The press spins its wheels furiously trying to explain the unexplainable: why a candidate for president would say and do such stupid things which can so easily be used against him by his opponents.
Incidentally, Kerry is campaigning during the convention, violating traditional truce terms which dictate that each candidate cool its campaign while the other has its convention. Can’t say I’m surprised.
Oof. This interview with Terry McAuliffe is entertaining, if a bit unfair. Then again, what did he expect? This wasn’t the liberal Chris Matthews playing “Softball”, and he is at the RNC.
McAuliffe was right about one thing, Hewitt was lying when he said that Bush “John Kerry called the President – I want to get it right – craven, stupid, and pathetic.” According to this partial transcript, Kerry was responding to a question “on how Republicans have painted him more the protester than the warrior” and he said, “I think it’s just pathetic. It indicates how craven they are. You know, in the dark of night I might call them some names, but I just think it’s kind of stupid. I really do.” So he wasn’t talking about “the President” at all — he was talking about Republicans in general. And he didn’t call them pathetic or stupid — he called their actions pathetic and “kind of stupid.” The only actual insult he hurled at them was “craven,” but even that is not directed at “the President.”
UPDATE: Here’s a partial transcript of the GQ interview, but it doesn’t contain the quote in question — that apparently appears only in the print edition.
Thanks for clarifying that, Brendan. When I read it, I was a little skeptical about the veracity, as McAuliffe seemed unprepared for the charges and I hadn’t heard anything else in the media. Hugh is generally a nice, amenable guy with his guests, but he’s not necessarily fair all the time.
On the other hand, I consider it an unmitigated glee when anyone dares to hold McAuliffe’s feet to the flames. He says so many dumb and outlandish things, especially since he’s been chairman of the DNC.
In general, I’d say your party has way a lot more really likable people than mine. I’m still a Democrat, though, for a similar reason to why I still prefer Letterman to Leno even though Leno has better writers: Letterman is fundamentally funnier, and the Democrats are fundamentally right about more things, so even if the other side has more talent on their side of the fence at the moment, I’m standing firm.
Though I think I’d say that I’m more solidly in Letterman’s camp than I am in the Democrats’. :)
September 1st, 2004 at 1:09:34 pm
The press spins its wheels furiously trying to explain the unexplainable: why a candidate for president would say and do such stupid things which can so easily be used against him by his opponents.
Incidentally, Kerry is campaigning during the convention, violating traditional truce terms which dictate that each candidate cool its campaign while the other has its convention. Can’t say I’m surprised.
September 1st, 2004 at 2:28:03 pm
Oof. This interview with Terry McAuliffe is entertaining, if a bit unfair. Then again, what did he expect? This wasn’t the liberal Chris Matthews playing “Softball”, and he is at the RNC.
September 1st, 2004 at 2:48:24 pm
McAuliffe was right about one thing, Hewitt was lying when he said that Bush “John Kerry called the President – I want to get it right – craven, stupid, and pathetic.” According to this partial transcript, Kerry was responding to a question “on how Republicans have painted him more the protester than the warrior” and he said, “I think it’s just pathetic. It indicates how craven they are. You know, in the dark of night I might call them some names, but I just think it’s kind of stupid. I really do.” So he wasn’t talking about “the President” at all — he was talking about Republicans in general. And he didn’t call them pathetic or stupid — he called their actions pathetic and “kind of stupid.” The only actual insult he hurled at them was “craven,” but even that is not directed at “the President.”
September 1st, 2004 at 2:51:27 pm
UPDATE: Here’s a partial transcript of the GQ interview, but it doesn’t contain the quote in question — that apparently appears only in the print edition.
September 1st, 2004 at 2:54:49 pm
Thanks for clarifying that, Brendan. When I read it, I was a little skeptical about the veracity, as McAuliffe seemed unprepared for the charges and I hadn’t heard anything else in the media. Hugh is generally a nice, amenable guy with his guests, but he’s not necessarily fair all the time.
On the other hand, I consider it an unmitigated glee when anyone dares to hold McAuliffe’s feet to the flames. He says so many dumb and outlandish things, especially since he’s been chairman of the DNC.
September 1st, 2004 at 3:18:06 pm
Agreed. McAuliffe is an ass.
In general, I’d say your party has way a lot more really likable people than mine. I’m still a Democrat, though, for a similar reason to why I still prefer Letterman to Leno even though Leno has better writers: Letterman is fundamentally funnier, and the Democrats are fundamentally right about more things, so even if the other side has more talent on their side of the fence at the moment, I’m standing firm.
Though I think I’d say that I’m more solidly in Letterman’s camp than I am in the Democrats’. :)
September 1st, 2004 at 3:19:19 pm
“way a lot” … hehe … I’m, like, way a lot smart, and stuff! :)