Post-debate thoughts
I didn’t watch much of the fray tonight (my usual debate-phobia). But from what I did see, I found Biden’s behavior not just disrespectful and undignified, but bizarre. He did everything but pound a shoe on a table. I’m trying to think of any major American politician—president, vice president, speaker, Democrat or Republican—who’s ever exhibited anything akin to Biden’s inappropriate affect, his derisive laughter when the opponent is speaking, or just his all-around strangeness.
Biden was like the drunken blowhard you meet at a bar, the guy everybody is entertained by for a just little bit (especially if they’ve been drinking, too) and then it’s more than enough. Laughing and telling stories, talking too much, and then saying the drinks are on him and by the way he can lick everybody in the place.
Does anyone want this man to be a heartbeat away from the presidency? Seriously, folks, I think that even were I a Democrat, I’d be frightened of Biden coming to any kind of power.
It says a lot about Obama that he chose him. It says a lot about Obama that he kept him. Obama likes to be surrounded by people who are mediocre and loyal to him. They won’t show him up, and they’ll do his dirty work as bidden. Biden is the epitome of this; he’s exactly and precisely what Obama wants in a VP.
I become more and more convinced that this election will be a test of the American people and their judgment. We will either pass it or fail it.
[ADDENDUM: Biden wasn’t just un-presidential. He was un-vice-presidential.]
[ADDENDUM: Bookworm has much the same thing to say:
Joe was the bloviating, obnoxious drunk at the bar who had grabbed Ryan by his lapel and wouldn’t let go. You could practically see Ryan’s hair melt from the noxious odors wafting out from behind Joe’s peculiarly whitened dentures.
I do not know that I have ever before seen such a loathsome spectacle at the national level. ]
“Biden was like the drunken blowhard you meet at a bar, the guy everybody is entertained by for a just little bit.”
Neo, yet again, you have nailed the description of someone/something perfectly!
Yes, he acted very much like that drunken blowhard you meet at a bar. I don’t drink, so I never find such bores entertaining – not in the least.
And Martha RadDITZ – that is her name, DITZ, isn’t it? She was certainly no moderator.
I didn’t watch the debate either, but from what I have heard, I don’t think this strategem is possible any more:
I think the media will declare Biden the winner, “unexpectedly.”
I flipped on the debate for a few seconds, at one point (I don’t have any idea what part it was) but the look on Martha Raddatz’s face was priceless. She looked horrified and like she wanted to jump underneath her desk (or table, or whatever it was) to get away from a trainwreck.
Biden behaved abominably.
Luntz’s Dunces loved it – they thought Biden’s contempt was a sign of “passion.”
I saw a stat saying Ryan was interrupted between 82 and 96 times by Biden (that doesn’t count the number of times Raddatz interrupted Ryan too). Ryan interrupted Biden 6 times.
I was furious watching it. I kept wanting Ryan to say, “Look, this is a debate, not a solo trek through a howling wilderness, not a stump speech, and not a forum for snark and contempt. A debate. That means when it’s my turn to talk, I talk, you SHUT THE F*** UP. Got it?”
Yeah, yeah, he couldn’t say that. But Ryan was just a titch too placid for my taste. I get why he did it, and I admire – boy, do I admire – his patience and genuine even-temperedness (as opposed to Obama’s media-created, i.e., non-existent, even-temperedness). But a bit more clarity that he is not someone to be talked down to I think would have gone a long way toward making clear to everyone what a disrespectful jackass Biden was being.
That said, I still think Ryan won, barely. Overall effect: a wash. Which I guess is good, or at least not bad.
Biden seemed unhinged at times what with his wild gestures and rude interruptions. Crazy Joe was wearing a “Look at me, I’m reckless blowhard” sign on his forehead. Chalk up a few more undecideds for R&R.
Luntz’s Dunces loved it — they thought Biden’s contempt was a sign of “passion.”
I’ve seen plenty of “passionate” drunks in my time. They were still drunks.
I think Slow Joe follows the old saying: “If you can dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bulls^%$t.”
It is difficult to take this man as a serious person. He is the reason I pray for the health and well-being of Barry. Heaven help us if Biteme is ever put in charge of anything.
Pingback:Bookworm Room » Joe Biden breaks into Jennifer Granholm’s medicine cabinet and tries to overdose *UPDATES*
I was really put off by Biden’s asinine behavior but I thought to myself…”I’m a strong R&R supporter… maybe independents and Democrats won’t see it that way.”
Based on snap polls and comments I’ve sent, I’m thankful they WILL think his behavior boorish and condescending.
P.S. Plus Biden told several lies that can be easily refuted…like he voted for both wars and tonight said he didn’t. Does he think people can’t look up what his votes were?
Kolnai,
“That said, I still think Ryan won, barely. Overall effect: a wash. Which I guess is good, or at least not bad.”
I offer that there were differing objectives here. Ryan needed to look Vice-Presidential and not lose ground. He had to convince people that he could handle the job of being a heartbeat away from the presidency. Biden already is a heartbeat from the presidency (good grief!) he needed to atone for Obama’s lackluster performance to help reinvigorate the base and to bait Ryan into somehow looking UN-vice presidential.
With that metric, I think both did their job. Ryan looked vice-presidential and while I think Biden played to the base, he obviously didn’t break Ryan’s cool. The loss, however goes to Biden because from the CNN poll it seems that he alienated independents. He certainly ticked off Chris Wallace on Fox News, and even Piers Morgan tweeted for Biden to stop mugging. (I’m curious to see how Biden’s smirking and laughing during a discussion of nuclear Iran will play with the women’s vote Obama is trying to court).
With Ryan two particular statements stood out to me. The first, when he respectfully chided Biden to not interrupt (“The American people would be better served . . . .”). The second was to mention that Romney’s charitable gifting was more than Ryan or Biden put together. It’s been known widely that Biden’s tax return for 2010 (?) showed a mere three hundred dollars (and change) in charitable deductions. To put Biden and Ryan together without singling out Biden as a cheapskate vis-a-vis Romney was either pure class or remarkably stealthy strategy. I wonder if anyone else picked up on this?
texexec: he doesn’t remember what his votes were.
I watched for awhile, but could not take it all the way through. I did drift in and out. My wife sat through the whole thing.
Was Ryan unbelievably clever by allowing Biden enough rope to hang himself, or, as I surmised was he weak? I was terribly disappointed in him.
Raddatz should be summarily fired. That was the worst performance I have ever seen by someone who was supposed to be in control. I would expect better at mud wrestling exhibition.
If we are going to have these farcial face offs, there simply has to be some rules established, and moderators found who can, and will, enforce them
More thoughts –
We all knew this was coming, more or less, just not this bad.
Isn’t this about as clear a window into the deranged leftist psyche as could be desired? The left really thought that Romney behaved in the first debate like Biden behaved tonight. Insane, but true: “Heh, if Romney can just sit up there and hog the mic and be domineering and just LIE with abandon, we can too, and BETTER!”
The execrable Biden schtick we witnessed tonight was, in a sense, the homage vice pays to virtue. The whole performance was so cockamamie, so forced, so over-the-top, so insane, basically, that it was clearly an attempt by the left to out-Romney (their complete misunderstanding of) “Romney.”
As I reflect on it, I am more and more impressed with how statesmanlike Ryan was. Almost too much so – by which I mean I don’t think the American people have a firm feel for what a statesman looks like. They have trouble “knowing it when they see it.” But who knows. Maybe I’m being too cynical on this one. We shall see.
In any case, I have been throwing in the towel on my previous Romney-bashing since the campaign started, but after the first debate and the one just concluded, that towel is down on the mat. R & R are statesmen. I’m proud to have these guys representing us against the left and for the country. Really proud.
Oldflyer: it’s starting to look as though Ryan’s demeanor may have appealed to exactly the people the ticket needs to reach: women and undecideds. Both of these groups seem (at least in preliminary polling and reactions) to have found Biden’s behavior rude and offputting.
Interesting. Hope it’s true.
Kolnai,
“The left really thought that Romney behaved in the first debate like Biden behaved tonight.”
I thinkthis is precisely correct. It reminds me of something I once read about MSNBC. The author (can’t remember who) said that MSNBC was the leftist version of what the left thinks Fox News is like.
Jonathan Haidt’s studies have already evinced the fact that conservatives better understand how liberals think than liberals understand conservatives.
Not only do I think you are correct, but to call this a demonstration of the deranged leftist psyche is being much too charitable to the left.
Again, I repeat my paean that we owe Obama (and Biden) a great deal of thanks for so ruthlesly bringing the leftist mindset out of the closet.
I watched it, half-heartedly (it was literally the first debate I’ve watched in this entire political season). I tried to watch it in a dispassionate and disinterested manner, and thought that Biden had the upper hand.
He has a knack for speaking authoritatively, knowing that even though he pulls facts and figures out of his ass, most viewers won’t notice.
About 2/3 of the way through, I switched to the Orioles-Yankees game.
T –
Yes, perfect example – and the Haidt reference is what I was grasping for. That ties it together pretty nicely.
It is amazing that the left believes MSNBC is “their” Fox News. Utterly amazing. Whenever I watch MSNBC (very rarely), I find myself saying, “Hilarious – this is what the left thinks Fox News is like, as though Ed Schultz is just their answer to Bill O’Reilly, Rachel Maddow their version of Megyn Kelly, Chris Matthews their Brett Baier, etc.”
Your reference to Haidt is so apposite because he captures exactly why the left’s attempt to “mirror” the right is at once so laughably bad and horrifyingly revealing. Given their amputated moral sense, they read the right – can only read the right – as sinister through and through, lacking all good faith and, well, morality.
Then it gets even more twisted – does the leftist mind ever stop twisting? – as the left’s intrinsic moral bankruptcy finds its legitimating sanction in their ludicrous projection of their own pathologies onto conservatives. They then amp up their crudity and mendacity, all of it justified in their minds by the nefarious essence of their “enemies.”
And this is the root perversion at the core of leftist “thought.” Almost all of it amounts to a rationalization for operating outside of ordinary moral constraints.
Sickening.
They must be defeated. God willing – and the American electorate willing – your faith in our DNA will prove warranted.
Kolnai,
“. . . the left’s intrinsic moral bankruptcy finds its legitimating sanction in their ludicrous projection of their own pathologies onto conservatives . . . .”
And you have perfectly distilled C.S. Lewis’ quote:
Biden is using Baboon Tactics: ridicule and mockery; diversion and lies. Counting cynically on the American citizens’ forgetfulness (good bet, unfortunately) and bird-witted attention span.
They’re all about Appearances. If he appeared butch and dominant and invited his watchers to laugh at and ridicule the earnest young man, then he won, in their minds.
I agree with you, Neo: this really is going to be a test of the American citizenry. Remember that word? funny how “nation” and “citizens” have been replaced with “homeland” and “people” in recent years. The former are associated with the Enlightenment ideals of America; the latter, with the Old World notions of blood and soil. Quite deliberate, like all the vocabulary shifts of the nomenklatura.
The scary part isn’t that the D ticket is behaving this way. I expect that. The scary part is that they still regularly pull in 40%+ of the polls. That’s a lot of voters who just don’t understand or appreciate this country.
Bidden was trying to punch Ryan’s buttons — and to get HIM into uttering some callous, unfeeling remark.
He didn’t rise to the bait.
So. From what I’m reading, Joe Biden is still an embarrassment.
Whoa. Color me surprised.
…uh, was that racist? That’s not racist, was it?
davisbr –
“was that racist?”
Well, it might blacken your reputation.
Two things stand out to me. First this a try out for a possible tactic in Obamas’ next debate. Second, this shows beyond any doubt they will lie regardless of how obvious it is to all. They think it’s a winner.
Hello Neo, long time lurker – infrequent commenter.
Perhaps we are all missing something here, eh? Is it possible that Biden was playing a role to appeal to the POV of the liberal left – at the same time attempting to be a provocateur to Ryan? For Biden the debate could very well have been a success.
