A funny thing happened on the way to the debate...
So many things have happened in the last week on which I intended to comment, for example Iyad Allawi's Bush/Cheney campaign tour '04. However, I haven't had a chance to comment for a myriad of reasons. Additionally, I'm suffering from a bit of campaign fatigue right now, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. It's getting harder and harder to discern the needle of real information amongst the haystack of rhetoric. Of course, elections are largely won or lost based on rhetoric rather than merit, but that's not the way I work. Anyway, I've made my mind up about the election a long time ago so I'm not sure why I don’t just tune it all out, but once again that's just not compatible with the way I work. Before this turns into too much of a diary diatribe, let me give my assessment of the debate. I think I achieved a unique perspective on the debates last night through a bit of chance. Let me explain.
Last night, I attended a charity function which ran a little late, so I missed the opening debate remarks, which was in full swing by the time I tuned in on my car radio. For the next 30-40 minutes, I listened to the debate on my way home. Realizing that nothing in the debate was going to change my mind, I really tried my best to listen objectively. Fortunately, I do have a talent for empathy, so I think I did a fair job of interpreting how the “average undecided voter” would perceive the debate. While I was listening on the radio, my perception was that Bush was winning the debate. Clearly, both candidates had been coached through their talking points, and if you've picked up a paper in the last 6 months, nothing said by either candidate should have surprised you. However, I felt that Kerry was coming off a bit too angry and a bit too confrontational. If you’ve followed Kerry recently, you wouldn’t have been surprised to see him come out firing, but I thought he went over the edge. It’s conventional wisdom that Gore lost the 2000 debates because he seemed annoyed and impatient at times. I started to feel that Kerry was losing this debate by exuding irritation and anger.
Furthermore, I felt that the points Kerry was making were too complex for the average swing voter. For example, at one point John Kerry reasoned that the Bush tax cuts and the cost of the war in Iraq had a negative effect on federal funding for local districts, thus leading many communities to cut back spending on emergency services and lay off police/firemen (a situation experienced here in Pittsburgh). Follow that? Odds are the average undecided voter didn’t. Even though this might be a powerful counter to Bush’s argument that the war in Iraq makes us safer, I doubt that many average swing voters want to think deeply enough to understand a reasoned argument. People who are undecided at this late date are probably not well informed on the issues, since well informed people probably have enough information to have made up their minds already. Furthermore, these types of arguments just aren’t effective in a world addicted to sound bites and headlines. These debates are usually won in the aftermath, through repeatable one-liners.
Eventually, I reached home and reluctantly started to watch the debate and a stunning thing happened. It occurred to me that my impression of the debate over the radio was completely turned around when I watched it on TV. Much like the famed Nixon/Kennedy TV debate, what wasn’t said was just as important as what was said. On TV, Bush’s mannerisms conveyed a sense of irritation and impatience, almost as though he didn’t anticipate anyone would have the gall to criticize his policies. Particularly telling were Bush’s facial expressions when Kerry was talking. I noticed some networks carried more split screen views than others, so many viewers may not have noticed it. But surely everyone noticed that Bush seemed irritable, even exasperated when he repeated the same answers time and time again. Meanwhile, Kerry seemed poised, pointed, and stately. While listening on the radio, Kerry’s comments came off as confrontational. But given a picture, they came off as appropriately pointed, with Bush looking uncomfortable having to continuously play defense.
Granted, it was more difficult to remain objective while watching on TV than while listening on the radio, but I’d have to score this debate a win for Kerry on all points. Unfortunately, it’s not the first impression that counts. We’ll have to wait for the spin cycle to complete before we know exactly what advantages were gained.
Merci pour des memoires
Last night, the final major league baseball game in Montreal was played. While the Expos went out with a whimper, losing 9-1, it brought back many great Pirate/Expos memories. After all, the last time the Pirates won the World Series, it was the Montreal Expos with whom they were nip and tuck all season long for the division title, finally besting them by 2 games.
Few fans are aware of the gold painted seat in the right field upper deck section of Olympic Stadium that marks the spot, some 500+ feet from home plate, where a classic Willie Stargell blast landed some 25 years ago. How many players have had such a tribute paid to them in a visitors' park? Fewer still (anybody??) are aware of the mammoth blast he hit at the Expos original home, Jarry Park, that sailed out of the stadium into a nearby swimming pool. And of course, I vividly remember his last at bat, in 1982, when he legged out an infield single against Steve Rogers.
Beyond the Stargell blasts and Pirate/Expos penant races, I always sort of rooted for the Expos. They've always had at least one or two players that I really enjoyed watching: Steve Rogers, Oil Can Boyd, Tim Raines, Al Oliver, Larry Walker, and Andre Dawson to name a few. They've also had many players that I hated such as Hubie Brooks, Rusty Staub, Tim Wallach, and Gary Carter. Unfortunately, few people seem to remember just how well the Expos franchise used to be run, as they always drew well and had an endless supply of young talent. Unfortunately, in the end they'll be remembered for empty stadiums, rotten records, and embarassing ownership thanks to Bud Selig and Jeff Loria.
When baseball fails again in Washington DC, and it will eventually, remember how good it used to be in Montreal.
