| Jan 21 2008; 9:53 AM | |
Editor: Will
Say what you will about the cable television networks, but their almost continuous coverage of the Democratic and Republican presidential races have provided some fascinating close ups of politics in the raw and opened the whole (sometimes sordid) process to public scrutiny. In the last few weeks we have seen Hillary Clinton “discover her own voice” (and Bill O’Reilly savaging her in what has to be – even for him - a new low in personal attacks); Mike Huckabee, the “Christian” candidate, preview an attack ad on Mitt Romney to the assembled press and then pull it at the last moment (there by making sure that the message of the ad if not the ad itself got wide coverage); Barack Obama being accused of drug dealing by the Clintons and fighting off a whisper campaign that claims he is a Muslim; John McCain successfully countering a scurrilous attempt to “swift boat” his campaign with claims of collaboration with the enemy while a prisoner of war and on Saturday night we got a bewildering and rambling speech from Fred Thompson that may or may not have been his swan song.
We have seen a former president of the United States attack a local television reporter who had the temerity to ask a pointed question and a former Governor of Massachusetts belligerently try to dodge legitimate questions from the Associated Press. We have had obfuscation on policies, out right lies on finances and blatant attempts to bribe the electorate – all live on our TV screens.
We have had town hall meetings, You Tube debates, press conferences, victory speeches and concession speeches, policy statements, clarifications, and apologies all accompanied by the staccato pronouncements of the pundits. Boy have we had pundits. In fact you could say we are up to our armpits in pundits. CNN (“the best political team on television”) covers the caucuses from two o’clock in the afternoon until midnight with as many as eight so-called experts offering their take on every twitch, cough, or stumble made by the candidates or their surrogates. “What does Obama’s win in a white state really mean?” “Did Hillary fake the tears?” “Is Mitt Romney’s religion holding him back?” “Has Rudy’s Florida strategy backfired?” “Why Hillary can’t lose.” “Why Hillary can’t win.” “McCain is dead in the water.” “McCain has the nomination sewn up.” “Obama is playing the race card.” “Clinton is playing the race card.” Any position you want to take, the pundits have given us. In fact the only thing that has been more entertaining than their prognostications is watching them back track when they are (inevitably) proven wrong.
We are in a veritable feeding frenzy of politics that began almost a year ago when candidates began announcing their intentions to run. Each week the intensity gets ratcheted up and the pronouncements more shrill and we have eight months left just to get to the conventions! For a political junkie it doesn’t get much better than this. I don’t know if Wolff Blitzer will make it to November, but I’ll be there, glued to the tube and watching one of the most fascinating presidential races since 1960. | | 7 Comments add a comment | | | | louis vuitton: Jun 7 2010, 5:29 AM
Where Perry and Lacoste forged Wedding Glovesthe brand trail, others have followed, with Bjorn Borg the best example.In the 1980s, notWedding Petticoat only did the Swede set a record with five straight Wimbledon titles, but his tight-fitting sportswear and trademark Louis Vuitton walletsheadband immediately singled him out as a style icon.Like Sharapova, his endorsement Louis Vuitton Replicaof other brands such as Diadora trainers and Fila sportswear massively boosted their profits and helped establish the companies as major industry players.Retiring at the tender age of 26, Borg fake Louis Vuittonhad some well-documented difficulties, but the fashion line he launched in 1987 has proved a commercial winner, promoting a daring range of underwear plus general sports and casual clothes and accessories.
|
|
| | brianc: Jan 23 2008, 4:57 PM
I saw it. It was pretty good TV - for a debate. Barack showed a good sense of humour - they all showed some smarts - and they all pretty much ordained McCain as the republican nominee.
|
|
| | mitsou: Jan 22 2008, 6:45 PM
I hear it continued today on the trail. CNN has been playing it up as if it was the best debate in modern times - but of course they broadcast it. Anyone a little more objective watch it and have a comment?
|
|
| | lefty: Jan 22 2008, 10:17 AM
It was entertaining - Great line about Hillary sitting on the board of Wal-Mart and great to see Edwards re enter the race with a strong performance.
|
|
| | dancer: Jan 22 2008, 10:12 AM
Last nights democratic debate was entertaining and based on this blog entry was one that I am sure the editor enjoyed. I look forward to his take on it and the rest of the races.
|
|
| | marie10: Jan 21 2008, 10:15 PM
It's been great so far - and it's only going to get better. Now they have a "new" topic to debate (and one they should have focused on earlier) - The Economy !
|
|
|
| |
Copyright © 2010 BreakingNewsOrNot.com
