Your humble scribe has not been assiduously following the debates between the several presidential candidates of the various parties, not merely because it all seems so depressingly like a hideously extended version of Jeff Foxworthy’s “Who’s Smarter than a Fifth Grader?” without either the youthful charm or juvenile humor, but also because the election itself seems so very far away that he’s unwilling to dedicate any few of his ever-diminishing pool of brain cells to mere preliminaries.
He has cast the occasional despairing eye of the detritus of these debates however, and it was with some amusement that he discovered the right-hand side of the blogosphere has enumbraged itself with CNN, who apparently could not be bothered to check the antecedents of the “undecided” voters who had submitted YouTube questions for the candidates. Hugh Hewitt notes that CNN Vice President David Bohrman explicitly claimed that -
“This debate is to let Republican voters pick from among their eight candidates,” said David Bohrman, Washington bureau chief and senior vice president for CNN. “We are trying to focus mostly on questions where there are differences among these candidates.”
Well, not so much, as it turns out.
It’s not healthy for Republicans to fash themselves about the world as it is, rather than the way they’d like it to be. After all, the Democratic presidential candidates didn’t boycott the Fox News debate in Nevada merely out of some napkin-in-the-lap sense of moral fastidiousness, but because they pragmatically realized that offering to brawl among themselves on hostile ground is a recipe for at least potential disaster.
After all, a thing is what it does, and if the Republican candidates want to play Daniel in the lion’s den, then they probably ought go in one at a time. It’s not that they won’t get eaten - they might - but at least they won’t have to choose between the claws of their host to their front and the knives of their adversaries in their back.
Update: Welcome to the Instalegions, and thanks to himself for the link.
26 responses so far ↓
1
Babs
// Nov 30, 2007 at 3:10 pm
I understand that 8-9 of the questioners have been found out as operatives of one sort or another for the Democrat party. Yes, it is a disgrace, but only a political junky will become aware of this.
Diamonds or pearls anyone?
2
Jim C
// Nov 30, 2007 at 5:03 pm
You know, the sad thing is that most of those questions were designed to play to stereotypes. Take the Confederate flag question for example. It seemed to me that that question was designed to make Republicans look like hayseed chomping racists. There were several other questions that were designed to do the same thing (play to stereotypes).
Like Lex said, the Republican candidates should have known that they were walking into trouble. Quite frankly, I don’t think they should have ever agreed to the debate in the first place. Unfortunately, I don’t think they really had a choice either. If they had turned it down, they would have caught h*ll for it. They would have been accused of running from tough questions. Never mind that the Dems did the same thing by running from FOX (who would have been much fairer to the Dems than CNN was to the Republicans). Oh well, tis the season.
Jim C
3
Park Slope Pubby
// Nov 30, 2007 at 7:17 pm
I’m as conservative as they come, and I liked the debate. It was lively, and full of interesting responses, and I think that our candidates did very well in handling hostile questions. Good practice for the campaign, where the media is guaranteed to play gotcha on the Republicans. I think we Republicans should stop feeling sorry for ourselves, should make it clear that even if CNN was trying to destroy us, we can handle it. We should hold our heads high.
There were 8 interesting intelligent people on that stage, and I could personally vote for any one of them.
4
Pixelkiller
// Nov 30, 2007 at 7:53 pm
It’s a year, almost, to the election. We are all being subjected to this “hype” because the MSM needs something to fill the air with other than news or something important. Think Super Bowl or World Series. My eyes glaze over and I surf to the History channel. Or, to Instapundit on the internet. What-the-hell.
(And after Glenn Reynolds, Lex).
5
paul a'barge
// Nov 30, 2007 at 8:08 pm
What does this have to do with a frog or a scorpion?
6
Shannon Love
// Nov 30, 2007 at 8:28 pm
…the right-hand side of the blogosphere has enumbraged itself with CNN…
Enumbraged? Are you sure that is a word?
7
Shannon Love
// Nov 30, 2007 at 8:29 pm
paul a’barge,
It’s a reference to a classic parable of (IIRC) Indian orign.
8
Gerry
// Nov 30, 2007 at 8:56 pm
Paul a’barge,
The ‘frog and scorpian’ story was originally a droll (and rather nasty) commentary on goings on in the middle East. I first heard it in the late ’50s *(which sorta dates me).
