Charlie Cook is one of our most astute political analysts, and he was not impressed by John Kerry’s debate performance:
Personally, I thought that Kerry sounded like Thurston Howell III, the snooty and condescending millionaire from “Gilligan’s Island,” but more people were comfortable with that than they were with the President’s stammering and halting delivery and repetition of same phrases and arguments. Kerry’s strongest argument was on certainty, and he did get better as the debate progressed.
Equivocating with conviction is the new Kerry hallmark.
The problem with Bush was that he looked like a liar. And you know why?…
You’re hallucinating?
Equivocating with conviction?
Has a nice inner alliteration of v’s and c’s, of course, it doesn’t mean anything, but I do appreciate a good turn of phrase.
Remember some of the phrases that George Bush used to roll of his tongue with such conviction? Can’t you just hear George Bush saying, “weapons of mass destruction”,”weapons of mass destruction”,”weapons of mass destruction”.
No equivication there, eh?
Completely, totally wrong, but Bush “stayed the course” until more than a thousand American soldiers died.
There is a choice for you, a flip-flopper would be right half the time, eh? At worst we would be 50% stronger in the presidential position with Kerry.