The headline above makes it sound like they're having an illicit affair, doesn't it?
It may seem like a small point to most, but I thought Dick Cheney's claim never to have met John Edwards before last night's debate was the unkindest cut he gave during the 98-minute debacle. It makes me happy to see stuff like this:
Other than that moment, I thought this debate was a bit boring; the format was like a small dose of Valium, and Cheney's low rumble was at times more like white noise than coherent conversation. If I hadn't been making soup concurrent to the debate, I might have fallen asleep.
I did enjoy the exchange on same-sex marriage, if only because it showed how confused both of these men are about the topic. The Kerry-Edwards ticket is tiptoeing around it, hoping to avoid the subject until Election Day and praying that gays turn out based on their "We're better than Satan--I mean, Bush" platform regarding our rights. And Cheney just doesn't know what to do. It's a state issue, freedom should be for everyone, and he supports the president. That's not flip-flopping: Cheney actually took every side of the debate at once last night. Bravo, Mr. Cheney. At least you had Mary's back a third of the time.
Cheney does win points for knowing how to escape a tricky topic; his response to John Edwards's long, tortured, Mary Cheney-invoking answer to Gwen Ifill's second marriage question--a rather cruel "Aren't you trying to have it both ways?"--was "Well, Gwen, let me simply thank the senator for the kind words he said about my family and our daughter. I appreciate that very much." Edwards gave him a get-out-of-jail-free card, Cheney knew it, and he used it. He's trying to have it about three different ways on this topic and he didn't have to explain how he reconciles his divergent thoughts on the matter within his family or in his heart.
I think Edwards achieved what he had to in this debate. There was no knockout blow, but he stood up in the face of withering criticism from the Bush administration's better half and looked competent for the VP job. He talked about issues that matter to voters and looked friendly doing it. Cheney took quite a bit of poetic license with the truth, which helped last night but is catching up to him now, when voters who didn't watch will hear about it. Kerry still has the momentum going to St. Louis on Friday. If he can carry it through there, he and Teresa can start thinking about who they'd like to invite to stay in the Lincoln Bedroom.
2 comments:
Actually, yes. Edwards was at his best at the very beginning, because he had Cheney reeling over Iraq. By forcing Cheney into sounding delusional, Edwards guaranteed that press coverage of the debate would highlight that facet, and every day we spend talking about Iraq or Halliburton is a bad day for Bush-Cheney. Admittedly, Edwards was not as strong toward the end, but he didn't let Cheney walk all over him. He always had an answer for Cheney's charges, whereas Cheney often evaded both the question at hand (a fact Edwards pointed up by saying at least once in every answer, "Now, to answer your question") and let Edwards get the last word on several assertions he appeared not to be able to refute. This wasn't a blowout, but I think Edwards did important work for his ticket and Cheney didn't. And as for the notion that Cheney would make a better VP, as Edwards said, America can't afford any more of this kind of experience.
Also, if you've been paying attention today, you've surely noticed how many of Cheney's statements have been revealed as lies. ("Senator Gone"--not true. Never met--not true. His depiction of Iraq--pure fantasy.) What does it say that, in order to fight to what pundits appear to be calling a draw, Cheney had to lie almost every time he spoke?
And there's this to consider: In the polls afterward, Republicans called the debate for Cheney, while Democrats called it a tie--and independents said Edwards won. Which tells me this: Republicans, having watched Bush bumble, thought an improvement from that was the same thing as winning. Democrats, having watched Kerry trounce Bush, expected nothing less from Edwards; now that we know what a real win looks like, nothing else passes. But undecideds just watched two men talk about ideas they have for our country and decided which one of them was presenting a better vision for the future. And among those people, even lying wasn't enough to salvage Cheney's efforts. That really says something, doesn't it?
Post a Comment