The frog and scorpion are on a beach of the Nile. Scorpian wishes to cross the river and askes the Frog if he will give him (the Scorpian) a ride on his back across the wide river (the Scorpian does not swim). There is much hesitation and mistrust.
So the Frog says, ‘but why should I do that when I know that you have a poisonous stinger and I would be in deadly danger, but then the Scorpian thinks and then says, ‘but If I sting you, you would die, I would sink and die also’.
So the Frog thinks about that and agrees to transport the Scorpian on his back, who has, after all made some sense of the matter.
Half way across the Nile, the Scorpian stings the Frog, who says, ‘oh God why did you do that - I’m dying and also you will drown!!!’
The Scorpion says, ‘ah, but you don’t seem to understand, that this is the Middle East’.
Nor should I have to explain just who is ‘the Frog’ and who is ‘the Scorpian’.
Made sense to me then, while I lived in Libya, ‘58-’60, and still makes sense today. Gerry
*This story may very well go much further back than the ’50s.
9
Gerry
// Nov 30, 2007 at 9:05 pm
Shannon Love, I think I’ve run into you before. Thanks for the further historical examination. G
10
lex
// Nov 30, 2007 at 10:09 pm
The language lives Shannon Love - and I do my small part to breathe life into it
11
J.M. Heinrichs
// Nov 30, 2007 at 11:13 pm
No emanations, please.
Cheers
12
Acksiom
// Dec 1, 2007 at 4:17 am
Perhaps you should expend less effort upon trying to inspire a nominalization, and more effort upon the task of insightful analysis.
Such as, for example, considering the effect upon not only the republican/conservative/right-wing base, but the centrist purple swing voters as well, of the further, greater exposure of CNN’s gross partisan bias.
I could point out other significant upsides for the republicans, but I think I will generously leave them as an opportunity to learn by doing for others whom would not have otherwise thought that deeply.
13
lex
// Dec 1, 2007 at 5:05 am
I always love it when people from the circumcision debate come by and tell me how I ought to have handled a particular topic.
Refreshing, but altogether too rare, alas.
And yet, I cannot help but think that a light Swiftian touch, complete with tutorial fable, might haved done more than sour condescension to achieve just those aims you favor, Acksiom.
Each to their own.
14
bour3
// Dec 1, 2007 at 5:15 am
Paul a’barge was joking, I’m certain.
I don’t much care for the parable. Inconsistent. The premise of the story anthropomorphizes animals and has a frog coming waaaay out of character, yet the moral is about acknowledging the reliability of innate character.
Also, the questioners are here likened to scorpions. Yes, they were doing what they are apparently designed to do, bang on express concern about their particular bug up their butt grievance. And express it. And express it. And express it. At every gathering of more than 1 express it, every birthday party, every holiday, every funeral, wedding, bar mitzvah, baby shower, BBQ, every freaking garage sale, every lunch date, express it. Yes, they do what they do. But scorpions? No.
The plants were asking valid questions that are important to them. I don’t believe it’s possible for liberals to contrive a debate meaningful to conservatives. After all, they honestly believe conservatives generally to be worshipers of Bush/Cheeny/Halburton triunity, fascist neo-Nazi constitution shreaders, check that, burners. The little darlings aren’t scorpions.
This inability to lead a debate meaningful to the world-view of the opposition, they know about themselves better than conservatives do; they refused to walk into the trap, a debate hosted on Fox — not a consciously set trap, or a mean-spirited one, but a trap nonetheless, the naturally occurring result of human nature. They knew in their bones conservatives would be unable to fashion a debate, lead one, or host one that is meaningful to liberals. And that wasn’t being arachnoid either, just straight up common sense.
15
bour3
// Dec 1, 2007 at 5:24 am
No fair for this editor to drop the html tags it displays in preview.
16
Bod
// Dec 1, 2007 at 5:36 am
I think the more appropriate analogy is that CNN themselves are ‘the scorpion’, and not the questioners.
