His cheatin' heart
The bloggers are at it again. INDC Journal gets the nod this time for noticing video coverage of the debate last week which seems to show John Kerry quickly reaching into his jacket pocket, removing what appears to be notes and placing them on his podium. Such an act by Kerry would be in violation of the rules agreed to by both sides and would have given him an unfair advantage during the debate.
The rules agreed to by both sides state clearly:
(c) No props, notes, charts, diagrams, or other writings or other tangible things may be brought into the debate by either candidate....
(d) Notwithstanding subparagraph 5(c), the candidates may take notes during the debate on the size, color and type of paper each side prefers. Each candidate must submit to the staff of the Commission prior to the debate all such paper and any pens or pencils with which a candidate may wish to take notes during the debate, and the staff or commission will place such paper, pens and pencils on the podium, table or other structure to be used by the candidate in that debate.
Since the video makes it pretty clear that John Kerry cheated, the only issue now being batted around by the blogosphere is how much attention does this really deserve? My take is this: The MSM seems to think that the debate and Kerry's performance have given his campaign a renewed optimism and have so affected the race as to draw Kerry even with Bush in the polls. If this debate and Kerry's performance are having such a monumental impact on such a monumental election (a sentiment I disagree with) then shouldn't the fact that Kerry gained an upperhand in the debate by cheating be a fairly significant news item? And if it's not, isn't the MSM applying its typical bias and double standard?
I understand that the blogosphere is being careful with its newfound impact on the news world and is reluctant to begin to be seen as reckless amateurs who's own bias would push an insignificant story with a hell-bent agenda. However, the MSM and not the blogosphere is the creature that has done just that with regard to the supposed impact of the debates. Therefore, I see it now as the blogosphere's responsibility to ensure that the creature who wishes to live by hyping the agenda should most surely die by it. Therefore, the bloggers should slay the beast.
Hence, my assessment -- Kerry's a sniveling cheat and snake oil politician who took advantage of George W. Bush's good character, knowing full well he would follow the rules of engagement. Upon instructions to take ten paces and draw, Kerry took 3 and fired. He's a huckster, a flim-flammer, a double-shuffle, two-bit sidewinder and he should answer some questions or face tar and feathers.
The rules agreed to by both sides state clearly:
(c) No props, notes, charts, diagrams, or other writings or other tangible things may be brought into the debate by either candidate....
(d) Notwithstanding subparagraph 5(c), the candidates may take notes during the debate on the size, color and type of paper each side prefers. Each candidate must submit to the staff of the Commission prior to the debate all such paper and any pens or pencils with which a candidate may wish to take notes during the debate, and the staff or commission will place such paper, pens and pencils on the podium, table or other structure to be used by the candidate in that debate.
Since the video makes it pretty clear that John Kerry cheated, the only issue now being batted around by the blogosphere is how much attention does this really deserve? My take is this: The MSM seems to think that the debate and Kerry's performance have given his campaign a renewed optimism and have so affected the race as to draw Kerry even with Bush in the polls. If this debate and Kerry's performance are having such a monumental impact on such a monumental election (a sentiment I disagree with) then shouldn't the fact that Kerry gained an upperhand in the debate by cheating be a fairly significant news item? And if it's not, isn't the MSM applying its typical bias and double standard?
I understand that the blogosphere is being careful with its newfound impact on the news world and is reluctant to begin to be seen as reckless amateurs who's own bias would push an insignificant story with a hell-bent agenda. However, the MSM and not the blogosphere is the creature that has done just that with regard to the supposed impact of the debates. Therefore, I see it now as the blogosphere's responsibility to ensure that the creature who wishes to live by hyping the agenda should most surely die by it. Therefore, the bloggers should slay the beast.
Hence, my assessment -- Kerry's a sniveling cheat and snake oil politician who took advantage of George W. Bush's good character, knowing full well he would follow the rules of engagement. Upon instructions to take ten paces and draw, Kerry took 3 and fired. He's a huckster, a flim-flammer, a double-shuffle, two-bit sidewinder and he should answer some questions or face tar and feathers.
1 Comments:
Pulling out pens, writing down notes, presenting new positions, cutting off rebuttal, cut off talking heads, taped wires from CBS cameras to human generals and turned up the power, cut off tree limbs, blown up Barbies, randomly shot at Fox reporters, razed "It takes a" villages in fashion reminiscent of Jengis and Chaka Khan.
Post a Comment
<< Home