the daily snivel

  Furious George

From the official Kerry-Edwards campaign blog:

BUSH GOES NEGATIVE… ON CHARLIE GIBSON?

“President Bush smirked and winked and chuckled to himself. He jumped from his stool, chopped at the air and interrupted the debate moderator. As he fought to keep his emotions in check in a testy, personal debate with Sen. John Kerry, the president asserted, ‘That answer almost made me scowl.’” [AP, 10/8/04]

“An angry Bush at one point cut off moderator Charles Gibson to upbraid Kerry for criticizing the size of the coalition backing the United States in Iraq, saying it denigrated allies like Britain and Poland.” [Reuters, 10/9/04]

“During his [Bush’s] own answers and rebuttals, he was pugnacious. He overrode moderator Charles Gibson's protests at one point, saying loudly, ‘I have to answer this.’” [USA Today, 10/9/04]

BUSH ON DEFENSE

Mark Shields: “I thought the President played defense on an awful lot of issues tonight. I mean including the Canadian importation of drugs and so much on the economy, and as well as Iraq.” [PBS, 10/8/04]

Liz Marlantes, Christian Science Monitor: “I actually would in many ways characterize the president’s performance as heated and to me, at times; it seemed very defensive, actually.” [MSNBC, 10/9/04]

John Harwood, Wall Street Journal: “[Bush] was quite agitated at the beginning. He looked defensive, he looked like somebody who was sort of trying to push the rock up hill, convincing people why he really should have gone to war against Iraq even though there were no weapons of mass destruction.” [CNN, 10/8/04]

BUSH’S ANGER MANAGEMENT

“ANGRY MAN”

Jon Meachan: “That was so interesting to me about President Bush is that he seemed like an angry man tonight, and clearly Kerry got under his skin in the first debate and instead of frankly not letting butter melt in his mouth, tonight he seemed to me to be speaking very loudly.” [PBS, 10/9/04]

Melinda Henneberger: “[Bush] seemed angry to me.” [MSNBC 10/9/04]

“TIGHTLY COILED”

Liz Marlantes, Christian Science Monitor: “[Bush] still has some of those things… I mean, you look at his face, he’s so tightly coiled; he’s got the jaw, he’s doing the blinking thing.” [MSNBC, 10/9/04]

“TENSE AND ANGRY”

Joe Klein: “…Bush seemed tense and angry. The person who wins is the person when you turn off the sound, the one who looks better to the public – that was Kerry tonight. Bush is supposed to be the laid back regular guy, [but] he seems more tense than Kerry does.” [CNN, 10/9/04]

“When Mr. Kerry accused the president of going to war unilaterally, Mr. Bush could not suppress his anger. He jumped off his stool and interrupted the moderator, Charles Gibson of ABC, saying, ‘I've got to answer this.’ Mr. Gibson wanted to pursue the subject of whether deploying Reserves constituted a form of military draft, but Mr. Bush was adamant. ‘Let me just answer what he just said about going alone,’ he insisted. ‘You tell Tony Blair we're going alone! Tell Tony Blair we're going alone!’” [New York Times, 10/9/04]

“STRIDENT AND INTENSE”

“At the outset, Bush seemed strident and intense, as if over-eager to avoid a repetition of his pained performance eight days ago.” [New York Times, 10/9/04]

“[Bush]...could have used more humility and was almost shrill at times.” [Editorial, Dallas Morning News, 10/9/04]

“The president seemed to fall back frequently on name-calling....” [Editorial, New York Times, 10/9/04]

NIXON-LIKE

“Bush ‘seemed wound a bit too tight. He was a little like Nixon – sort of jumping out of his suit,’ said David Niven, political science professor at Florida Atlantic University. ‘He looked bad on the TV close-ups.’” [AP, 10/9/04]

HOT UNDER THE COLLAR

“The president...let his feelings get the better of him, getting hot under the collar in a medium best served cold. From the outset, his clenched jaw twitched, and he blinked repeatedly, like a man whose contact lens hurt. And when Senator John Kerry turned and confronted him face to face with the latest report on the absence of illicit weapons in Iraq, President Bush snickered derisively - the first sign that the president, though more combative than in the first debate, was not on his game.” [New York Times, 10/9/04]

“AGITATED”

“Bush, curbing most of the signs of frustration that marked his performance in last week's debate, grew agitated after Kerry asserted the United States is bearing the burden in Iraq.” [Houston Chronicle, 10/9/04]

“FLUSTERED”

“[Bush]...did come across as flustered at a couple points in the evening, referring to his opponent as ‘Sen. Kennedy,’ who is the senior senator from Massachusetts. When asked about the draft, Bush declared: ‘I hear there is a rumor on the Internets.’” [Chicago Tribune, 10/9/04]

BUSH’S DEJA VU EXPRESSIONS

“Mr. Bush seemed hesitant and spoke loudly when he took the stage...at times he flashed glances of anger at Mr. Kerry that were reminiscent of his demeanor the week before.” [New York Times, 10/9/04]

“And not unlike that first battle, the president sounded angry and defensive, as if scolding the undecided. ‘Yeah, great question,’ he said when a man asked him about the draft.” [New York Times, 10/9/04]

“Bush kept his smirks and other body language in check more so than he did in the first debate, though at times he still let them roam. At one point, Bush even interrupted moderator Charles Gibson to lecture Kerry about the allied coalition in Iraq: ‘You tell (British Prime Minister) Tony Blair we're going alone!’” [Arizona Republic, 10/9/04]

Thinking back to the Democratic primaries last spring, I thought the media made way too much out of the "Dean Scream," but, frankly, I think last night's performance was Bush's Dean Scream.

As Burnt Orange Report puts it:

And we had Britain, and Italy, and Poland, and Ukraine, and Fiji, and Vanuatu... and then we went into Iraq to take down Saddam! YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEARRGH 

  The scary little man...

The word on the second Kerry vs. Bush debate, from truthout.org:

 In my report on the first debate, I described Bush as, "Shrill. Defensive. Muddled. Angry, very angry. Repetitive. Uninformed. Outmatched. Unprepared. Hesitant." As bad as that display was, it honestly paled in comparison to the frenzied hectoring Bush sprayed at 140 Missouri citizens who had the ill fortune of watching the man come unglued before their eyes.

John Kerry, by comparison, was every inch the controlled prosecutor pressing his case to the jury. It was, perhaps, that calm delineation of Bush's myriad errors which caused the Republican candidate to blow his stack. Exactly 30 minutes into the debate, Bush became so agitated by Kerry's description of the "back-door draft," which is literally bleeding the life out of our National Guard and Reserve forces, that he lunged out of his chair and shrieked over moderator Charles Gibson, who was trying to maintain some semblance of decorum.

"You tell Tony Blair we're going alone," Bush roared. "Tell Tony Blair we're going alone!" The disturbed murmur from the crowd was audible. Bush, simply, frightened them.

More unsettling than Bush's demonstrable agitation was his almost uncanny disconnect from reality.

Full article here.

See the video of George W. Bush flipping out. 

  And now for some hot Edwards on Cheney action!

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.

 

  Quote of the Day

"My opponent says he has a plan for Iraq. Parts of it should sound pretty familiar -- it's already known as the Bush plan."

"In Iraq, Senator Kerry has a strategy of retreat; I have a strategy of victory."

-- President Bush, in the same speech, this morning in Pennsylvania.

He's losing it. 

  From the spotted to the spotter

The weird thing about hitting the gym three or four times a week is that you are inevitably forced to progress from clueless, intimidated newcomer, and move towards becoming know-it-all, intimidating regular. Machines that once seemed baffling and inexplicable in purpose are now part of my alternating workout routines. Weights that were once unattainable are now being hoisted by my increasingly firm and defined muscle groups. I have to guiltily confess to even doing a little showboating once in awhile, and flexing in front of a mirror (though only when there's no one around). In my defence, it really does sicken me when I see guys strutting around the gym, constantly admiring themselves in mirrors and checking out all the girls like the musclebound narcissists they are. I think a dangerous point comes in the life of almost anyone serious about working out when it can move from self-improvement to self-obsession. It's a constant danger and is an intolerable vanity. There really is one guy in particular who is a serial offender in this regard, and he even makes little "I'm so sexy" faces as he poses unabashedly at every mirror he sees -- a real life Reggie Mantle.

