Will's Coffee House

John Dryden, Dramatist, Critic, Poet Laureate, and my ancestor, frequented a coffee house called Will's almost daily, where he would hold forth on sundry subjects with great wit and aplomb. Same deal here, only without the wit or aplomb.

Location: Large Midwestern City, Midwestern State, United States

I am a stranger in a sane land...

Wednesday, October 06, 2004


Sigh. OK, look, I'm going to vote for Kerry unless things change dramatically between now and November--and I mean, I'd have to find out that Kerry was the gunman on the grassy knoll AND was the real mastermind behind the Tate-LaBianca murders--but I pride myself on giving credit where it's due. I watched last night's Veep debate with the assumption that Edwards was going to just walk away with it--that he'd be charming and witty and well-informed and Cheney would look like an evil ogre. Well, that didn't quite happen. Cheney--no Bush he--gave as good as he got, and even though he kept rubbing his hands together in a gesture that just screamed "Uriah Heep," and even though you can actually see the waves of evil rising over him like hot air over an asphalt desert road, he was thoughtful and articulate and kept Edwards on the defensive most of the night, and used his scorn in an effective rather than odious manner, and even had the cojones to let things go, not to use all of his allotted time if he didn't feel he needed it. Brave. He didn't talk much about Bush, of course, because why would you? Bush is a weak product who won't sell; you focus on the war, on your opponent's weaknesses, etc.--that's just smart debating. And--getting to the point here--he had the line of the night. The line that everyone was going to remember. The line that Lloyd Bentsen set the gold standard for when he nailed Quayle with "I knew Jack Kennedy. I worked with Jack Kennedy. Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy." Bush Sr. won the election, but Quayle was destroyed from that point on--he was forever tarnished as "the Not Jack Kennedy" candidate, and never even came CLOSE to getting the next nomination for Prez. And I thought Cheney had that line when he just flat out stated, cold and hard, that Edwards's Senate attendance record was so utterly shameful that the two men hadn't met until Edwards walked on the stage that night. OUCH! Vicious. Devastating.


Please for to read: http://news.bostonherald.com/election/view.bg?articleid=47763

WHY AREN'T WE ALL SCREAMING ABOUT THIS??? OK, clearly, I'm screaming about it, but come on: a candidate for Vice-President LIED in order to make a major charge against an opponent in a televised debate, and no-one (save the B.H.) seems even slightly interested! Please, God, help me not to have my head explode like those poor bastards in Scanners...


Blogger graygor said...

Lie? Or just stupid?

My point is not to defend Cheney, but to point out that this is the same sort of thing we're faced with now re: WMADs in Iraq. The reports are out now: none, haven't been for over a decade. NO activity, only this amorphous "intent."

Was Bush lying? or just stupid? (Of course, there are other options, too: misled or willfully misled, etc.).

The question matters, in one sense, but in another it doesn't. Whether manipulated/ing or just wrong, inaccurate intellignce is a compelling argument against the doctrine of "preemptive strike." And for my money, that's enough to kick Bush out.

If he lied, so much the worse. But being wrong, with these stakes, is enough to kick the bum out.

9:14 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home