The liberal base have no issue with facts, hence Obama lies endlessly and isn’t challenged by his supporters. Biden lies, their response is ‘yawn’. The liberal left is all about feelings and entertainment (see #OWS) and they got plenty last night with Biden, endearing him to their psyche. Imagine the Obama base watching last nights debate – they would have been rolling on the floor with laughter as Biden appears to be provoking Ryan.
The purpose of the debates are to encourage your base and draw supporters from the ‘other’ side. Perhaps America is so divided that all we’re able to do is encourage the party base. We see a parallel situation (almost identical) with American understanding of the Islamic world – assigning them motives that from their POV are ridiculous. Moderate Muslims? ROFL
Pingback:Biden’s behavior shocking- unprecedented « Notion Tidbits
Biden of the blindingly white DaVinci veneers and the arrogant and grotesque manner seems to me to be a cross between a cheap, over the hill wise guy from the Sopranos, combined with a slimey, crooked used car salesman.
Ryan should have called him on his behavior last night and, moreover, I thought the so called “moderator” was working for the Obama camp last night as she interrupted and cut off Ryan over and over again.
Joe was amped up on switch grass extract and his brain addled by standing too long in front of solar panels.
neo-neocon: “I’m trying to think of any major American politician–president, vice president, speaker, Democrat or Republican–who’s ever exhibited anything akin to Biden’s inappropriate affect, his derisive laughter when the opponent is speaking, or just his all-around strangeness.”
Of course, there was Al Gore during his debates with George W. Bush.
Biden was like the drunken blowhard you meet at a bar,
Seems to be the popular metaphor. I wonder who started it? And why so many copied it. For myself, I have never seen a drunken blowhard in a bar, because I don’t hang out in bars.
No election, no debate, no speech is about facts or issues, or is about such things only tertiarily.
Everyone watches for demeanor (vote for a president who looks presidential) or viciousness (“he landed a blow”), even if the violence is metaphorical, or tribal loyalty. Emotion, not facts or lies, is the alpha and omega of politics.
I found Biden’s performance infuriating, but when I take a step back and think of it from the perspective of a “low information” undecided voter, I think Joe did alright.
He was confident and passionate, he didn’t make any major mistakes. Conservatives can call him rude, but I’m not sure everyone else sees it that way. Of Course, he also fidgeted and made funny faces when he wasn’t talking. If anything hurt him in the debate, that was it.
I think that people who don’t have strong opinions about an issue tend to side with the guy who acts like he cares the most. Ryan’s calm, intellectual-but-still-relatable thing works very well in some situations, but a debate with Joe isn’t one of them.
In the aftermath of last night’s Bidenesque performance by none other than Biden himself, Ed Driscoll’s post at Instapundit (7:50 AM) is worth noting (emphasis mine):
“Underbussing.” What a great neologism.
Pingback:Martha Raddatz reacts to being interupted by Joe Biden « Notion Tidbits
Its been awhile since I commented… got new job which is keeping me busy. I’m there now, but just had to write a quick comment.
First, Kudos to Romney for that First debate… I think he cut through the media nonsense & Obama spin to show his intelligence and ability and goodness.
Re: the Ryan-Biden thing..
I do hope that Biden’s behavior appears as boorish to others as it seemed to me..
But, at the same time, I feel Ryan (as much as I like him) missed some golden opportunities. For example, Biden frequently resorted to this drunken, boorish laugh in response to Ryan’s comments. I felt Ryan should have taken that as an opportunity to point out that such behavior is precicely part of what was wrong with the last 4 years: an administration that had no respect for any opinions or views other than their own (for example, passing Obamacare in the face of unified Republican opposition and also in the face of a public that didnt want it)…. pin all that to Biden’s arrogant laugh, and then end by saying “Mr. Vice President, the pain and suffering of the American people who are out of work is no laughing matter… this is not an academic exercise, but the lives of real people… your way has not worked… its time for something new.”
I’m not saying Ryan did terrible, but I wish he called Biden out more, as above.
J.L., I know it’s Monday morning quarterbacking, but that would have been an excellent and hard-hitting response.
Whatever Ryan was prepared for, I don’t think anyone asked him at practice: “How do you respond if Biden laughs and chuckles at the concept of a nuclear armed Iran?”
The Dem campaign: managed by the editorial staff of The Onion.
Neo — a very succinct and accurate description of Jersey Joe’s performance.
It’s good to know that most people on both sides of the aisle noticed. Whether you found it offensive or not depends on which side you’re on, but the fact that even the left have offered some criticism for his bizarre behavior has got to irritate the Obama campaign staff. While they can take satisfaction that he appealed to like-minded children, aka, his base, a lot of the points he made in the defense of Obama will be lost while they are distracted by questions trying to explain the strange performance. In the same way Obama’s somnambulance was the attributed to the the altitude, perhaps it was past Bonzo’s bed time and he needed a nap.
This debate probably didn’t change any minds on on either side, and may have satisfied the Chris Matthews’ relatively small fan base. But reasonable undecided voters watching the antics of Obama’s pet monkey might have concluded the more level headed and mature Ryan to be a better VP,and the other to be an immature buffoon. As long the discussion continues to be about about Joe Blow’s behavior and not what he said, that’s a win for Ryan/Romney.
Neo wrote “I become more and more convinced that this election will be a test of the American people and their judgment. We will either pass it or fail it.”
Sad, tragically, really, death of King Arthur, sad.
How can Obama turn things around? He would have to offer a vision and substance in the next debates. I just don’t see it. The only thing he knows how to do is spew empty rhetoric. He has never had to make policy arguments. He does not understand the details.
Well, if nothing else maybe the independents now understand that yes, old Joe really is batshit crazy . . .
I think this VP debate set Obama up for another poor performance. He’ll see the criticism of Biden’s rude, boorish, and condescending behavior and it will make him hold back some of his planned aggressiveness. If he doesn’t, he will appear to be nasty and snarly.
He’s even less capable than Biden in knowing how to disagree with someone without being disagreeable. Remember…his emotional makeup is dysfunctional.
Romney might throw Biden’s words back at Obama during the next debate. For example he could say ‘VP Biden claimed that the intelligence community gave you wrong information about Libya…, that is just not true….’ Having to defend or distance himself from Biden’s lies would put Obama in a tight spot.
Texexec: dysfunctional, as in sociopath.
Here’s what Ryan should have said:
“Mister Vice-President, I have a small gun in my pocket. If you interrupt one more time I will take it out and shoot you.”
It probably would not have worked, but it would have been worth a try.
According to this,
http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html
Obama is a perfect fit.
kolnai,
“I was furious watching it. I kept wanting Ryan to say,…”
Exactly what was on my mind for the most part of the debate, a debate as educating as it was infuriating.
I have nothing much to say about Biden. He had taken Obama’s advice to be himself in earnest, so we got what we expected. I felt like I was watching the late Leslie Nielsen’s well-known role, only in a graceless remake.
It’s about the “moderator” and Ryan. Raddatz’s blatant bias reminded me nothing so much more than the recent photo captures AP and Reuters both featured from Netanyahu’s speech at the U.N., the one deliberately chosen to make it as though my prime minister were making a Nazi salute. It’s a kind of bias that isn’t shocking for itself, but for its total lack of shame: Where your adversary not only relieves his bladder over you (as is his wont) but doesn’t bother trying to tell you it’s rain.
And Ryan was comporting himself the way my government does to the onslaught of hostile bias: In politeness and calm even though there is no one less deserving of them than the other side is. Should Ryan have gone ballistic? No, but being polite and calm and being firm and assertive aren’t mutually exclusive.
The previous debate showed the ability of the good side to win once the curtain of hostile bias is lifted. This debate has given the complementary lesson, that even a cinch like Ryan (calm and intelligent) vs. Biden (crazy buffoon) is no longer a cinch if the debate is under the control of the enemy side. Raddatz was truly an oppressor in that debate, and it is not in the nature of oppressors to give up their power willingly; like my government vis-é -vis the hostile, Marxist-owned worldwide media outlets, Ryan should have stood up to his right to present his side of the debate properly. Although it’s clear Ryan has won by leaving Biden to show every viewer what a buffoon he is, this tactic will not work with someone who isn’t as terminally insane as Biden, so it sets a bad precedent.
