Pages

Friday, October 03, 2008

Hyper Debate Analysis, O'Reailly Blows Stack

I have always liked Joe Biden. I disagree with him profoundly on very significant issues, but I like the guy, what can I say. I like Sarah Palin. I'm not goo goo over her, and prefer a southern accent :-) but she's plucky, and no pushover, and underestimated I think.

I thought they both did a good job in the debate. I didn't like Palin's question avoidance and I didn't like Biden's fact avoidance, but overall it was a nice, decent debate. And again I thought both did a good job.

My biggest problem with the debate was that I thought the time frame was too short and it made both candidates rushed. They had to talk extra fast and give rapid fire mini speeches more than thoughtful answers. I would much prefer a town hall meeting leisurely conversation myself.

I really don't think there is high drama in this election other than by how much Obama will win. We all pretty much know where the candidates are coming from, and if we don't we can find out online, including party platforms.

The endless media chatter I do find annoying. I remember in the late 1970's Jimmy Carter was having a new sconference. Bill Marshall, Van Kornegay and I were having a bible study of some kind in Bill's garage apartment. But we watched part of the news conference or whatever it was beforehand.

I remember how the media got all over Carter after the news conference and felt compelled to offer their endless mind numbing analysis. And I remember just wanting to scream. Why can't we, the American people, listen to our President without the media having to inject themselves into a mediating position (hmmm) and tell us what we should have heard and should have thought. I liked Carter, and at least thought that as President he should be able to speak to us without the seeming required mediation. I have thought the same about every president since.

I scanned all the post debate blabber I could find last night and it was the same old stuff. I just don't know why we can't watch debates and such and let it sink in and come to some of our own tentative conclusions. That usually takes more the the 13 seconds before the media jumps in and tries to spin it this way or that way.

Perhaps some bipartisan or non partisan group could run some commercials telling the people exactly where they can find each candidates stated positions, voting records, and party platforms. I hardly know the point of having an opinion if we don't read that stuff first.

I like Bill O'Reilly. I think his interview with Obama remains one of the high water marks of this election. I often don't like his fill ins (Laura Ingram) and I am not a fan of either Hannity or Colmes. But overall I think O'Reilly does a good job. Deep in his heart he seems to be a populist who does have "the folks" in mind and there are some things that just make his blood boil.

I like Barney Frank and we certainly disagree on a lot of subjects! I think his oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac has not been splendid. But I don't think he is being honest about his culpability. I think he was BS-ing O'Reilly, though I give him credit for going toe to toe. But I don't think it is either good theater or edifying for anyone for O'Reilly to blow his stack. He's been a volcano ready to erupt for weeks on this financial crisis issue, but somebody just needs to cut to commercial when he goes that way.

He did it once with Geraldo Rivera over immigration, but Geraldo stood his ground and gave it back pretty much as good as he was getting it. That was decent theater since they were colleagues who seem to liek and respect each other, but the O'Reilly Barney Frank blow up was not. I think O'Reilly should apologize "to the folks."


No comments: