New Hampshire Debate: : Kerry stays on top while Clark, Dean and Edwards flounder.

· Jan. 22, 2004: PoliSat .Com's Political Satire/ Commentary Daily Update # 01·· ™©·2004·(Home)·
Where the satire is always commentary, but the commentary isn't always satire (but you'll know the difference)·
(Permanent, direct link to this Daily Update: http://polisat.com/du2004/du040131.htm#20040122-01.)
(Keep abreast of PoliSat.Com's Daily Political Satire/Commentary via Google's News Alert)

New Hampshire Debate: : Kerry stays on top while Clark, Dean and Edwards flounder.·

Commentary-- Tonight in the final debate before the New Hampshire Primary, John Kerry, the Reluctant Warrior, proved again he's the Un-Dean (Un-Vitriolic), Un-Clark (Un-Erratic), Un-Edwards (Un-Un-Tested), Un-Kucinich (Un-Flakey), Un-Sharpton ( Un-Funny), Un-Bush (Un-Visionary) candidate. His warrior resume is better than Lieberman's but Lieberman's strategic vision is better than Kerry's. However, by not stumbling tonight, Kerry is continuing the process of saving the country from a Dean (or Clark) candidacy.

Dean failed to confront the elephant in the room (his temperament, inter alia). For the Democrats, Lieberman is the right man at the wrong time. (He should join Zell Miller and Ed Koch.) Edwards, the lawyer, showed himself to be woefully uninformed about the Defense of Marriage Act, about which he pontificated in error. First year law students would understand it was merely designed to provide an exception to the Full Faith & Credit clause to implement the very policy Edwards was claiming to support. Likeable, but lightweight.

Even though New Hampshire primary voters often pride themselves in their ability to stick their fingers into the eyes of Iowa victors, this year seems likely to be the exception that proves the rule. Kerry can continue playing "prevent defense."

Clark's unwillingness to distance himself from Michael Moore surely must have made all his former military colleagues cringe. Sharpton, the man with nothing to lose, remains free to provide clichéd entertainment and occasionally throw a curve at the other candidates.

One wonders if the candidates' studied avoidance of "negative attacks" on their peers tonight signals a temporary reprieve from vitriol or merely an uneasy truce. I suspect the latter. Nevertheless, assume, arguendo, that Kerry gets the nomination (as PoliSat.Com predicted before the Iowa caucus). Bush should then challenge Kerry to conduct the same kind of high-road campaign for 2004 as Kerry and Weld conducted a few years ago. It is possible for candidates to exchange sharp differences of opinion without each one trying to imply that evil, base motives rather than intellectual differences of opinion and judgment comprise the basis for the opponent's positions. It's also possible for each side to poke fun at the other side via satire, parody etc. without crossing that line.

Will it happen? I doubt it. If Kerry were to oppose Bush in such manner, he would probably alienate the people now supporting Dean and drive them into supporting Nader or some other minor-party group. Could Bush oppose Kerry in such manner? He'd better. That will be the best way for him to distinguish himself from how Kerry is likely to be forced to campaign (to protect his left flank.) On both sides of the political spectrum, there are too many other forces. Heck, some of my own work may have occasionally been over the top, but it's usually because it's directed at someone else for having gone over the top. The real test will come when each side is forced to decide whether to repudiate offensive views expressed by groups supporting them but over whom they have no control. Will Kerry repudiate the extremists on the left and will Bush repudiate the extremists on the right? I predict that neither one will do so effectively. Maybe the best way to improve political campaigns is to change the law on the taxpayer check-off by allowing those funds to be used to pay year-long, all-expenses-paid vacations to New Zealand during campaign years for Barbra Streisand, Susan Sarandon, Tim Robbins, Michael Moore, and most of the rest of Hollywood, and for Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, and Judge Roy Moore,

Donate your frequent-flier miles to military personnel to return home from port of reentry on leave: www.HeroMiles.Org.

·support our troops, support Bush, support Cheney, support victory in Iraq, support victory in Afghanistan, Clinton Liebrary, http://PoliSat.Com , PoliSatDOTcom, Salute America's Heroes, Fallen Heroes Fund, oppose Gore's Global Warming theory, support milblogs, Michael Yon, Pat Dollard, BlackFive, MilBlogs, MilBlogging, Michael Yon, Mudville Gazette, HotAir.Com, JawaReport, PajamasMedia , VictoryCaucus , VetsForFreedom , FreedomsWatch , DayByDayCartoon , WrennCom.Com , Video , Political Satire, Politics, News, oppose MoveOn.Org, oppose Code Pink, oppose DailyKos, oppose ANSWER, support PoliSat.Com, support WrennCom.Com, ·

First Things First: Salute America's Heroes · Fallen Heroes Fund · Frequent-Flyer-Miles for Troops · Thanks to Troops · Military News ·· MilBlogs ·

Home · Posts: Current /Recent · Videos/Toons/Songs: Latest · Embed-Codes · Text Index · Images Index · Archives: Old · New · About · Contact · Syndication · Affiliates ·

News Sources/Papers/Magazines Pundits Blogs ThinkTanks What is "property"? Pantheopians Global Climate Asteroids/Comets Hitting Earth--Risks/Predictions Science GlobalWeb