Debate Season
As many of us know, the first of 4 debates, including JRE and RC are coming up, starting next Thursday. Some of the JREG folks are asking about Debate Questions. I included a link from US Politics.com at the beginning that takes one to a newsletter in which some of the issues are being discussed.
While certainly I have a bunch of questions, here's a fantasy debate: Mrs. Lynne Cheney and Elizabeth A. Edwards. Would it not be fascinating to see those two to talk about anything from Moms on a Mission (Iraq), Health care, woman's right to choose, civil unions (and why no one sees the gay daughter on the campaign), higher education, bankruptcies (Elizabeth's specialty) of small businesses, etc, extraordinary things as well.
Do post comments about questions you'd like to see on the issues?
9/26/04
I'm adding a video stream of Elizabeth A. Edwards on Keith Oberman's show a couple of weeks ago, thanks to JREG member, Lilfroggy. This is the first of two parts. I'd like to see a counterpart with Mrs. Cheney.
Another news item concerning Elizabeth A. Edwards (thanks, Lilfroggy), from JREG: Elizabeth Edwards points out Differences Between Tickets.
EAE, we can see the great communicator you are that JRE has been fascinated with for 27 years.
9/27/2004
From the NYT:
Look for Substance, Not Sizzle
Commentary about the upcoming debates
As First Debate Nears, Rivals Seek to Bring Iraq Into Focus
WASHINGTON, Sept. 27 — Three days before their televised debate on foreign policy, President Bush ridiculed Senator John Kerry today, asserting that the Democratic challenger's shifting positions on Iraq make him ill-suited to lead as well as hard to debate.
How to Debate George Bush
Al Gore gives some tips for Kerry to debate Bush in this NYT Op-Ed piece.
We will have to see if Bush indeed will be very simple in responses, no talking points offered, as Ann Richards suggests? Is this the kind of leader we want?
9/30/2004
Tonight is first night of the debates between the two candidates who are fighting for the undecided vote. One is an incumbent, the other a Vietnam soldier who is for more fiscal responsibility. One takes no responsibility for his actions, very different from a WWII generational president, Harry S. Truman, who said, "the buck stops here." Kerry, the challenger (although he appears now to be the underdog) in testifiying in Congress, spoke up about the non-strategic tactics he and his men had to do, that had nothing to do with democracy and freedom for our country. Sure, he was angry at our military leaders. He should have been: he represented very much of his generation. That took courage, and proved he was willing to take risks. Kerry is taking the biggest at all: debating the incumbent on his turf. He has come more than halfway to meet his opponent on these debates to be heard. If Kerry is perceived to be persuasive, it's a victory not just for the Democrats; it's leading to a victory at the polls for something we cherish so much: democracy.
10/04/2004
From Paul Krugman of the NYT, who said what I wanted to say about tonight's debate, but he did it first, and probably best:
"Now it's Dick Cheney's turn.
Mr. Cheney's manufactured image is as much at odds with reality as Mr. Bush's. The vice president is portrayed as a hardheaded realist, someone you can trust with difficult decisions. But his actual record is one of irresponsibility and incompetence.
Case in point: Mr. Cheney completely misread the nature of the 2001 California energy crisis. Although he has stonewalled investigations into what went on in his task force, there's no real question that he placed his trust in the very companies whose market-rigging caused that crisis.
In tonight's debate, John Edwards will surely confront Mr. Cheney over that task force, over domestic policies and, of course, over Halliburton. But he can also use the occasion to ask more hard questions about national security.
After all, Mr. Cheney didn't just promise Americans that "we will, in fact, be welcomed as liberators" by the grateful Iraqis. He also played a central role in leading us to war on false pretenses.
No, that's not an overstatement. In August 2002, when Mr. Cheney declared "we now know Saddam has resumed his efforts to acquire nuclear weapons," he was being dishonest: the administration knew no such thing. He was also being irresponsible: his speech pre-empted an intelligence review that might have given dissenting experts a chance to make their case.
So here's Mr. Edwards's mission: to expose the real Dick Cheney, just as Mr. Kerry exposed the real George Bush. "
To see the full opinion, click here. You have to be registered at the NYT to see it, but it is free if you register first.
10/06/2004
From ABC News...
Cheney, Edwards a TV Study in Contrasts
UPDATED - Wednesday October 06, 2004 12:59am
Who Won Tonight's Debate?
Vice President Cheney
Senator Edwards
NEW YORK (AP) - No TV talent booker could have found more striking opposites than Dick Cheney (website - news - bio) and John Edwards (website - bio) in their vice presidential debate Tuesday night. If they hadn't been clashing in the campaign appearance of their lives, Vice President Cheney and his Democratic rival struck a visual contrast more commonly found in vaudeville comics or TV anchormen. Seated across the table from moderator Gwen Ifill, Cheney and Edwards each was yin to the other's yang: old and young; contained and effusive; gruff and twangy; slouchy and peppy; Darth Vader and Peter Pan. They even differed in their fluid intake. Unlike Cheney, Edwards repeatedly took sips from his mug.
Cheney, Edwards a TV Study in Contrasts (source: AP) Earlier, several media pundits had forecast that the more intimate seating arrangement would inhibit the kind of combative give-and-take that isolated lecterns might promote. Afterward, NBC's Tom Brokaw was one observer who corrected the record. This debate, he said, "proved you can have hand-to-hand combat while seated." The networks, reprising their policy from last Thursday's first presidential debate, broke the rules, too, by showing the debaters' reaction shots - an explicit no-no. But this time, neither candidate was caught unawares in the glare of split-screen, as President Bush (website - news - bio) had been, repeatedly seen blinking and looking annoyed while his opponent, John Kerry (website - news - bio) , replied to a question. Instead, Cheney, in reaction, favored a wary sidelong stare. Edwards often jotted notes, a bit theatrically, on his pad, and, late in the debate, ripped a page from that pad, its sound interfering with Cheney's words. During the 98-minute faceoff at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ifill - of PBS' "NewsHour" and "Washington Week in Review" - generally handled her duties with poise, although she did bobble one sequence. Despite the sometimes testy exchanges between the two candidates, the campaign's sole vice-presidential debate wasn't great theater. But as television, it made for a vivid display of clashing styles - even with the sound turned off.
I saw Mary Cheney tonight, yet her father opposes in public her lifestyle. It was nice to see Elizabeth, dressed in purple, and the JRE/EAE young ones, Emma Claire, and Jack (who was bored by Dick Cheney--Jack looked a bit sleepy).
JRE, good job! The moderator started with foreign policy, which was good for Cheney; economy at the end, good thing for you and your running mate. Uncommitteds (according to CBS) rated you higher and perceive you could be president, if necessary. Well, some of us knew that since the Iowa caucus in January. :-)
While certainly I have a bunch of questions, here's a fantasy debate: Mrs. Lynne Cheney and Elizabeth A. Edwards. Would it not be fascinating to see those two to talk about anything from Moms on a Mission (Iraq), Health care, woman's right to choose, civil unions (and why no one sees the gay daughter on the campaign), higher education, bankruptcies (Elizabeth's specialty) of small businesses, etc, extraordinary things as well.
Do post comments about questions you'd like to see on the issues?
9/26/04
I'm adding a video stream of Elizabeth A. Edwards on Keith Oberman's show a couple of weeks ago, thanks to JREG member, Lilfroggy. This is the first of two parts. I'd like to see a counterpart with Mrs. Cheney.
Another news item concerning Elizabeth A. Edwards (thanks, Lilfroggy), from JREG: Elizabeth Edwards points out Differences Between Tickets.
EAE, we can see the great communicator you are that JRE has been fascinated with for 27 years.
9/27/2004
From the NYT:
Look for Substance, Not Sizzle
Commentary about the upcoming debates
As First Debate Nears, Rivals Seek to Bring Iraq Into Focus
WASHINGTON, Sept. 27 — Three days before their televised debate on foreign policy, President Bush ridiculed Senator John Kerry today, asserting that the Democratic challenger's shifting positions on Iraq make him ill-suited to lead as well as hard to debate.
9/28/04
When George Meets John
Excellent article by James Fallows concerning what the two candidates will have to do to be convincing
C-SPAN.org Debate Resources
Includes debates with former opponents, both sides, articles from USA Today, the history of presidential debates and more.
How to Debate George Bush
Al Gore gives some tips for Kerry to debate Bush in this NYT Op-Ed piece.
We will have to see if Bush indeed will be very simple in responses, no talking points offered, as Ann Richards suggests? Is this the kind of leader we want?