Romney and Ryan can handle the one who stutters without his teleprompter and the crazy uncle who was let out of the attic, but no one, I repeat no one–no person, no nation-state, no civilization–can win a rigged game. There’s nothing more important for the good side than unrigging the game. Any victory under a rigged game is a fluke; the prerequisite to winning by one’s merits is to make the absence of hostile bias a precondition to participation in the contest. That’s a basic demand that should never be compromised on.
Neo, you’re spot on regarding Biden and also the fact that in the end this election is about the collective wisdom of the American people.
It also says a lot about Romney that he chose Ryan. His solid performance last night reflects credit upon Romney just as Biden must make a lot of people (D as well as R) question Obama’s judgment in choosing him.
Ryan didn’t have to win the debate (though I think he did). He had to present himself to America as smart, thoughtful, and someone who we can feel comfortable with as VP, and if it came to it, as President. I think he succeeded last night.
zion truth,I totally agree.Perfectly said.
Does anyone know the back story on why the GOP agreed to the debate moderators all being known left-of-center types? Jim Lehrer isn’t as transparently leftist as some, but come on; Bob Schieffer? Candy Crowley? Martha Raddatz?
Why couldn’t they get at least ONE mainstream conservative? Britt Hume? Chris Wallace?
Caroline Glick, the Israeli journalist, has some very perceptive remarks about the Ryan/Biden debate and its significance for Romney’s upcoming debates with Obama. I hope it gets read by Romney’s advisers.
The URL is
http://www.carolineglick.com/e/2012/10/biden-obama-and-the-politics-o.php
Southpaw–Biden as “Obama’s pet monkey” captures it perfectly.
I can just see it now. Obama is the organ grinder, grinding away, and sitting on top of the organ, dressed in the traditional pill box hat and bolero jacket is a little Biden monkey, grimacing, and hopping around, screeching, biting the occasional passersby, and sometimes throwing shit at them.
“Sad, tragically, really, death of King Arthur, sad.”
49 years after the death of JFK it’s about time we move away from the leftist/progressive attempt to recreate “Camelot.” Let’s make the most of what this country is not subscribe to some propagandistic and theoretical urban-planned dystopia.
Ziontruth @ 10:23 wrote: “no one–no person, no nation-state, no civilization–can win a rigged game.”
I suggest that’s not true. It’s not the presence of the scam that rigs the game, it’s the fact that the mark doesn’t know it is a scam. If one expects a scam then prepare for it and lay your strategy to win the game by defeating the scam itself; e.g, watch The Sting. The second scam, unknown to the audience, is the FBI agent played by Dana Elcar which is used to counteract the intrusion of the “real-life” police detective (Charles Durning).
Now if you tell me that the Repub debate team didn’t expect Dem bias from an avowed liberal moderater and were caught by surprise, then they deserve to lose the match up.
As for Netanyahu, I would expect he has already figured out exactly what he needs to do (or not do) in order to contribute to Romney’s chances of winning the election.
cornflour:
Thanks much for that link. IMHO, Caroline Glick is one of the most courageous ( and wise) columnists living today.
I only hope that Mitt Romney and his advisors read this dire warning at the end of her piece:
Aside from Biden being a bully and bizarre he executed a rather classic leftist tactic, denying your opponent the right to speak.
Back before conservatives had a media foothold, “mainstream” media would occasionally have conservatives on TV shows. However they would always have four or five leftists on as well so that the conservative would be overwhelmed, and yes there would be lots of smirking about the zoo creature they had on the show.
The fairness doctrine was another attempt to deny conservatives the right to speak, more recent variants on this include net neutrality and local control of media.
Conservative speakers are always heckled by the left to deny them free speech. Only conservatives need bodyguards to speak on college campuses.
Currently if you watch any of the “debates” on cable TV you will regularly see leftists cross talking unless their mics are muted in order to drown out the conservative.
No doubt most conservatives in their personal lives have argued with leftists who are shocked and appalled that someone actually disagrees with their leftist religion and get very passionate and try to over talk you continuously.
So for leftists Biden seemed normal, whereas for the regular folks he seemed what he was, a weird bully.
