did anyone read Atlantic Monthly "when chimp meets John?"

[mimitabby]

its a very interesting article


http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200407/fallows

When George Meets John

Presidential debates always put more importance on projecting character than on being right. George W. Bush and John Kerry can both boast of never having lost a debate, though the two candidates rely on strikingly dissimilar sets of skills. A viewer's guide to this fall's version of "asymmetric warfare"
by James Fallows

.....

ecently I saw an amazing piece of political video. It was ten-year-old footage of George W. Bush, and it changed my mind about an important aspect of the upcoming campaign. Because the President so rarely exposes himself to live, unscripted questioning, and because he has expressed himself so poorly the few times he has risked such exposure this year, the political establishment assumes that John Kerry has a big advantage in this fall's debates.

[wheresthemind]

1. that was an amazing article...

I have been citing it to friends throught this election cycle on why I don't mind that Johnny is behined in the polls, and why the debates matter.

I loved it!

[stray cat]

2. Bush has never lost a debate

The guy stays on message and benefits from low expectations which they promote. He is playing the same game with Kerry by threatening to eliminate a debate.

[buycitgo]

3. zat Fallows? he's TOTALLY full of shit

he claims that dumbo has NEVER lost a debate!

I've heard him say that at least three times on radio....just yesterday, as a matter of fact

he is out of his mind, falling for the lamest CW bullshit

he says he's watched tapes of all his debates, presidential primaries, Gore, back to Texas gov, and he WON all of them

how could he have watched the Gore debates, watch him LIE like a fricking slugtrail half the time, have no clue the rest, and still think he won.

he must've watched the gasbags' interp of those debates, instead of watching them himself

he has ZERO credibility in my book

[The_Casual_Observer]

4. He never loses because the press says so.

It wouldn't matter what happens from this point on, the press has already declared chimp the winner.

[buycitgo]

5. eggs actly....meant to say that more clearly

I can't express my disgust and fury back then, when, after watching that toad lie and lie and lie, then demonstrate his utter ignorance of the issues, that media could so brazenly declare him the WINNER, much less not a drooling imbecile

that was the moment I realize just HOW deeply corrupt they were; I knew they were very very bad, but couldn't believe just how in the tank they were til then

[jayavarman]

6. Before you say he's totally full of it, please read his cover story

this month "Bush's Lost Year" http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200410/fallows
& the story from Jan/Feb "Blind into Baghdad".
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200401/fallows

Fallows eviscerates bush in these 2 articles in such a well researched & thorough way regarding Iraq that it is practically impossible to dispute his points. They are both on the Atlantic's website, it will take a long time to read them both, but please do.

If the whole nation had the ability to read & comprehend these 2 articles there would be an uproar like we've never seen . . . Instead the only people who read articles in the Atlantic tend to be, well, the type of people who read the Atlantic.

[cheshire]

7. and people who want or can subscribe.