Elizabeth Scripturient (the delinquent, ecumenical (hermionesviolin) wrote,
Elizabeth Scripturient (the delinquent, ecumenical
hermionesviolin

Kerry/Bush et al

My father writes, "It's interesting how a stereotype--or a story line--develops and then people fit incidents into the story line, or ignore things that don't fit. [...] What fit the stereotype often stuck and what didn't fell away." He links to this from Jacob Sollum:
"You can't say nuclear; that really scares me," sings the cartoon Kerry to the cartoon Bush in Gregg and Evan Spiridellis' satirical short This Land. It bothers me too. But as Nick mentions, Jimmy Carter, a featured speaker at the Democratic convention yesterday, has the same problem, despite his service as a nuclear engineer in the Navy. (Maybe it's a regional trait; do all Southern politicians have trouble pronouncing the word?) While Carter was generally regarded as smart (though ineffectual) despite his tendency to say "nucular," Bush's mispronunciation is widely seen as a sign of his stupidity.
This would be a Bushism except that it’s Kerry.

Speaking of... there are not more African-Americans, men or otherwise, in jail than in college, though John Kerry keeps saying so.

My dad offers more information:
To go back: John Kerry said, "We've got more African Americans in jail than we do in college. " Stefan Sharkansky took him to task, pointing out that the Census Bureau says:
http://www.usefulwork.com/shark/archives/002309.html

Blacks in college (2000): 2,224,181
Blacks in jail or prison (2000): 899,200

A number of people commented to him, saying that things would look different if you only considered black males. And they indeed do:
http://www.usefulwork.com/shark/archives/002326.html

Black males in college (October 2000): 814,000
Black males in jail or prison (June 2000):791,600
Black males in jail or prison (June 2001):803,400

Barbara Sweeny points out that if your expand the "in jail or prison" figure to include people on probation or parole, you very definitely get more blacks "under the supervision of the criminal justice system" than in college.

One thing that jumped out at me is the incredible gender difference:

Black females in college: 1,400,000+
Black males in college: ~ 800,000
Glenn Reynold talks about the whole “Anybody but Bush” thing and says this of Kerry voters:
Not exactly a strong base of support, but it's what happens when you nominate a weak candidate, and unify your party around hatred for the incumbent.
Matt Welch adds:
Isn't that also a pretty accurate description of George W. Bush in 2000?

Shoot, I've seen people this season criticize the anti-Bush nature of Kerry-supporters in one breath, while mentioning in the next that the only thing they'd like about a JFK2 victory is that it would thwart the immediate presidential ambitions of Hillary Clinton. In modern-day two-party politics, hate's a feature, not a bug, and what's more I think it's the only way Bush can win (by whipping up enough anti-Dem hatred to shore up his shaky base).

And though it's frequently ugly and annoying, hate isn't always such a bad thing. I (and enough California voters) hated Gray Davis, and rightly so. I certainly hated or hate Richard Nixon, Oliver North, Rick Santorum, Tom DeLay, Daryl Gates, Trent Lott, Joe Andrew, Terry McAuliffe, Richard Daley, Robert Lagomarsino, and so on. If you're going to hate somebody, I reckon you might start with someone who is misspending your tax dollars, debasing the Constitution, and/or lying about it.
samfeasor writes:
I agree that the "because he's not Bush" argument isn't a good one. But it's one. I think a better one is:

Because Bush isn't working and what we do in the United States is vote out people who don't work. that's our version of democracy. if we elect someone and they don't do a good job - say by lying or even something so "mundane" as making bad economic choices or cutting the wrong funding - we elect someone different the next time around and see if they can give it a better go. And if they can't... well, we do the same thing again in four years. And sure, we'd like to not have it be that way. But we do what we have to to forge ahead and make our country better. And, unfortunately, we have a limited party system. So it's either or when we vote. I hate it, but I also don't think our current President (and the people he surrounds himself with) is doing a good job. And people who suck at their jobs should be fired. And that's why I'll be voting for Kerry in '04.
Jeff Jarvis writes:
A nation undecided, not a nation divided:

I think the reason the JibJab animation of Bush v. Kerry singing "This Land is Your Land" has become such a hit and struck such a nerve is precisely because it doesn't take sides: It's quite balanced in its amusing disdain for the foibles of both candidates. That, I believe, represents the views of most Americans: We're each evenly divided trying to decide which we can bear better.
Heinz vs. W ketchup

My father has heard John Edwards' "two Americas" ad a number of times and thought it was TERRIBLE, ridiculously dishonest and says this article is a partial reason why.

Stuart Buck points out that Abraham Lincoln and FDR both used Christian rhetoric in their speeches.
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 2 comments