The other night I was doing some bench presses (aside: I'm up to lifting 175 pounds now!), and was enjoying a quiet minute of repose after a set when I noticed a guy apparently lifting more than he could handle over at another bench. Indeed, the bar came down on his chest and he couldn't get it back up. He began calling out to a friend, who was busy working out somewhere else and hadn't noticed, but by that point I'd sprinted over and come to the rescue, and hefted the bar off him. He took some weights off after that and had his friend spot him. I felt good about being able to help out, but also about actually having progressed to the point where I'm on the lookout for others in trouble, and ready to help when someone is stuck or just learning, as opposed to needing a lot of help myself. These days I tend to work out on my own, or with a friend who's just learning, so I know my limits and increase my workouts incrementally and never to an exertion that is more than I could handle.

Not that I'm going about things entirely healthily. A good 75% of my motivation for working out is, of course, based upon my own health and self-esteem. But there's a lingering portion of motivation that is purely the vain quest for beauty, and to end up with body that I desperately hope a certain someone will notice and find attractive. Which isn't to say that I think she's in any way shallow, or that the sight of me sporting more bulgy muscles and a less bulgy tummy will suddenly make her see me in a different light. Our one date, with the many "fools rush in"-esque mistakes I made afterwards, and the close trust and friendship we've developed since then have probably put any past attraction to rest for her. But I will say that there are some nights... nights when I'm dead tired and would rather go home than spend half an hour on the elliptical machine and an hour and a half doing weights, that even the tiniest hope that I might someday nevertheless turn her head and put a twinkle in her eye... is why I ultimately go. 

  Get off the vote

Low voter turnout is a growing problem facing todays democratic governments. A number of solutions have been floated for this growing apathy, including mandatory voting laws. I've always been against forcing people to vote, as it strikes me as unconstitutional to impose a sanction on the exercise of democracy. But I do like the idea of encouraging voting, even though it's true that there aren't many candidates inspiring people to the polls these days. Nevertheless, some responsible voters taking it upon themselves to hit non-voters where it really hurts, which is the premise behind http://www.votergasm.org/. The idea is that registered voters take a pledge not to have sex with non-voters on election day. You can go further, all the way up to pledging to not have sex with non-voters for the next four years. In turms of fantastic reasons to cut people off, that strikes me as right being up there with failed condom negotiations.

What we need next is a Canadian version of this. Not that I'm getting any these days, but surely it could do some good for others. 

  This job would be so easy without all the questions and responsibility...

If you haven't been following the US Election as closely as I have, let me say that following the Presidential Debate on Thursday, October 30, the great consensus among pundits, analysts, Jon Stewart, and those polled is that John Kerry performed magnificently, projecting preparedness, confidence, consistency, and optimism, while George W. Bush looked petulant, irritable, sulky, and stupid.

This is what comes of a President who has held so few press conferences (the fewest ever during a Presidency: 12), who rarely appears outside of the safety bubble of pre-scripted questions and friendly audiences, and who honestly was never up to the job of being President of the United States. Bush has always kept a litany of patented themes and slogans close at hand, but has never offered much substance in his speeches or responses, leastwise not when there's no teleprompter in sight. And I'm delighted and relieved that, finally, a great many Americans are seeing the emperor without his clothes and realizing that he is a small and fearful man, not necessarily a bad man, but not one who should be leading the United States. And the Newsweek poll held after the debate showed just this: 47% of votes would vote for Kerry (49% without Nader in the running), compared to just 45% who would vote for Bush. Given that earlier polls showed a range of support for Bush somewhere between statistically insignificant lead and 10-point lead (notwithstanding that N = controversially oversampled Republican voters), I think (and hope and pray) that voters are sitting up and paying attention to the miserable failure Bush has been, and how few plans he has for improving matters either domestically or abroad.

Newsweek actually lays it out brutally here:

Bush, by contrast, sometimes looked peeved and impatient in the split screen, his features wrinkled into a smirk. Kerryites exchanged high-fives when their man uncorked a much-rehearsed defense of his vote against funding for the war in Iraq. And they were in ecstasy when he cleverly interpreted in strictly literal fashion Bush's statement that the war in Iraq had been launched in response to 9/11. "Saddam Hussein did not attack us, Osama bin Laden attacked us," intoned the senator—shocked, shocked. The unrehearsed move produced a devastatingly theatrical moment. Exasperated, Bush could only sputter: "Of course I know Osama bin Laden attacked us. I know that." By the time grim-looking Bush aides marched into "Spin Alley," Kerry's team indeed were declaring victory.

Bush had very little to say about Iraq except that the coalition was strong and that Kerry kept forgetting to mention Poland. The same Poland who said this?

"They deceived us about the weapons of mass destruction, that's true. We were taken for a ride."

And as the Center for American Progress points out, here's how the rest of that strong Coalition in the War on Terra is doing:

President Bush said, “The alliance is strong.”   FACT: The shaky international alliance in Iraq is disintegrating. Norway quietly pulled out its 155 military engineers last June, “leaving behind only about 15 personnel to assist a new NATO-coordinated effort to help train and equip Iraqi security forces. New Zealand intends to pull out its 60 engineers by September, while Thailand plans to withdraw its more than 450 troops that same month, barring a last-minute political reversal that Thai officials consider unlikely, say envoys from both countries. The Netherlands is likely to pull out next spring after the first of three Iraqi elections, while Polish military officials told the Pentagon that Poland's large contingent will probably leave in mid-2005, other diplomats say.” [Washington Post, 7/15/04]

Here is a quote from the transcript of one of the most telling moments in the debate:

Mr. Kerry: Jim, let me tell you exactly what I'll do. And there are a long list of things. First of all, what kind of mixed message does it send when you've got $500 million going over to Iraq to put police officers in the streets of Iraq and the president is cutting the cops program in America? What kind of message does it send to be sending money to open firehouses in Iraq but we're shutting firehouses, who are the first responders here in America? The president hasn't put one nickel - not one nickel - into the effort to fix some of our tunnels and bridges and most exposed subway systems. That's why they had to close down the subway in New York when the Republican convention was there. We haven't done the work that ought to be done.

The president - 95 percent of the containers that come into the ports, right here in Florida, are not inspected. Civilians get onto aircraft and their luggage is X-rayed, but the cargo hold is not X-rayed. Does that make you feel safer in America?

This president thought it was more important to give the wealthiest people in America a tax cut rather than invest in homeland security. Those aren't my values. I believe in protecting America first. And long before President Bush and I get a tax cut - and that's who gets it - long before we do, I'm going to invest in homeland security and I'm going to make sure we're not cutting cops programs in America and we're fully staffed in our firehouses and that we protect the nuclear and chemical plants.

The president, also unfortunately, gave in to the chemical industry, which didn't want to do some of the things necessary to strengthen our chemical plant exposure. And there's an enormous undone job to protect the loose nuclear materials in the world that are able to get to terrorists. That's a whole other subject.

But I see we still have a little bit more time. Let me just quickly say, at the current pace, the president will not secure the loose material in the Soviet Union, former Soviet Union, for 13 years. I'm going to do it in four years. And we're going to keep it out of the hands of terrorists.

Mr. Lehrer: Ninety-second response, Mr. President.

Mr. Bush: I don't think we want to get to how he's going to pay for all these promises. It's like a huge tax gap and - anyway, that's for another debate.

I have to say that I've always been optimistic about John Kerry's prospects in this election, but it's great to see energy and optimism in the air. America might finally be on the right track again.

One final note: I'd asked a friend to bring me back a Kerry/Edwards campaign pin while she was on a recent road trip to the United States. Instead, she and a friend pulled out a Kerry/Edwards lawn sign and brought it back for me. I wanted to apologize to anyone in the state of Pennsylvania who might have lost a cherished sign to that little mission (and who had perhaps blamed it on evil Republicans), but also say for the record that it went to a good home. Thanks.