Brad DeLong's Semi-Daily Journal: A Weblog

ditto. Yet he is neck and neck in the polls. Does anyone know why?

Ok, you and I agree. But we both have PhDs, and, forgive me for venturing the guess, were not the guys who got laid through high school. This is a stupid gut check and popularity contest, not an IQ or knowledge test, and it's being administered by a large number of freaking morons.

I thought Dick Cheney just seemed drained during the debate, especially towards the end, when he was passing on questions. I could look at him and say, "Yes, this guy could have been president 15 years ago."

Finally. The debate moderator tried to nail Kerry on the real reasons companies out source. Not because of tax breaks, but because of cheap labor. Notice Kerry ducked. Notice how he tries to avoid the obvious: his position is really no different than Bush’s with regard to out sourcing. No I’m not saying this make Kerry the same as Bush. But let’s hold both these guys to the same standard. Let’s try to be just a little bit “fair and balanced” for a change.

One of Bush's business buddies from the 80s (I think he was on the board of Harken) once said of the Chimp, "If you'd asked me to pick 25 million people who could be president someday, he wouldn't have been on the list".

I think there's a very serious problem going on here that no one's addressing.

Bush, because he's an idiot and invents his own realities, can stand there on the stage and spew complete lie after lie and irrelevancy after irrelevancy and do it with all the conviction of a preacher.

I think the problem is people believe his lies. And he's going to win the election and America is going to sink to second-world status even faster.

Kerry's plan of attack should change dramatically from policy clarification and defense of himself to: "That's a lie." "The president tells you these lies and expects you to believe it". "The president lives in a dreamworld where everything he thinks is right, but he doesn't really understand anything."

People need to be made aware of this con artist, and Kerry's got to start doing it RIGHT NOW.

A. Zarkov, there's nothing to be "balanced" about; a "fair" judgement is that Kerry is a politician who will avoid upsetting key constiuencies and hedge his words appropriately, whereas bush is a shallow little ideologically blinkered liar.

I wish this weren't so; i wish bush were merely a politician with whom i disagree. But it is.

BTW, Manish, never forget that 42% of Americans think that Saddam was part of 9/11; ergo, bush only needs a very small percentage of the rest of americans. You can fool some of the people all of the time.

Ergos: I do not buy your argument. There has to be something more than just education. I know that the rich will vote for Bush, and most of them are 'educated'.

As for outsourcing, I agree with Zarkov. It was important to get that out in the open. If not any one else, Lou Dobbs would definitely take up that issue. Kerry could not do much more than duck the question.

I always check Tradesports.com for a reality check. People are paying real money for their opinion. It looks like Bush took a major hit from the 2nd debate, even more so than from the first.

A. Zarkov: "Fair and balanced" sounds like the motto for Fox News. It's doublespeak.

I must tell you that I feel better knowing that prospective appointees to the Supreme Court must pass the Dred Scott litmus test.

"Yet he is neck and neck in the polls. Does anyone know why?"

I grew up in red counties, and lived most of my adult life in red counties in both red and blue states. There is a large fraction of the voting population who are one issue voters. For example: "Mr. Candidate, are you in favor of gun control?" and the answer is "No, but..." and as soon as you say "but" you lost a vote. No nuance allowed. No exceptions allowed.

I was speaking last week with someone who is bright, well-educated, and otherwise a very reasonable person, but whose button is tax increases. If a candidate even suggests that there are conditions under which it would be appropriate to raise taxes, he will vote against them.

As a black man, I'm going to have to vote for Bush now. Finally, someone takes a stand on slavery.

I hate Bush with a passion, but I must say that I thought he performed fine tonight.

I strongly disagree with him on all points where he and Kerry differ, but he did fine.

howard:

“Kerry is a politician who will avoid upsetting key constiuencies (sic) and hedge his words appropriately ...”

It’s more than simply “hedging” his words. He is trying to completely misrepresent his position. Edwards tried the same thing. They are trying to make their position on out sourcing a distinguishing factor. They are telling the public over and over that these companies out source (mainly) because of the tax advantages, and they know this is incorrect as Kerry’s own campaign officials admit. Kerry is also a hypocrite on this issue as some of his biggest campaign contributors out source.

Kevin:

I guess my sarcasm was not evident. Of course “fair and balanced” is a junk phrase, just like “tax the rich” (shades of Huey Long).

If liars really do burn in Hell, Bush, Karen Hughes, Sean Hannity, et al will be roasting for all of eternity.

A. Zarkov, at the margin, what kerry is proposing will make a modest difference; he's hardly misrepresenting his position. But as i say, he's a politician, behaving like every other politician.

there is no equivalence between that and the continuing demonstration of the bush-cheney team's residence in a parallel (and delusional) reality.

