Debate #3: I Give Up

Not much of consequence is happening here and it’s not even over, but one of these guys is really more Presidential than the other.

I don’t know precisely how the canned “zingers” and Ayer stuff plays in Peoria, but I suspect that economically scared Americans couldn’t give a crap.

God help us.  I can’t decide whether to chug Drano or Pine Sol.  We are SO headed into the barrel.

“Don’t stop thinkin’ about tomorrow…..”  I want to think about ANYTHING but tomorrow.

At least I have my Fightin’ Phils…..


19 Responses to “Debate #3: I Give Up”

  1. Mark Esswein Says:

    I dunno…

    The image that kept coming across to me was Bob Dole with TWO bum arms.

  2. Timothy Peach Says:

    I wish someone would just stick a pen in my neck and put me out of my misery….

  3. Mark Grannis Says:

    Man up, Tim. I understand the despair, and I myself wonder what options are now open to conservative voters. Should we remain in (or in my case, re-join) the GOP in the hope that it can be brought back to conservative principles? That will be a long row to hoe, and the eventual outcome strikes me as very much in doubt. Should we join a minor party that is already reliably conservative but labors under huge electoral disadvantages in terms of financing and ballot access? That might well be less frustrating in the short term, but the major-party duopoly looks pretty hard to crack. Become (or in my case, remain) independent? In theory, a large and growing number of independents might exert influence not only on the out-of-power Republicans, but on the reigning Democrats, but somehow it feels more like doing nothing than like doing something, and I fear it might be too subtle to induce any real reform in either major party.

    I’m not ready to propose an answer yet. But in the meantime, here are two thoughtful columns by Christopher Buckley, who first endorsed Obama and then quit the National Review because of the firestorm his endorsement created. I’ll be adding Buckley’s Daily Beast to the Reasonable Minds blogroll.

  4. David Fitzgerald Says:

    You think watching the debate will cause you to worry about the future? I taught my first 8th grade Religious Education class last night…Oi Vey! I had forgotten just how awful it is to be a 13 year old boy. Let’s just say none of us should be counting on the next generation to keep the SS trust fund in surplus…

    Obama’s recent policy proposals have certainly made me a bit angry the last few weeks. Particularly, his kooky idea about a moratorium on mortgage foreclosures. His proposal to allow people to withdraw $10,000 from their 401(k)’s without penalty has actually caused me to raise my voice intemperately at the dinner table.

    I am hoping that these are the ravings of a man trying to cement the lead and close the deal and that the rational and sober side of the man, the side which has come accross so clearly in the debates, will be reflected in his government. He certainly has shown however, that he is not above pandering.

  5. Timothy Peach Says:

    Chris Buckley reminds me unsettlingly of Hannibal Lecter.

    One must always be hopeful. If Obama wins, I will be hoping he is the great leader he often sounds like. I will be hoping his associations were naive and opportunistic, and that he is in some ways like Clinton, but without all those demons crowding out the tiny part of his personality that’s good-intentioned.

    But for the moment, I’m scared and depressed. Sort of the way I felt when Lynskey came over to our apartment and shut us out at hearts.

    As for parties, they are both FUBAR. Mine is likely to be completely destroyed if McCain loses. The other one will be a train wreck in two years unless Obama has something magical and transcendent inside him that empowers him to cram down two of the biggest lefty buffoons in history.

    But I promise you I will be rooting for him.

  6. David Fitzgerald Says:

    Peach on the “substance of things hoped for”.

  7. Timothy Peach Says:

    Granulous, get your well-grounded butt up here to NYC Election Night and pay for a big old hotel room so we can all hang out, get drunk (on your tab), and watch this thing together!!!

  8. David Fitzgerald Says:

    Tim, Grannis is a well known “Ford Republican” and shares the feelings about NY of all members (2, 3?) of that tribe. No chance in hell your suggestion happens.

  9. Timothy Peach Says:

    Obama is not pulling away.

    The polls are still in his favor, but mid-single digits and a bit tighter from the last few days.

    Why is he not pulling away?

    Is Joe the Plumber playing in Peoria? Did Obama shoot himself in the foot with his “spread the wealth around” comment? Was that the gaffe that will define these last few weeks?

  10. Timothy Peach Says:

    P.S. Do yourself a huge favor and watch the McCain and Obama speeches at the Alfred E. Smith charity dinner — absolutely pee yourself funny.

  11. Brian Freeman Says:

    If only during the campaign McCain had been how he was in his Alfred E. Smith dinner talk — which was pretty much how he was before the campaign . . . But as the Yogi teaches, it ain’t over ’til it’s over.

  12. Mark Esswein Says:

    Kathleen Parker had a column in the Washington Post this morning commending Chris Buckley…

    It has some very interesting quotes from WFB regarding the wingnuts – circa 1955.

  13. Mark Grannis Says:

    Nice piece by Parker, and the Al Smith routines lived up to their billing — particularly McCain’s. Here are the links:

    McCain Part 1

    McCain Part 2

    Obama Part 1

    Obama Part 2

  14. Brian Freeman Says:

    Many good points in Buckley’s and Parker’s columns. But putting aside from issues of experience, economic philosophy, degree of partisanship, etc., here’s the rub:

    How can one trust a man who parses on something so primal as whether a newborn infant has a right to live?

    (And considering this while mindful of Dave Fitzgerald’s apt comments a while back about single-issue voting.)

    [Note: So we don’t get sidetracked on details, the factual understanding underlying the above is that (1) Obama voted “present” at least once in the Illinois state legislature on legislation to require care for such infants, even after anti-Roe provisions was cut from the bill; and (2) Illinois state law at that time required such care only under certain conditions, i.e., where the attending doctor, pre-procedure, determined that there was a chance of the infant being born alive. Unless either of these understandings is clearly mistaken, I’d rather we not get into details here.]

  15. Mark Grannis Says:

    Brian, I honestly can’t sort out whether your factual premises are entirely true. I find the Obama campaign’s discussion of the issue inconclusive, though in fairness it should be said that’s true of many claims about the meaning of this or that legislative vote. But in the end, even the best face the Obama campaign puts on this is awful.

    The hard part for me, as I said above, is deciding whom to vote for instead. There were good alternatives in the GOP primary, but they lost. And it’s not as though the principled constitutional conservatives and the principled fiscal conservatives lost to the principled social conservatives; instead, principled conservatives of all stripes lost to a man of no settled principles of all — a man who was unquestionably once a hero but is now merely a Republican. I find it quite depressing.

  16. Timothy Peach Says:

    Well Granulous, I appreciate your dilemma, but you really need to figure this out in short order, lest the outcome in Maryland be decided by a crime of omission.

  17. Brian Freeman Says:

    Mark, agreed. I’m not trying to cheerlead for McCain, who wasn’t my first choice in the primaries either. I don’t belong to the Republican Party. As for present alternatives, it’s been a while since there’s been a really striking, proven leader from either of the major parties, or minor parties for that matter.

    And the country endures yet.

    Times like this I recall something I learned in college (for Georgetown alums, from Fr. Otto Hentz’s freshman-year “Problem of God” class): As we neared the end of a semester of inhaling deeply of theology and philosophy, he began class one day by writing on the blackboard a Latin aphorism that translated “It did not please God to save man through metaphysics.”

    Or politics.

  18. jim walsh Says:

    Non in dialectica complacuit Deo salvum facere populum suum.

    St. Ambrose

  19. Mark Grannis Says:

    Thanks, Jim. I Googled for it and came up empty. I should have known better than that.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: