Fred Barnes: Not Enough

The Weekly Standard ^ | 10/01/04 | Fred Barnes

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

"Not enough" is being kind. All the hoopla and even the idiot, Bill Kristol, saying that Kerry showed himself up for the job of CiC (gag!!!!!) disgusts me.

What did Kerry do that was any different than he's done all along? What qualified him to "win" the debate?

Nothing new but a few hundred more hand gestures and the open palm against his chest a zillion times. Was that supposed to depict passion?

Sheeesh. I must live in a different universe than most everyone else.

[ladyinred]

I am not so sure that Kerry is the one who put Bush on the defensive, at least not on his own. If you will look at a transcript it appears most of the questions were designed to do that very thing for him. No questions on Kerry's record.

[Mike Darancette]

Thing is --- Bush is probably over 50% already.

[John Lenin]

I really think Kerry lost bigtime tonight, on the biggest issues Bush handed Kerry his head. Kerry scored a few style points but Bush gave better answers to almost every question. I notice that AP and Reuters are being very cautious on saying Kerry won tonight. He lost bigtime and now it is up to the Bush team to point it out.

[LibertarianInExile]

Now I feel better. Barnes is a legit critic. Had to get throughout the cries of "THE SKY IS FALLING!" on here to find out the truth.

Kerry adds more flips and flops. More lies. Only now the press is national, not local, and every lie is instantly caught. This ain't the Massachusetts Senate Race, F'in. This is the White House. You don't get to lie anymore, not after Danny Boy got crucified for it.

You're going down faster than "the NYC subway."

[David1]

No, I think you miss heard Fred. Fred was the one that said he did not think the polls would tighten because of this debate.

[Dave S]

Perhaps it is worth noting that by every estimate Reagan lost his first debate to Walter Mondale in 1984.

I dont think the situations are the same. Reagan was a very popular President and we werent at war. Plus you forget, Mondale proudly told everyone that he was going to raise their taxes.

[Jenya]

So sad to say, but I think Bush was off his game. He didn't bomb by any means, but he didn't really deliver. I think he was tired. He looked tired. A lot of people have trouble with composing their thoughts when they're exhausted. I know I do. He had the posture of a tired man too.

I watched his interview with the Bloviator this week, and Bush did great. He looked well rested, and gave crisp answers.

Two more to go. He'll nail sKerry's ass the next time.

[rewrite]

I watch the post debate on Fox News. Fred said no such thing. His opinion was the same as this article.

[roaddog727]

Correct.

I watched the whole thing.

The prez caught on to that one and I expect that a bunch of the listening population did as well.

We do not need a permission slip from the UN or anyone else to defend ourselves.

To express that out loud is out and out lunacy.

[Reagan Man]

>>>>No questions on Kerry's record.

The debate wasn't about Kerry's past record. The debate was about America's current foreign policy. A few quesions did offer the impression they were pre-staged as a setup for Kerry to answer. OTOH, those same questions could be viewed as standard inquiries on foreign policy.

It was quite obvious on several occasions, the relentless attacks from Kerry frustrated the President. Reminded me of the last interview Bush gave to Tim Russert on MTP. Bush was very defensive during both events.

[chris1]

Exactly - GWB "Senator - there you go again - Flip Flopping on America's Support for its Troops."

That would have been priceless!!!!!!!!!!!

[lawgirl]

Kerry, on the other hand, is persuasive in the Washington sense, arguing his case knowledgeably with a specific or two

Because Washington=lawyers.