Daily Kos

Biased story tops Google News: "Round 2 to Bush"

Fri Oct 08, 2004 at 11:55:17 PM PDT

It's late and I'm tired, but heads up...this biased AZ Republic op-ed --

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/opinions/articles/1009sat1-30.html

is topping Google News right now, claiming that the very things that should indicate a deperate, angry Bush loss were actually the attributes of his victory. Did the author watch the same debate as the rest of us? (Article reposted after jump)

Round 2 to Bush
Town hall setting serves president

Oct. 9, 2004 12:00 AM

The central question going into the second presidential debate was simple: Would the re-election campaign of George W. Bush collapse under the weight of two consecutive poundings from John F. Kerry?

Another stylistically impressive presentation by Kerry notwithstanding, the pillars of Bush House are still standing.

In contrast to his distracted, ill-prepared show Sept. 30, Bush fairly leaped out of his chair Friday night, at some points seeming to overwhelm the sound system at the debate site at Washington University in St. Louis.
advertisement    

This clearly was a different Bush, one who seemed far more comfortable in the town hall format - a setting that he often uses on the campaign stump, including an appearance at Mesa Community College earlier this year.

Prompted, perhaps, by that lackadaisical first showing by Bush, the questions to both candidates from the audience seemed to focus on the essentials of leadership.

To Kerry: Are you truly wishy-washy?

To Bush: How are you going to repair relations with foreign allies?

Once the answers from both candidates are run through the fact-check strainers, plenty of dubious lumps no doubt will be found. But in terms of the manner in which they offered themselves as candidates, Bush at the least stood even with Kerry, and on the crucial issue of the war in Iraq, came out a bit ahead.

Almost shouting, Bush consistently referred to the apparent incongruence in Kerry's assessment of Iraq currently and his proposed resolution for the future: Castigating Iraq as a mistake - the wrong war at the wrong time - works against lining up the allegiances Kerry contends he will lead in raising Iraq from its current chaos.

"Nobody," Bush declared, "is going to follow somebody who says the war is a mistake."

Whatever ground Bush may make up as a result of this debate will not come, however, as a result of Kerry missteps. The Democrat again was composed, prepared and self-assured.

That preparation may have served him best when an audience member asked about legislation to allow the importation of prescription drugs from Canada. Bush said he was considering it, and may decide to allow the cost-saving measure by December. Kerry noted that in debate four years ago, Bush said he supported it then, but has blocked it since.

Kerry also recalled Bush's comments regarding a huge issue of this election that has been largely smothered by the Iraq war - the likelihood that the next president will name at least two U.S. Supreme Court justices. Despite Bush's contention that he would have no other "litmus test" than a fair interpretation of the Constitution, Kerry noted that Bush has said several times that what the court needs is a few more conservatives.

Regarding Kerry's favorite domestic Bush-bashing cudgel - the enormous number of jobs lost since Bush took office - the challenger needs to play a bit more fair. The figure Kerry consistently cites - 1.6 million jobs lost - is wrong by about half.

The Friday debate employed the same format as in 1992, when Bush's father, George Herbert Walker Bush, made the infamous blunder of glancing at his watch while waiting for Bill Clinton to finish speaking. This time, this Bush came across assured, winking at people off camera, and for all appearances happy to be there.

At the very least, George W. Bush did not do himself in with some careless foible. On that alone, victory was his.

This op-ed is crude selective interpretation, and we all know why. Let's make sure they hear about it.

Tags: (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 9 comments

  •  A great response to this (none / 1)

    "Nobody will follow you if you keep saying this war is a mistake" line by Bush would be for Kerry to say: "So if we lie about how great it's going, people will follow us then? Is that what you're up to?"
  •  Even some people here were (none / 0)

    thrilled with Bush's debate performance, unfortunately. I can't remember who, but they were going on and on about how brilliant his closing comments were, and how Kerry's were awful, blah blah.

    I think that we may be underestimating how popular and how well-accepted Bush's "angry" behavior is. Many people see this as strength, and integrity (which it isn't), not pettiness or tantrums. The more we play this up the more likely he is to get a huge momentum and a November landslide.

    It seems like Bush wins no matter what he says or does.

    •  "It seems like Bush wins ..." (2.50 / 2)

      It seems the polls would disagree.

      One poorly written editorial changes nothing.

      •  Not just one, sadly. (none / 0)

        And they're spinning the polls as a tie, not as a Kerry win. They're going on about all the ground Bush has made up, he's back, etc.

        They're doing this so they can destroy Kerry on Wednesday. IT's all planned ahead of time. I just can't believe that we've already lost all the spin, or much of it. The media clearly had this all planned well ahead of time and nothing will change their nasty lies.

  •  More biased reporting (none / 0)

    from USA TODAY. They go on about how the poll results they had were "virtually a draw" and Bush was beating Kerry badly on Iraq and terrorism. The article on the debate lauds Bush's "pugnacious" attitude towards Charlie Gibson, and talks about his "gentle" scowl jokes (never mentioning that the jokes got 0 laughs).

    We seem to have lost the media spin on this. They're spinning it as a tie but with Bush having all the momentum and opening up huge leads on terrorism and Iraq. They know that he will probably win thanks to their lies and hate. They know they have made sure he can't lose in November.

    It's just awful. I don't know if anything can defeat Bush. The media would slit their own throats for this man. They've given him the whole debate. I really do think that the only reason they said he tanked the first debate was to have him make a big comeback tonight and then surge even more next Wednesday.

  •  Don't link to it!! (none / 0)

    You just improved its rating with Google by doing that.  

    Please.  Update your diary so it has a text link (not clickable).

  •  I'm with, err, Dumbo (none / 0)

    take out the link already  

    There oughta be a jail sentence for False Dichotomy.  We could lock up both Bush and his sycophant media.  Because Bush didn't collapse into a pile of dust, he must have won the debate.  Because there are problems with the Kyoto Treaty, the only option is walking away entirely.  Because a bill contains language about partial-birth abortions, opponents of the technique must vote for it no matter what other terms it contains.  Because the evidence showed Saddam Hussein wasn't Ghandi, we obviously had to lauch a full-scale invasion.

    Sheesh.

    Export democracy: Draft a Republican.

    by turbonium on Sat Oct 09, 2004 at 07:37:38 AM PDT

Permalink | 9 comments