PS. Yes, i'd prefer if kerry-edwards didn't try and play cute on outsourcing, but the great is the enemy of the good. It's nothing compared to how much i'd prefer it if our president and vice president respected facts and reason.

I really think the "name three mistakes questions" was the real stake into the vampire's heart. It froze him. It could be seen it the face of the audience. They knew he blew it, and blew it big time. This was his chance to dispel all the concern about him being inflexible, rigid, detached from reality. Instead, he reinforced all of those concerns. Of the whole debate, those two minutes were he couldn't bring himself to say, "Yes, I've made some woppers," and tick off three simple examples, any three, will stick in the minds of everybody who watched.

I think it's undeniable that Bush performed better this time. What most repelled me was the utterly dishonest clown show that followed on CNN. It would be hard to find two more dishonest, cynical, shifty con men than Ken Mehlman and Marc Racicot, but Tucker Eskew's ecstatic endorsement of all things Bush is truly frightening.

howard:

Fair enough. BTW, I think the dictum is “The best is the enemy of the good.” However, I have more. Neither candidate seems to understand what the Patriot Act actually says and how it is really applied. The controversial part of the Patriot Act is section 285 which essentially only slightly modifies the provisions Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978. Then there is the business of stem cell research. There is no law against stem cell research, only government funding for stem cell research. Thus private researchers are free to engage in this activity. Notice that Kerry said Bush made it “impossible” for scientists to do this kind of research. Not true. This is not hedging-- it’s deception.

He did FINE? Have our standards really fallen that low?

Perhaps my brain has been sizzled with shrillness, but Bush looked like a raving lunatic. If in the last debate he looked like a 7th grader who hadn't prepared for the oral exam, this time he appeared like a 7th grader who spent his time sniffing glue in place of studying. Honestly, I'd cast my ballot for and any one of the audience members who asked the questions before voting for that man.

The stem cell issue is complex. Certainly private researchers can work on stem cells. But we all know that the real investigative work historically has been done in the university setting. So, either the work is not done, or the professors quit teaching. Sounds a lot like a nuance to me, and too hard to discuss in this setting with the republican vultures ready to pounce.

Second, there are problems with private research on stem cells. The first is that there is neither government nor institutional oversight of the work. It is easy to imagine a parade of horribles from that, but it seems like a nuance.

Third, private research is privately owned. Do we want that for drugs for Alzheimers? for basic research on the nature of these cells? Another nuance.

Prohibition is close enough for that setting, and you can bet that Kerry knows this stuff, and that Bush just knows that he made a decision, so it is right.

DUBYA was way too hyper. He acted like a Pentacostal Preacher at tent revival not a Predisend at a Town Hall. He should have been give a Bible and a snake for each hand.

Too much shouting from Bush. I could barely hear myself curse.

Too much shouting from Bush. I could barely hear myself curse.

Yeah, and Tucker Eskew confirming that Bush can cure cancer.

Manish, I wish you were right but you simply missed the point.
You make two inferences that are at best doubtful. On the first, rich does not equate smart. Poor does not equate moron. There might be some correlation but I'd be surprised if it was very strong. As for the second, not all "rich" people vote Bush (ask me if you want more data, but it's quite easy to find) and, in spite of what he does to them, Bush has a strong support among some poor categories.
As for the poor of the mind, they like simple arguments coming from a guy they could have a beer with (or so they think). They are not educated to question, especially authority. They get lost in the complexities of the issues. Take the example of abortion rights. Kerry tried to convey the actual complexity, Bush tried to ridicule him. I know who looked a fool to me but I perceive who looks undecided (hence weak) to the feable minds.

The stem cell business is truly weird. Because research institutions charge NIH and other government agencies "facility and administrative costs (AKA overhead)" for charges which cannot be directly allocated, they cannot do stem cell research on other than the majic lines in buildings or other places for whose use overhead has been charged.

This means you have to put up a new building to do such research, at a minimum. Which is why it is a big deal

One suggestion for Kerry's debating points:

When Bush mentions the votes Kerry's missed while campaigning, Kerry should

TALK ABOUT ALL THE VACATION TIME BUSH HAS TAKEN AS PRESIDENT!!!

Bush has taken over a fifth of his time as president on vacation. Even ignoring Bush's regular imcompetance, no one can doubt that his laziness as president has contributed to the poor state of our national security and economy today.

"That's why I proposed a hydrogen automobile -- hydrogen-generated automobile." - we finally find out why it's so hard being President... he's got a second job as enviro-technology visionary.

For Bush it's faith in faith that counts, not faith in facts.
See this: "The Puritans live! And the shrewd men of the Bush administration have expertly hotwired the president to the galvanic energy-source of Puritan tradition. It's as if America, since 9/11, has been reconstituted as a colonial New England village: walled-in behind a stockade to keep out Indians (who were seen as in thrall to the devil); centred on its meeting house in whose elevated pulpit stands Bush, the plain-spun preacher, a figure of nearly totalitarian authority in the community of saints."
--Jonathan Raban on George Bush's debt to the Puritans
Jonathan Raban, The Guardian
Wednesday October 6, 2004

For Bush it's faith in faith that counts, not faith in facts.
See this: "The Puritans live! And the shrewd men of the Bush administration have expertly hotwired the president to the galvanic energy-source of Puritan tradition. It's as if America, since 9/11, has been reconstituted as a colonial New England village: walled-in behind a stockade to keep out Indians (who were seen as in thrall to the devil); centred on its meeting house in whose elevated pulpit stands Bush, the plain-spun preacher, a figure of nearly totalitarian authority in the community of saints."
--Jonathan Raban on George Bush's debt to the Puritans
Jonathan Raban, The Guardian
Wednesday October 6, 2004

Kerry is magnificent! Smart, DISCIPLINED.
He knows that he has this minimal opportunity (4.5 hrs total) to accomplish certain defined goals and he stays focused.
And isn't it ridiculous that out of the millions of dollars spent on this election over a years time, these 4.5
hours are the only opportunity that WE the people have to evaluate them side by side?
MORE debates!!

Another Bushism: he mispoke again and I am not sure anyone noticed when he said...
"if [Kerry had been in command], Saddam would still be in power, and the world would be a better place". Really... need to find that quote and play it over and over again!

Bush was blinking at a very rapid pace when Kerry was talking. Also, his jaw movements were rather noticeable. In all seriousness, I think those jaw movements indicate he is on anti-pyschotic or other pyschiatric medicine. If you've been around people on anti-psychotics that kind of jaw movement is very familiar.

Bush did NOT take his annual physical this year, and there is no report on his health from the White House. He was almost out of control several times today.

As a matter of urgent, non-partisan public interest, the press and public figures need to pressure the White House to issue such a report, to allay fears that Bush is not mentally competent.

Allay fears? "that Bush is not mentally competent"

Fear that the Commander in Chief is a bit Captain......Queegish?

From what little of the debate I saw, Bush did fine with his base. He spewed out the lies they wanted to hear, which is that all their problems are, uhm, Bill Clinton's fault (?), and yes he looked a bit the Pentecostal preacher tonight, but look, I remember watching Jimmy Swaggart and Oral Roberts at their hyper best in their prime, and his base ate it up.

The problem is that I don't think he's winning the credibility gap with the middle third of the electorate. You put a, well, Presidential, person like John F. Kerry on the stage beside him stating that the sky is blue, and Shrubby looks like a raving lunatic when he insists that no, the sky is a nice shade of puce. His base doesn't believe anything Kerry says due to the "flip-flop" meme that Rove started pushing back in February, so will believe Shrubby when Shrubby says the sky is a nice shade of puce, but that's only a third of the electorate.

While Bush has to keep his base firm, that's not going to win him the election. He has to keep some of those somewhat moderate types too, the ones who voted for him in 2000 because he promised to be a moderate Republican rather than an extremist, a uniter not a divider. The problem is that he hasn't proven to be very moderate nor very Republican (given that only half of the deficit can be explained by increased military spending -- the rest is pure pork domestic spending). Rove's strategy of painting the other candidate as a weak waffler who won't defend the nation from terrorists as well as Shrubby has is a strategy born of desperation rather than the kind of slam dunk that Rove would prefer.

In other words, Kerry did not need to come to this debate needing to slam Bush to the ground. He merely needed to come to the debate looking Presidential. At that, he succeeded. While it would have been gratifying to see Shrubby slammed to the floor and put in a headlock, it wasn't necessary. Shrubby's done too good a job of backing himself into a corner all by himself, and Rove's desperate strategy of painting Kerry as a weak waffler is falling flat when the two stand beside each other on the same stage and Kerry more than holds his own. Kerry's statements about the sky being blue, side by side with Bush's statements claiming the sky is puce, forces the people to make a decision about who is telling the truth. Bush seemed sincere enough, but people on the fence were more likely to think "poor guy, he's out of his depth spinning frantically" rather than "he's right!"

Cheney, on the other hand, had both Bush's sincerity and a gravitas that Bush lacked. I honestly think Darth Cheney won that debate with Edwards. Yes, Darth Cheney looked like some evil Star Wars villain, clutching his hands and hunched over like a frog, but look, he was sharp as a tack and quick with the facts (nevermind that virtually all of them were lies) and the most credible-sounding liar that I've ever come across. Cheney lost the POST-debate, when the media started realizing, "whoa, virtually everything Cheney said was a bald and blatant lie!", but if you just saw the debate with no knowledge outside of what you saw there and did not catch any of the post-debate coverage where Cheney's lies started getting uncovered, Cheney won.

