the daily snivel

Last night I was running a fever, so I left the Clinic early (that is, at 7:00 pm) and skipped my forensic science class. My friend Mélanie treated us to some Thai, and we watched the Vice Presidential debates between Dick Cheney and John Edwards. I'm a bit of a fiend for this upcoming election, notwithstanding the fact that I'm not American, because I'm simply so worried about the path that the United States will continue on if George W. Bush is re-elected, I have to stay on top of every development lest I go mad with worry and grief.

In terms of the debate itself, I like the way Jon Stewart put it: "the debate was really quite dull until Dick Cheney unhinged his jaw, and then devoured and slowly began digesting John Edwards. When asked for an explanation, Cheney responded, 'I need his life energy.'"

This was an interesting debate because of the fact that Cheney and Edwards are strong speakers with good rhetorical skills. In many ways, they are the dream candidates for their respective parties who simply could not win the nomination on their own because of other perceived weaknesses (Edwards' relative youth and inexperience, and Cheney's remorseless diet of newborn kittens). They both put forward a lot of facts with heavy partisan slants, and I think at the end of the day most spectators will agree it ended in a draw. I, however, am biased, so I think Edwards still carried it well. He was more forthright, optimistic, and energetic than Cheney, who seemed grumpy, resigned, and terribly, terribly negative. His job, as alwayas, was to scare voters into giving the Bush-Cheney ticket another chance. And, actually, taking a quick look at some post-debate poll numbers (I'm such a wonk), it looks like a fair majority have given up on that boobeyman's message, and agreed that Edwards did a better job.

Cheney was quite strong and aggressive on foreign policy issues, which in one sense is unsurprising as it has been almost the singular focus of that administration, and on the other hand is surprising because they've done such an awful job of mucking about in the world. But basically I felt that Cheney fibbed so often that Edwards had his work cut out sorting simply through it all. Consider the fact that Cheney lied about the Iraq-terrorism connection, alternatingly saying that there was one (lie 1), but also that he never said Saddam had anything to do with September 11, 2001 (lie 2). Responding to a serious critique of Cheney's record by Edwards, Cheney attempted to rebuke Senator Edwards by pointing to his attendance record in the Senate -- and in order to be able to get that zinger out, Cheney even lied about not having ever met Edwards before he walked onto the stage.

On the other hand, Edwards did much better on the domestic front, especially because the jobs figures are piss poor right now (just 96,000 new jobs were created last month, worsened by the fact that there were 110,000 announced layoffs in September. You need 150,000 new jobs per month just to keep up with population growth), as well as the fact that he stood his ground on health care vs. tort reform (Cheney: "Trial lawyers are bad, m'kay?" Edwards: "Actually, lawsuits only comprise 1% of healthcare costs."), and pointed out that Cheney voted against a resolution in support of freeing Nelson Mandela, voted against Head Start, he voted against banning plastic weapons that can pass through medical detectors, he voted against 'Meals on Wheels' for Seniors, and he voted against a holiday for Martin Luther King. ("He voted against flunjers, capdabblers, and smendlers!" -- Dr. Seuss)

And Cheney didn't even try to respond to those.

I eagerly await the performance of Great Leader George W. Bush on Friday. They are getting desperate. Their messages are increasingly out of synch with what the news is telling us is actually happening, and they increasingly desperate.