and the eight-hour workday, to name just a few.
The moment was so bizarre – does he think the Democrats are painting him as someone who wants to return to pre-Civil War era plantations? I just can’t figure out where it came from. I thought there might have been a mioment where he decided not to go along some idea path, and suddenly had no where to go in his answer. So he fell back on the “oppose slavery” emergency reboot disk.
For that matter, Bush came up with a few talking points out of nowhere. But Dred Scott wasn’t a talking point, it seemed like he was seriously trying to answer the question and that was the best he could do.