Who’s the Smarter, More Articulate Candidate for President?

Hint: It’s not John Kerry. From an interview by Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday (thanks to Althouse):

WALLACE: …you also said that you won’t play politics with the Constitution. Implication: this President has played politics…

KERRY: Correct.

WALLACE: … with the Constitution. Isn’t that what John Edwards calls the negative politics of the past?

KERRY: No, those are comparisons of choices about the values that we bring to politics. You know, you hear a lot of talk about values in America. I think that the choices that you make in your policies reflect your values, and the things that you try to champion. John and I want health care for all Americans. That’s a value. John and I believe that you shouldn’t talk about no child left behind and then not fund the education system so that no child is left behind. That’s a value. Under our plan, we’re going to fund education, we’re going to respect educators, teachers, we’re going to bring our schools up in a positive and affirmative way. They’re choosing to do one thing, and we have an affirmative choice. Obviously, we have to talk about the comparative choices. That’s not name-calling. That’s not petty and small. We have a big idea of health care for all Americans. We have a big idea for young people to afford to be able to go to college, where tuitions are going up. We have a big idea for restoring America’s reputation in the world and fighting a more effective war on terror. To compare how we will fight the war on terror is the center of this campaign and that’s what Americans want to know.

What on earth does any of that have to do with the Consitution? And what on earth does it mean? Perhaps Kerry is really the “Manchurian Candidate”, instructed by his brainwashers to lull all of us to sleep with psychobabble.

Name Calling

I just posted a comment at another blog that’s worth posting here (with some edits):

Name calling on the web just gets in the way of rational discourse. It’s “e-mail bravado”: People say things in dashed-off e-mails, posts, and comments that they wouldn’t say in face-to-face conversation. And being civil, face-to-face, isn’t just a matter of avoiding a fistfight. It’s a matter of seeing the face in front of you and thinking something like this: “Here’s another human being; he or she is worthy of my respect until he or she proves otherwise,” or “I was taught good manners as a child and I’ve found that good manners are generally met with civility and a respectful hearing.”

Now, satire isn’t name-calling unless it devolves into likening your ideological opponents to people like Hitler, Stalin, or bin Laden. I don’t often engage in satire, but I reserve the right to do so, without becoming offensive.

Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is

The polls suggest a “convention bounce” for Kerry. The betting odds at Iowa Electronic Markets say that Bush regained his lead when the Demo convention began. I’d bet on the betting odds.

In the "So What?" Department

The New Republic reveals a nefarious plot :

PAKISTAN FOR BUSH.
July Surprise?
by John B. Judis, Spencer Ackerman & Massoud Ansari

Post date 07.29.04 | Issue date 07.19.04

[Editor’s Note: This afternoon, Pakistan’s interior minister, Faisal Saleh Hayyat, announced that Pakistani forces had captured Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani, a Tanzanian Al Qaeda operative wanted in connection with the 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. The timing of this announcement should be of particular interest to readers of The New Republic. Earlier this month, John B. Judis, Spencer Ackerman, and Massoud Ansari broke the story of how the Bush administration was pressuring Pakistani officials to apprehend high-value targets (HVTs) in time for the November elections–and in particular, to coincide with the Democratic National Convention. Although the capture took place in central Pakistan “a few days back,” the announcement came just hours before John Kerry will give his acceptance speech in Boston.]

Why not now? It’s better than next year.