17
SeniorD
// Dec 1, 2007 at 5:42 am
Cap’n,
Three salient points:
1. The extended Press Conference we call ‘debates’ are nowhere near the classic debate form a’la Lincoln/Douglas. I really don’t care what the sound bite based polticos say at these events. I prefer to listen to their reasoning for holding to a point of view or policy matter. Then I’d like to hear rational discourse in a retorical setting. Of course, we’ll never see such events occur.
2. Between you and I, with respect, only one of us can truthfully say we are losing brain cells. As Nicolas Cage said in ConAir “I’m one and you’re not the other”.
3. GO NAVY!!!
18
rezzrovv
// Dec 1, 2007 at 6:09 am
This is the most pedantic, pretentious blog I have ever read. I think I like it.
19
Jim C
// Dec 1, 2007 at 6:31 am
bour3,
I agree with you that today’s liberals are incapable of fashioning a debate meaningful to conservatives… but not for the same reasons. I believe they can’t do it because they have mo interest in doing it. They wanted to make the Republican candidates look bad. They wanted to play to the stereotypes of racism, not caring about children, gay hating, gun toting, and the rest.
As far as the Democrats running from a debate hosted by FOX News… I believe that FOX would have been far more fair to the Democrats than CNN was to the Republicans.
Were the questions asked of the Republicans good? Yeah, I guess they were, but it was the way they were asked. They were asked in a “gotcha” manner by Democrat operatives… not every day Americans as advertised by CNN in the run up to the debate.
I believe it was Mark Strauss — (the guy who asked Ron Paul if he was going to run as an independent) who is actually a Bill Richardson supporter — who asked a question during the July Democratic Youtube debate. Is America such a small place that this “normal American” gets to ask questions in two different debates? Debates for two different parties? They say it’s a small world… but not that small.
Jim C
20
Brown Line
// Dec 1, 2007 at 7:31 am
The fable of the Frog and the Scorpion may originate in India, but its classic form appears in the tales of the ancient Greek fabulist AEsop. The punchline of the story is that the scorpion stings the frog despite the fact that both of them will drown; when the dying frog asks the scorpion “Why?”, the scorpion replies, “Because it is my nature to do so.” When someone here says that liberals or the MSM takes the role of the scorpion, we’re not comparing them to scorpions per se; rather, we’re saying that they do what they do because it is their nature to do so: that they are incapable of doing otherwise. So, CNN doesn’t play fair with the Republicans? Don’t expect anything else that from them: it’s not in their nature to do otherwise.
As our host points out, there’s no point in griping: that just how things are, and wishing won’t make it any better. As my kids would say, “Deal with it.”
21
Bart
// Dec 1, 2007 at 7:38 am
Gerry: It’s a little deeper than that. The scorpion says: “because I am a scorpion, and that is what I do.” It’s supposed to suggest that this is an innate character of the scorpion, and there is nothing you can do to change it. I disagree with the premise of the parable as applied to the Middle East that cultures are immutable.
22
Acksiom
// Dec 1, 2007 at 2:59 pm
A
23
Gabriel Hanna
// Dec 1, 2007 at 3:57 pm
Another part of the story is that the frog knew what the scorpion was when he agreed to give him a ride. The frog has no one to blame but himself, because as scorpion won’t do other than how he does no matter what’s in it for him.
24
Gabriel Hanna
// Dec 1, 2007 at 3:58 pm
The version I heard from the Middle East ended thusly:
Frog: Why did you sting me, I’ll drown too!
Scorpion: We’re both Arabs.
25
Acksiom
// Dec 1, 2007 at 4:48 pm
“- Original thoughts: Tends towards zero”:
My bad.
“- Ability to recognize a good idea: Tends towards infinite”:
Your bad.
26
Phil Andrilla
// Dec 2, 2007 at 8:31 am
While the election is a year away, the primaries that determine who we will be voting for is less than 2 months away (in those key states that either historically vote for the “winner”, or have so many electoral votes that they must be won to preserve the big pitcture. It all stems from the arrogance of several states political machines for wanting the bragging rights to picking the party candidate.
Since the parties haven’t yet moved up the nomination convention, the verbal sniping is going to get worse, trust me. Dirt will be manufactured, which we all know violates the law of conservation (love the pun), so I know I have to pay attention like it or not.
Leave a Comment