The Finch Formerly Known As Gold

4 August 2004

Where the elite meet for defeat

John Kerry, says New York Daily News columnist Zev Chafetz, is "the captive of the overbearing, elitist wing of his party," and as such, is sure to lose:

John Kerry is not a bad man. He probably wouldn't make a bad President. But he is a bad candidate in a terrible situation. He represents the wing of the Democratic Party that is imbued with a sense of its own moral, intellectual, cultural and social superiority. In short, he is the standard bearer for the unbearable.

But surely he can dispatch the fumbling, inarticulate George W. Bush in the debates. Or can he?

Democratic true believers think he'll kill Bush, one on one. That's what they thought about Al Gore, too.

Actually, Democratic true believers still think Al Gore won.

(Via La Shawn Barber)

Posted at 10:10 AM to Political Science Fiction

"As an amateur historian, Malkin would have been well advised to take a real survey of the historical material available on this subject, because there is a wealth of work that would have readily refuted many of her most basic tenets." (link)

I know that you've taken to linking to right wing townhall trash, but I'd thought I'd let you see what kind of bed your making for yourself chaz.


Posted by: bruce at 11:43 AM on 4 August 2004

Let's see. I link to a New York columnist on the subject of John Kerry, and you come back with someone's critique of Michelle Malkin's book, which I haven't read and which you probably haven't read either.

Does the phrase "high irrelevance" mean anything to you? Or is it just that everyone on the Right thinks exactly the same Bushspeak, whereas everyone on the Left is an independent free thinker?

Choose your response carefully.

Posted by: CGHill at 12:23 PM on 4 August 2004

fine, next time I'll send it email if you're going to be a **** about it.

Don't put words in my mouth.

Posted by: bruce at 1:52 PM on 4 August 2004

No words were put into your mouth.

"That car is blue."
"No, it is going south."

Your comment was a non sequitur. Your reaction to his reply was unwarranted.

Posted by: unimpressed at 2:54 PM on 4 August 2004

The irony of this whole exchange, combined with the original posting, could not be more evident.

Posted by: Vickie at 3:02 PM on 4 August 2004

I can remember when bruce was at least entertaining. Recent news must be getting him down.

Maybe after the election there'll be a stock market crash, that might cheer him up.

Posted by: McGehee at 3:08 PM on 4 August 2004

Bruce -- shove it.

Posted by: Vickie at 7:07 PM on 4 August 2004

Regarding the debates: "Democratic true believers think he'll kill Bush, one on one."

It's funny because it's true. They'll never catch on. Democrats were convinced that Ann Richards would cut him to pieces, and so would all three Al Gores.

But political debates are scored by what happens in the polls afterwards. After every debate, Bush gained.

Here's why: he seems normal and pleasant while his opponents seem condescending, nasty, and weird. John Kerry, who is all three by nature and inclination, will be roadkill. The debates will finish him off.

Posted by: lyle at 10:28 PM on 4 August 2004