Saturday, October 09, 2004

Live from New York...
It's 1-3 points nationwide!!!
want some wood?

John Forbes Kerry just won the second debate. Not the one that was broadcast live from Washington University in St. Louis (holla) friday night, but the one broadcast live from NBC studios in NYC.

Or, he just won the prior by absolutely cleaning up in the latter. Think back to 2000. The conventional wisdom about the debates was that Gore lost because he seemed so different at each debate. But polls taken right after the debates aired showed that people thought Gore won. It wasn't until Saturday Night Live spoofed the debates that the image of Gore as pandering reallt gelled. And I'd bet that you remember the SNL debates as well or better than you remember the actual debates.

Now, the friday debate: It was on a Friday night during a Yankees/Twins playoff game. Undecided voters aren't undecided because they, after watching C-Span/CNN/Fox religiously, just can't choose. They're undecided because they would rather go out on a friday night, or watch the Twins and the Yankees, than watch Bush and Kerry. And so the spin and the process of forming the Conventional Wisdom for this particular debate are much more important in terms of moving votes.

I thought it was a tie when I watched it. But now that my mind has been made up for me by television, I echo JFK's line from last night:

"Mr. President, you're 0-2."

and the last round, a domestic policy debate in the one-on-one format of the first contest, W isn't likely hit one out of the park.

remainders: is the forced airing of the Anti-Kerry movie on network TV one of Rove's October surprises?

(also there's a great Victoria's Secret ad I just saw that used "Monkey Man" by the Stones as the backdrop. It will not matter in the presidential campaign.)
Dred Scott, Explained: It's About Abortion

I didn't get it, when Bush said it, but now it makes sense. Code words and winks for the base. Got it. A Dred Scott litmus test is a Roe v Wade litmus test.

and this isn't the right place for it, but....

Bush-Cheney '04: Because I need some wood.

Friday, October 08, 2004

Monday, October 04, 2004

Jeffrey M. Stambovsky, Appellant,
Helen V. Ackley et al., Respondents.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York
July 18, 1991

Whether the source of the spectral apparitions seen by defendant seller is parapsychic or psychogenic, having reported their presence in both a national publication and the local press, defendant is estopped to deny their existence and, as a matter of law, the house is haunted.
Might as well forget Poland after all.