9/30/2004
Tonight is first night of the debates between the two candidates who are fighting for the undecided vote. One is an incumbent, the other a Vietnam soldier who is for more fiscal responsibility. One takes no responsibility for his actions, very different from a WWII generational president, Harry S. Truman, who said, "the buck stops here." Kerry, the challenger (although he appears now to be the underdog) in testifiying in Congress, spoke up about the non-strategic tactics he and his men had to do, that had nothing to do with democracy and freedom for our country. Sure, he was angry at our military leaders. He should have been: he represented very much of his generation. That took courage, and proved he was willing to take risks. Kerry is taking the biggest at all: debating the incumbent on his turf. He has come more than halfway to meet his opponent on these debates to be heard. If Kerry is perceived to be persuasive, it's a victory not just for the Democrats; it's leading to a victory at the polls for something we cherish so much: democracy.
10/04/2004
From Paul Krugman of the NYT, who said what I wanted to say about tonight's debate, but he did it first, and probably best:
"Now it's Dick Cheney's turn.
Mr. Cheney's manufactured image is as much at odds with reality as Mr. Bush's. The vice president is portrayed as a hardheaded realist, someone you can trust with difficult decisions. But his actual record is one of irresponsibility and incompetence.
Case in point: Mr. Cheney completely misread the nature of the 2001 California energy crisis. Although he has stonewalled investigations into what went on in his task force, there's no real question that he placed his trust in the very companies whose market-rigging caused that crisis.
In tonight's debate, John Edwards will surely confront Mr. Cheney over that task force, over domestic policies and, of course, over Halliburton. But he can also use the occasion to ask more hard questions about national security.
After all, Mr. Cheney didn't just promise Americans that "we will, in fact, be welcomed as liberators" by the grateful Iraqis. He also played a central role in leading us to war on false pretenses.
No, that's not an overstatement. In August 2002, when Mr. Cheney declared "we now know Saddam has resumed his efforts to acquire nuclear weapons," he was being dishonest: the administration knew no such thing. He was also being irresponsible: his speech pre-empted an intelligence review that might have given dissenting experts a chance to make their case.
So here's Mr. Edwards's mission: to expose the real Dick Cheney, just as Mr. Kerry exposed the real George Bush. "
To see the full opinion, click here. You have to be registered at the NYT to see it, but it is free if you register first.
10/06/2004
From ABC News...
Cheney, Edwards a TV Study in Contrasts
UPDATED - Wednesday October 06, 2004 12:59am
Who Won Tonight's Debate?
Vice President Cheney
Senator Edwards
NEW YORK (AP) - No TV talent booker could have found more striking opposites than Dick Cheney (website - news - bio) and John Edwards (website - bio) in their vice presidential debate Tuesday night. If they hadn't been clashing in the campaign appearance of their lives, Vice President Cheney and his Democratic rival struck a visual contrast more commonly found in vaudeville comics or TV anchormen. Seated across the table from moderator Gwen Ifill, Cheney and Edwards each was yin to the other's yang: old and young; contained and effusive; gruff and twangy; slouchy and peppy; Darth Vader and Peter Pan. They even differed in their fluid intake. Unlike Cheney, Edwards repeatedly took sips from his mug.
Cheney, Edwards a TV Study in Contrasts (source: AP) Earlier, several media pundits had forecast that the more intimate seating arrangement would inhibit the kind of combative give-and-take that isolated lecterns might promote. Afterward, NBC's Tom Brokaw was one observer who corrected the record. This debate, he said, "proved you can have hand-to-hand combat while seated." The networks, reprising their policy from last Thursday's first presidential debate, broke the rules, too, by showing the debaters' reaction shots - an explicit no-no. But this time, neither candidate was caught unawares in the glare of split-screen, as President Bush (website - news - bio) had been, repeatedly seen blinking and looking annoyed while his opponent, John Kerry (website - news - bio) , replied to a question. Instead, Cheney, in reaction, favored a wary sidelong stare. Edwards often jotted notes, a bit theatrically, on his pad, and, late in the debate, ripped a page from that pad, its sound interfering with Cheney's words. During the 98-minute faceoff at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ifill - of PBS' "NewsHour" and "Washington Week in Review" - generally handled her duties with poise, although she did bobble one sequence. Despite the sometimes testy exchanges between the two candidates, the campaign's sole vice-presidential debate wasn't great theater. But as television, it made for a vivid display of clashing styles - even with the sound turned off.
I saw Mary Cheney tonight, yet her father opposes in public her lifestyle. It was nice to see Elizabeth, dressed in purple, and the JRE/EAE young ones, Emma Claire, and Jack (who was bored by Dick Cheney--Jack looked a bit sleepy).
JRE, good job! The moderator started with foreign policy, which was good for Cheney; economy at the end, good thing for you and your running mate. Uncommitteds (according to CBS) rated you higher and perceive you could be president, if necessary. Well, some of us knew that since the Iowa caucus in January. :-)
posted by benny06 at
Friday, September 24, 2004
2 Comments:
I saw on the Kerry-Edwards site:
Edwards Holds a Conversation with Women and their Families on Making America Safer and Stronger
JRE also met with Moms with a Mission (here's the FT):
Davenport, IA - Speaking to women and their families in Iowa, Democratic vice presidential nominee John Edwards said that George W. Bush’s wrong choices and stubborn attachment to a failed approach have made America less secure and undermined our efforts in the war on terror. He pledged that a Kerry-Edwards administration will take the war on terror in a new direction to make America safer and more respected in the world.
Joined by Lt. General Claudia Kennedy, some of the September 11th families who endorsed the Kerry-Edwards campaign last week, and the “Military Moms with a Mission,” Edwards stressed the importance of a president who will make us stronger, rather than alienating us from our allies, refusing to act quickly on the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission and going alone into war without a plan to win the peace.
“None of us will ever forget where we were on September 11th. We share the same terrible images and the same profound sadness for the more than three thousand lives lost,” said Edwards. “But rather than taking the good will and the lessons learned from September 11th, George Bush and Dick Cheney let Osama bin Laden escape, underfunded security at our ports and chemical plants, went to war without a plan to win the peace and diminished our standing in the world. They have not taken the necessary steps to make us safer; John Kerry and I will.”
Last week, five September 11th families endorsed the Kerry-Edwards ticket saying they believe that John Kerry has a stronger commitment to, and will be more effective at, fighting and winning the war on terror. Kristen Breitweiser, a September 11th widow who joined Edwards at today’s event, said that Bush’s actions had failed to make the country any safer than it was on September 11th.
“I spent the last three years, with these other women, fighting to try and address the failures that occurred on September 11th, to address individual failures that occurred on September 11th. We were fought the entire way. That is a huge disappointment. We need to know that we are safer living in this country,” said Breitweiser. “I do not feel safe living in this country, I think that so much work remains to be done, and I know that John Kerry as president will make this nation safer than it is today.”
Also joining Edwards today were Moms with a Mission, a group of moms and wives of servicemen and guardsmen serving with the military. These moms are currently campaigning across the country to tell the truth about the real costs of George W. Bush’s failed foreign policy and his failed record for military families. Their ‘Home Front Tour’ will cover 3,500 miles and 30 cities through the battle ground states, bringing personal stories of how George Bush’s policies have hurt military families to voters.
Despite his tough talk, George Bush’s efforts have fallen short; the Bush administration still has no comprehensive plan for victory in the war on terror. America was forever changed on September 11th. Rather than executing an effective strategy to destroy the terrorists, George Bush allowed Osama bin Laden to escape and terrorist cells to regroup as he diverted crucial resources from Afghanistan for an ill-conceived war in Iraq. Bush’s go-it-alone approach to foreign policy has isolated America, instead of isolating our enemies. At every step of the way, key military advisors and world leaders urged George Bush to reconsider his steps, and at every step, he made the wrong choice and weakened America.
With the number of American casualties in Iraq topping one thousand in recent weeks, George Bush’s failed leadership has never been so clear. George Bush wrongly chose to go to war in Iraq without our allies and without a plan to win the peace; now he is choosing to mislead the nation about the situation in Iraq and the war on terror.
“The greatest tribute to those who died on September 11th is to build a safer world where terrorism falls and democracy rises,” said Edwards. “John Kerry and I will honor those who fell on September 11th and those who have subsequently fallen in the fight for freedom by leading a relentless fight to crush terrorism and restore America as a safe, strong, respected nation once again.”
John Kerry and John Edwards know that America is waging a global war against terrorists that are unlike any adversary our nation has ever faced. As president, John Kerry will put in place a strong and smart strategy to win the war on terror – an approach that recognizes the complexity of the challenge and uses all of America’s power at our disposal to destroy the terrorists and make America more secure. In doing so, a Kerry-Edwards administration will create a worldwide alliance to help us fight for freedom and security, rather than walking alone.
John Kerry and John Edwards will aggressively go after the terrorists where they are to destroy and disrupt terrorist networks. In order to prevent the world’s deadliest weapons from falling into dangerous hands, Kerry and Edwards will launch a new initiative to secure vulnerable bomb-making materials and work to end nuclear programs in hostile states. They embrace the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission and support strengthening America’s intelligence capabilities, with the creation of a real Director of National Intelligence who can transform our intelligence services to deal with today’s threats.
A Kerry-Edwards administration will restore and strengthen our alliances and work with the international community to prevent terrorist havens and secure Iraq and Afghanistan. To win the war of ideas abroad and prevent recruitment of new terrorists, Kerry and Edwards have a plan to end economic and cultural isolation; the strategy includes strengthening public diplomacy and an international effort to improve education.
John Kerry and John Edwards:
A Strategy to Win the War on Terror
John Kerry and John Edwards understand that America is waging a global war against terrorists that are unlike any adversary our nation has ever faced. This is not just a manhunt - we cannot rest once Osama bin Laden is captured or killed. That day will mark only a brief victory in the war on terror, not its end. We face a complex global jihadist movement consisting of many groups - spanning at least 60 countries - with separate agendas, but all committed to assaulting the United States and free and open societies around the world.
Despite his tough talk, President Bush's efforts against terrorism have fallen far short of what is necessary to meet this threat. We are not safer and President Bush still has no comprehensive or long-term strategy for victory. After allowing bin Laden to escape from our grasp at Tora Bora, he diverted crucial resources from the effort to destroy al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan to fight the war in Iraq. And his go-it-alone approach to foreign policy has cost us the support of other nations - support that we need to defeat an enemy that is hidden in countries across the world.
As president, John Kerry will put in place a strong and smart strategy to win - an approach that recognizes the complexity of the challenge and uses all the tools at our disposal. He understands that the path to victory in the war on terror will be found in the company of others, not walking alone. A Kerry-Edwards administration will never, ever wait for a green light from abroad when our safety is at stake - but we will not alienate those whose support we should have, and must enlist, to help make America more secure.
John Kerry and John Edwards recognize that victory in the war on terror requires a combination of American might, skill, and determination. We must also maximize international cooperation. Key elements of the Kerry-Edwards plan to win the war on terror include:
Directing Military Action to Destroy and Disrupt Terrorist Networks. Under John Kerry’s leadership, American military operations will be precise and deadly.
Keeping Weapons of Mass Destruction Out of Terrorist Hands. John Kerry and John Edwards will launch a new initiative to prevent the world's deadliest weapons from falling into the world's most dangerous hands. They have a plan to secure vulnerable bomb-making materials, prevent the production of new materials for nuclear weapons, and work to end nuclear weapons programs in hostile states like North Korea and Iran.
Strengthening America’s Intelligence Capabilities. John Kerry and John Edwards will restore the credibility of our intelligence community, strengthen accountability and leadership by creating a true Director of National Intelligence, maximize coordination and integration of resources and information, and transform our intelligence services to deal with today’s threats.
Leading Relentless Efforts to Shut Down the Flow of Terrorist Funds. America will crack down on nations or banks that fail to act against money laundering by strengthening our anti-money laundering laws and imposing tough financial sanctions against violators.
Preventing New Terrorist Havens. John Kerry and John Edwards will work with our allies and the international community to stabilize and secure Iraq and Afghanistan to ensure that these newly freed nations and other weak states around the world do not become havens for terrorists.
Preventing Recruitment of New Terrorists. John Kerry and John Edwards will work to win the war of ideas and the future of a young generation with a strategy to break down economic and cultural isolation in Arab and Muslim countries and support local efforts to promote democracy, trade, tolerance, and respect for human rights. The strategy includes a major initiative in public diplomacy and an international effort to improve education.
By
benny06, at 11:44 AM
On Monday morning at 7am cdt, C-SPAN is having a program on the debating styles of Bush and Kerry. Wonder if they will have one on JRE and Cheney?
By
benny06, at 3:15 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home