No surgery for Wells (at this time)
This report says that Dr. James Andrews agreed with the Pirates team doctors that Wells' elbow can be healed with rehabilitation and rest. It looks like the MRIs revealed no damage, just tendonitis.
As I previously stated, I think Wells will need surgery eventually, whether it's now or sometime next spring. I'm no doctor, but I am able to recognize patterns, and what I've been hearing and reading about Wells' injury is consistent with other injuries that have eventually required surgery on other pitchers. Keep in mind, Wells already tried rest to no avail. Hopefully the rehab will do the trick because I think Wells is a very underrated part of the Pirates' future.
Tunnel vision
This cartoon pretty much sums up this administration's inability to perceive reality. There are enough real problems and threats to Americans and democracy in general (Iran, N.Korea, Russia...) that I wish we hadn't gone and made things worse in Iraq. But now that we have, I wish we had leadership that would face reality and stop blowing smoke up our collective behind.
Will your vote count? Will you be able to cast it?
Our democracy is at risk. But we are the only ones who can destroy it, not a group of theocratic, jihadist idiots. The GOP in Ohio is taking a page out of Jeb Bush's Guide to Floridian Elections.
http://www.daytondailynews.com/localnews/content/localnews/daily/0924registration.html
(If it asks you to sign in, use the email address
dailykos@dailykos.com, password = dailykos.)
New posts
I'm heading to Atlanta for a day or two, so if you don't see any new posts, you know why.
Of course, baseball-wise, Atlanta is the exact opposite of Pittsburgh. This year is Atlanta's 13th straight (can that be right?) division title. Meanwhile, the Pirates haven't had a winning season in 12 years.
Fair and balanced elections
From Jimmy Carter:
After the debacle in Florida four years ago, former president Gerald Ford and I were asked to lead a blue-ribbon commission to recommend changes in the American electoral process. After months of concerted effort by a dedicated and bipartisan group of experts, we presented unanimous recommendations to the president and Congress. The government responded with the Help America Vote Act of October 2002. Unfortunately, however, many of the act's key provisions have not been implemented because of inadequate funding or political disputes. The disturbing fact is that a repetition of the problems of 2000 now seems likely, even as many other nations are conducting elections that are internationally certified to be transparent, honest and fair.
We can't have democracy without fair elections. Election shenanigans are a greater threat to our freedom than terrorism. It just happens to be a stealthier, more silent threat. Let's declare a war on election fraud.
War, famine, and sabremetrics
What is it about 'sabremetrics' that makes some otherwise rational people so mad? I quote Peter Gammons:
Teammate Dave Roberts says Orlando Cabrera is one of those players who is not particularly good playing on bad teams where the only things that count are sabermetrics....Roberts is right about Cabrera, and the same thing can be said about Derek Jeter -- who the stats Nazis will insist from their garages isn't an exceptional shortstop...
I'm not sure how to respond to that? So people who understand advanced baseball metrics are stats Nazis? Is he inferring that they live in garages? Is he saying that the bad teams are bad because they care about sabremetrics?
I've never heard anyone with a rudimentary understanding of sabremetrics say that Jeter is not an exceptional shortstop. I have heard them say that he is not as good of a shortstop as Alex Rodriguez. I've also heard them say that Jeter is a poor defensive shortstop. But contrary to whatever Gammons is spinning, its unanimous that Jeter is an exceptional shortstop once you take his hitting into account.
King Rove and his minions
Reason #1,211 why I can't vote for GWB. This is an excerpt from an article in this week's
The Atlantic Monthly that is essentially an interview with a former minion of Karl Rove. This excerpt is specifically about a campaign during the 90's in Alabama, where Rove used his smear machine against a Democratic judge.
When his term on the court ended, he chose not to run for re-election. I later learned another reason why. Kennedy had spent years on the bench as a juvenile and family-court judge, during which time he had developed a strong interest in aiding abused children. In the early 1980s he had helped to start the Children's Trust Fund of Alabama, and he later established the Corporate Foundation for Children, a private, nonprofit organization. At the time of the race he had just served a term as president of the National Committee to Prevent Child Abuse and Neglect. One of Rove's signature tactics is to attack an opponent on the very front that seems unassailable. Kennedy was no exception.
Some of Kennedy's campaign commercials touted his volunteer work, including one that showed him holding hands with children. "We were trying to counter the positives from that ad," a former Rove staffer told me, explaining that some within the See camp initiated a whisper campaign that Kennedy was a pedophile. "It was our standard practice to use the University of Alabama Law School to disseminate whisper-campaign information," the staffer went on. "That was a major device we used for the transmission of this stuff. The students at the law school are from all over the state, and that's one of the ways that Karl got the information out—he knew the law students would take it back to their home towns and it would get out." This would create the impression that the lie was in fact common knowledge across the state. "What Rove does," says Joe Perkins, "is try to make something so bad for a family that the candidate will not subject the family to the hardship. Mark is not your typical Alabama macho, beer-drinkin', tobacco-chewin', pickup-drivin' kind of guy. He is a small, well-groomed, well-educated family man, and what they tried to do was make him look like a homosexual pedophile. That was really, really hard to take.
Next time you hear Hannity, Rush, Quinn, et al bitch and moan about negative campaigning or angry liberals, think back for a minute. Remember, Rove's tactics aren't reserved solely for liberals. Just ask John McCain.
