On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 1:54 AM, Dave Land <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Sep 24, 2008, at 11:26 AM, John Williams wrote:
>
> > Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >> Golly, that sounds familiar.  Echoes of the Iraq war, anyone?
> >
> > Those politicians are slippery.
>
> And how!
>
> What do others think about two bits of news from the American
> election this week:
>
> 1) The two campaigns agreed to a "simplified" format for the debate
> between the VP candidates, ostensibly so that Ms. Palin can "have
> opportunities to present Mr. McCain's positions, rather than spending
> time talking about her experience or playing defense.", according to
> McCain campaign advisors.
>
> 2) McCain suggested that both candidates "suspend" their campaigns,
> including the planned debate Friday; Obama declined, saying "I think
> that it is going to be part of the president's job to deal with more
> than one thing at once."
>
> Dave
>
> _______________________________________________
> http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
>

I hadn't heard about the VP debate, but it seems to me that Palin was picked
to bolster McCain's
appeal to social conservatives and the religious right, rather than for her
experience, so this makes
perfect sense to the McCain campaign. I can only speculate, but the Obama
campaign may have
agreed to this format because if Biden wipes the floor with her in a
traditional VP debate (as he probably
would), he runs the risk of appearing to be bullying, and don't think that
her handlers wouldn't cry  Sexist
and Unfair in a minute. OTOH, according to conventional wisdom, no one votes
for the Vice President, and
this may all be an entertaining sideshow.

This is the *perfect* time for campaigning and debating, and hopefully (but
probably not) meaningful discussion of
the issues facing us, including the economy. Both McCain and Obama need to
tell us why he should be President
instead of why the other should not.

On a different tack, some of us who are of a particular age, will remember
another controversial President associated
with an unpopular war, floundering economy, etc. So, what do you all think?
Nixon vs Bush (the son). Which was worse?

john
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to