I watched the vice presidential debate last night, despite the fact that it was 3 in the morning here (good thing we moved back our clocks already while the US is still in daylight savings time, so at least it saved me an hour). All the commentary that I've read and heard kept saying that it was a tie, and that each side will think its own candidate won. I disagree. It was very close, but I think Cheney was better than Edwards.
In the presidential debate, Kerry was on the offensive more than he had to defend himself. Here, I felt Edwards was being attacked more than Cheney, and that the vice president's line of attack on Edwards' inexperience was more effective and more prominent than the senator's line on Cheney's extremism. Both men were right, because each of them targeted their opponent's Achilles Heal: Edwards is indeed inexperienced and probably wouldn't make a good chief executive (which is why, even though I'm voting for Kerry and Edwards, I hope the second JFK will complete his term without dying or resigning); Cheney is indeed extremely right wing.
I almost felt sorry for Cheney when they talked about gay marriage. It was an awkward moment when Edwards praised the Cheney family about how they treat their lesbian daughter. Also, Cheney probably agreed with every word Edwards said about the gay marriage issue, but couldn't say so, so as to not contradict the president. That's why he just thanked Edwards for his personal remarks and forfeited about a minute and a half of the time he had to respond - I don't believe we'll see anyone give up so much time in a debate any time soon.
Regarding Cheney's comment about the terrorist attacks in Israel being reduced because of Saddam not being in power: I think that's a load of crap. Sure, Israel, like the US and the rest of the world, is a lot better off without Saddam. He did indeed send millions to the families of suicide bombers, and it's good that it stopped. But still millions are pouring in to the bank accounts of terrorist groups and terrorist families - from Saudi Arabia, Iran, Lebanon and Syria. The US has started getting tougher on Syria, but it is too soft on the others. The reduction in attacks is the result of the fence and Israeli forces stopping attacks before they occur, not because of the current situation in Iraq.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment