The Final Debate

Was largely a downer; Kerry was a bit rote and preachy, tho I think largely effective, while Bush looked like a maniac and yet had his strongest performance of the three. Did Barbara sit W. in the corner all day for punishment after the last debate? He looked contrite and chastened, but somehow the veneer kept cracking and the arrogant overly-confident guy who Jesus selected to be our president kept creeping out.

Is being gay a choice? Bush: "I don't know, but we should be tolerant." Kerry: "*tortured legalese designed to ensure I don't alienate those red-state voters who make this their litmus test*"

BOTH candidates were simply lying: Bush obviously believes homosexuality is a choice and that all gays are damned to hell and their behavior shouldn't be tolerated in America. Kerry I'm pretty sure is FOR gay marriage but can't say so because it'll cost him in Colorado, Nevada, Pennsyltucky, WVa, and he can't afford to say what he actually believes. At least he said people were born gay. At any rate, both answers to this question made me want to wretch.

The media so far are giving Kerry a pretty solid victory, while acknowledging that Bush held his own. There are two things which are being harped on, and public perception of these debate snippets will shift through the weekend as various news outlets spin and filter them:

Kerry's "outing" of Cheney's already out daughter. The Right is crying foul on this, with Lynn Cheney decrying this as a "concerned mother" worried about her daughter's feelings. Also, the Right (typically anti-PC) is trying to use PC culture weapons against Kerry here, which is absurd. I think Kerry had his heart in the right place, and was trying to point out that the Right can't blame parenting or a lack of "family values" for homosexuality without condemning Dick Cheney--a risky move, and I'm not sure how this will play out.

Bush saying "I don't think I ever said I didn't worry about Osama bin Laden. That's what you'd call a Exazzurayshun." Several of the networks last night actually pulled up the March 13th, 2002 press conference where Bush said precisely that and played it:

QUESTION: Do you believe the threat that bin Laden posed won't truly be eliminated until he is found either dead of alive?

BUSH: As I say, we hadn't heard much from him. And I wouldn't necessarily say he's at the center of any command structure. And, you know, again, I don't know where he is.

I'll repeat what I said: I truly am not that concerned about him. I know he is on the run. I was concerned about him when he had taken over a country. I was concerned about the fact that he was basically running Afghanistan and calling the shots for the Taliban.

Of course, to be fair to Bush, he was pointing out that OBL was likely by that time unable to do much, since he was on the run and unable to command anyone--in other words, he'd been reduced to a "nuisance," and so was not a priority. Funny how Kerry says reducing terrorism to a "nuisance" is something we should worry about.

Here's my take on Kerry: he's bOring, but he's competent. He's not going to fire anyone up about anything. I NEED a bOring president, someone who shows up for work and who's uncontroversial and who doesn't push us out to the extremes. Kerry won't do so. He may even take us back a bit from the lunatic fringe we find ouselves on. I need a non-nuisance president for once, someone I can ignore. How's that for an effective slogan? Vote Kerry. He's someone we can ignore! or, John Kerry--Less of a Nuisance.