One more point on Biden and Obama debating Romney-Ryan. Obama has a structural problem. He can’t defend his failed, debacle of an economy, he can’t defend his failed, debacle of a foreign policy, and as a Bolshevik he can’t tell us who he is or where he wants to take the country as Americans aren’t Bolsheviks. Thus we get lies, smears and obstruction.
Biden embodied one of the things which I find most repellent about modern American liberals: the attitude that any disagreement with their idiotic notions is simply impossible. If you don’t parrot the same line, or if you challenge their blatant lies and unexamined assumptions, then you are not just wrong, you’re evil. So much of their moral identity is based on holding the correct opinions that encountering someone who doesn’t hold them — who challenges them or scoffs at them — terrifies and enrages them.
The old idea that “reasonable men of good will may disagree” is simply not possible for them to understand. Agreement is how they demonstrate their reasonableness and good will.
This also explains why they are so eager to seize upon “dog whistles” to smear dissent as the result of racism or misogyny or something equally doubleplusungood. In their mindset disagreement simply must flow from unworthy motives.
I don’t know how to counter or cure this attitude. Engaging them with logic and facts, as Romney and Ryan have done, leads to enraged shrieks: “LIES! ALL LIES! CHEATING LIARS! LYING CHEATERS!”
And of course trying to deploy meaningless appeals to emotion as they do simply opens one to the charge of being superficial and manipulative.
Neo, you made the change: what can we do?
Trimegistus,
I suggest that the simplest weapon is to simply become immune to the charge of “liar” and “racist.” It’s kind of like the old “sticks and stones” retort. Now, it’s somewhat more complicated than in the schoolyard because a larger number of people respond to that invective.
IMO, that is one of the benefits that has come from the Obama administration. “Racist” has been so overused that it has less impact on a daily basis. So too will “liar,” although that word has just entered the lexicon of broascast politics. The media has played a major role in this change; first giving the charges credence by refusing to ignore then; then, by not ignoring them giving them so much play that they become ineffective.
I, also, would be interested in Neoneocon’s thoughts on this.
I felt like I was watching the late Leslie Nielsen’s well-known role, only in a graceless remake.
Perfect!
I too, neo, suffer from debate-phobia, but my wife and kids wanted to watch, so I reluctantly turned from the Yankees-Orioles game.
Biden’s demeanor struck me as forced, an obvious attempt to obfuscate the issues and derail a substantive debate into a slanging match. Ryan, to his credit, refrained from responding in kind, although a lesser man (ahem) would have been sorely tried to follow his example.
@kolnai: at 4:35 am Well, it might blacken your reputation.
Kudos. I lol’d. /tips hat/
@1:37 AM above, Kolnai referenced my frequent assertion to the American spirit in our DNA (“God willing — and the American electorate willing — your faith in our DNA will prove warranted.”).
See this quote (emphasis mine):
the link (H/T Instapundit):
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/us-election/9601766/Obamas-election-strategy-has-collapsed-says-Romney-camp-as-their-man-begins-to-believe.html
Wolla Dalbo – That would make a great political ad. Throw in Big Bird and it would be a party.
T,
“It’s not the presence of the scam that rigs the game, it’s the fact that the mark doesn’t know it is a scam.”
One can know he’s being scammed and not do anything about it, and then the rigged game is just as effective at slanting the result. How many interruptions by Raddatz in Biden’s favor did Ryan need in order to understand she was biased? After a certain point, his lack of readiness to call her upon it was negligent.
“Now if you tell me that the Repub debate team didn’t expect Dem bias from an avowed liberal moderater and were caught by surprise,…”
Lehrer’s exceptionally fair moderation may have made them complacent. Or it may be the usual Republican fault of being too compromising, cutting the other side too much slack for their own good.
“As for Netanyahu,…”
I only brought my local affairs as an analogy, nothing literal to be read into it.
I do believe all of the ideas you have presented for your post.
They’re very convincing and will certainly work. Nonetheless,
the posts are too brief Insoles For High Arch starters.
Could you please lengthen them a little from next time?
Thanks for the post.
It’s remarkable to go to see this web page and reading the views
of all mates on the topic Bones Of The Foot this post,
while I am also keen of getting familiarity.