And as for why Cheney did not fall over with a heart attack, I suspect that it is because after his last heart attack, he had his heart removed and replaced with a sphere of pure pulsating evil. It'd explain a lot, wouldn't it? :-).

- Badtux the Snarky Penguin

masaccio:

Nice try at spin. But when Kerry says:

“And the president has chosen a policy that makes it impossible for our scientists to do that. I want the future, and I think we have to grab it.”

It’s not a matter of complexity, or problems with private research, or even who owns the fruits of that research. It’s simply that Kerry’s declarative statement is wrong.

I missed the first debate. This was an improvement for Bush?

Kerry was almost scarily intelligent. I wouldn't want to debate him on nationwide TV.

Zarkov is right, our scientists can move to other countries to carry out stem cell research. Kerry's declarative statement is parsively wrong.

Rabett:

Or American scientists could seek funding from other countries, or from private foundations or even go out and raise venture capital. They can then buy or otherwise obtain embryonic stem cell tissue. Note that the UK has very strict rules governing stem cell research there, possibly more strict than a scientist here would have using non-government funds.

I strongly disagree with A. Zarkov on Stem Cells.

The President has created a policy that has made it impossible for _our_ scientists to do their work.

_our_ scientists have been leaving _our_ country in order to do their work abroad.

And that means that this work will create intellectual property for other countries, and build the industry of other countries.

The difference between 'impossible' and 'effectively impossible' just doesn't matter.

America's strength has largely rested on American Science. George Bush has attacked American Science. Bush has hugely damaged our scientific infrastructure. He has done far more damage to our country than Sadaam ever did!

Gibson:

Tell us how it’s “impossible” for our scientists to work on stem cell research. Is this line of research so risky and unlikely to bear fruit that only government money is available? If not than why wouldn’t private money be available support this kind of thing? I don’t agree with the Bush policy, but short of making it illegal I don’t understand why this kind of work can’t go forward?

If you feel the need to be kept up of nights, and need to fight off sleep, contemplate the fact that somewhere between 40 and 60 million Americans believe that this man has been chosen by God Almighty, out of all people, and sent as a special dispensation to America to save the nation in this, its hour of greatest danger.

Works better than strong coffee for me.

And it looks as though God's HR Department isn't working as hard as it should.

Hey Zarkov, even if US scientists got money to do the research from other countries/ foundations/ industry, the work would have to be done in labs which had never benefitted from US government support and could not be supported by instrumentation which had been purchased using US government funds. Given that a decent electron microscope goes for ~ 700K$, that is a sufficient barrier. Then there is the thicket of state laws. Better to move to another country where such institutional barriers don't exist. Korea for example

Rabett:

Funding an electron microscope is chickenfeed. There are lots of biotech projects that use no government money at all. It’s not equipment that eats up the money as much as salaries. I think the real problem is that this line of research is somewhat speculative. But again, it’s far from “impossible” to do research. Bush does not want to emphasize that his ban on using new embryos doesn’t apply to the private sector because he wants to play to his conservative Christian constituency. On the other hand, Kerry wants an issue, so he’s playing the deception game too. I’ll bet 95% if the public thinks the ban applies across the board.

Your safe Online Pharmacy

Buy cheap Soma online

home mortgage loan

Online Masters Degree Programs

online casino

mortgage leads

mortgage leads

7545 http://www.blackjack-1000.com
PlLAY the best blackjack-1000.com
debt consolidation only.

2047 http://www.i--cialis.net
Offering Cialis with overnight delivery. Also, If your looking for generic cialis this is a good site to visit.

refinance mortgage

4175 Kona Coffee Starbucks Coffee Jamaica Blue Mountain
Coffee
coffee maker gourmet coffee green mountain coffee kenya coffee organic coffee specialty coffee folgers coffee coffee brewers costa rica coffee Tullys Coffee Millstone Coffee coffee grinder http://www.coffee-delivered.com

xenical
xenical

7974
directv
direct tv directv satellite direct tv satellite directv dvr direct tv dvr direct tv tivo directv tivo directway
direcway
directway internet directway satellite direcway internet direcway internet free hbo free cinemax free dvd player satellite radio http://www.satellitetvboutique.com

directv
direct tv
directv satellite direct tv satellite directv dvr direct tv dvr direct tv tivo directv tivo directway
direcway
directway internet directway satellite direcway internet direcway internet free hbo free cinemax free dvd player satellite radio http://satellite-tv.cjb.net

HGH Oral Spray. Human Growth Hormone.

I chose this in reference to the other site

HGH Oral Spray. Human Growth Hormone.

Vivid Page