Over on Roger L. Simon. I've posted one below. Try to find this kind of stuff on the idiot box, in a newspaper, Time, or Newsweek. Good luck.
-----
Samuel's right, of course. It didn't go badly. I think the real problem for alot of us very pro-Bush people is two fold- first, we have a deep respect for the president- it takes an amazing person to do what he considers the right thing, when half the world is against you and your own countryman are calling you Hitler. The sheer resolve and determination this takes is mind boggling and speaks volumes about W's character. And we think that character SHOULD translate into a winning debate style- we are upset that Bush's performance did not evidence Bush's best qualities but unfortunately, highlighted those qualities for which he was endlessly harassed during the last 4 years. We'd like the undecideds to see Bush how we see him - a good man with firm resolve to make us safer- for most of us, we have no doubt of W's good intentions- we're too smart to think for one second that Iraq was only about Haliburton and oil. And we were disappointed that Bush's debate performance did not live up to our hopes and (probably unrealistic) expectations.
Secondly, quite frankly, Bush is the head of the republican conservative pro-war movement and as a member of said movement, I wanted our C & C to administer a sound drubbing to the leader of the shrill anti-war idiot brigade, the group which has spent the last 3 years calling me a facist and a nazi and spitting on me (factoid- my car was keyed a few days ago and my Bush bumpersticker was torn off the car- I'm assuming the two are related- could you even imagine doing this to a car with a Kerry bumper sticker ?). I wanted some payback, quite frankly. Kerry stood up there and lied his ass off on national TV, bold faced, unabashedly and Bush didn't call him on his BS. The lying thing gets to me the most- the sheer amount of lies being told by the far left the last 3 years and I'm ready for the truth to be told - for me, like I'm sure many of you, the truth vindicates our position for 3 years- the french are lying sacks of crap, Hussein had WMD and terrorist ties, the war in Iraq was necessary and this country is well on its way to being safer for everybody - but Bush never said that. Kerry might as well have been radio'd controlled from moveon.org HQ b/c all he did was repeat their talking points (he failed to call Bush Hitler but he was probably thinking it). So while I don't think Bush did poorly and I dont think it will have any bearing on the election (I still have Bush by 10), at the same time, he was our spokesperson for those 90 minutes- most of us have went to the mat for Bush over the last 3 years, defended his policies against idiot moonbats and clueless peaceniks- and I suppose I just wanted to feel like finally, our side was able to make a good coherent argument that Iraq was necessary, that Hussein was a threat, that we are on the right path. Bush should have done that and he didn't.
Does that mean I like him any less ? No, of course not. When it comes down to it, I know, like most of you, that Bush hardly shines in a debate setting. At the same time, its hard to not be disappointed when there was some level of hope that Bush's positions and policies would finally be defended properly and on a national stage.
Posted by: Matt Evans at October 5, 2004 05:17 AM
Note: I, Matteo, am not Matt Evans.
No comments:
Post a Comment