I guess Shrub is running scared, and it appears more likely now they will skip debate number 2 thinking that he has more to lose in 3 debates versus 2 debates. The loser of course, are the voters and the undecideds in Missouri. Just reinforces to me how uneasy Shrub is in being in front of the microphone as usual. Lets see, when was the last Preisdential news conference????

Looks like it's time to bring back the Chicken George costume from '92.

You can wear one to the Oct. 30 debate in Coral Gables...if he doesn't find some lame reason not to do it.

This REALLY pisses me off -- but should not be a surprise.

[ September 08, 2004, 09:56 AM: Message edited by: bobby78751 ]

I hate the way Bush pre-spins the debates, setting such low expectations that when he does ok, and he will do ok, but not great, then the spin is how well he did, how he did better than expectations. My guess is that the debates will be a draw.

Any incumbant is going to set as few debates as possible, to minimize exposure for the challenger. That said, we need more than just 2 debates. Didn't 2000 have 3 and 1996 have 3 or 4?

This is the schedule when there were three Prez debates and one VP debate planned...

First presidential debate:
University of Miami
Coral Gables, FL
Thursday, September 30

Vice presidential debate:
Case Western Reserve University
Cleveland, OH
Tuesday, October 5

Second presidential debate:
Washington University in St. Louis
St. Louis, MO
Friday, October 8

Third presidential debate:
Arizona State University
Tempe, AZ
Wednesday, October 13

The Link

Since Chicken George refused to talk to MTV and sent out John McCaine to do it instead, maybe he'll send McCaine to debate Kerry. I think Kerry should show up at the debate site, even if it is yanked from the schedule.

Too bad he can't send McCain; McC and Kerry would make for an intellectually stimulating discussion, as both men have functioning gray matter.

W is going to show up only because he HAS TO, and give his folksy BS performance, and the cowed media will claim, no matter how badly he comes off (as in his press conferences, where he was worse than the random, incoherent people the local TV correspondents always find to talk about someone who just got murdered or run over by a van or arrested for kiddie porn, etc.), that the debate was a "draw," before they rush to claim that Kerry was too "nuanced" or "wordy" or "lofty" or some other such RNC-scripted bullcrap. As if the issues we face as a nation and as individuals in 2004 can be reduced to inane bullet points, and we can only talk about them in simple declarative sentences that verge on babytalk. But that's the RNC/ROVE aim, isn't it?

I just hope--PRAY--that Kerry will challenge W when he lies outright. Just say: "Mr. Bush, you know that simply isn't true. Tell the people the truth." On about 40 issues, he can state this without stepping over the line. On WMDs. On W's opposition to the $87 billion at first. On W's opposition to the 9/11 commission. On W's opposition to the Homeland Security Dept. On W's failure to commit sufficient troops to Afghanistan to seize ObL. On W's past relationships with the bin Laden family and the Saudi Royals. On W's refusal to allow Senate and House committees to investigate a Saudi linked to two of the 9/11 terrorist-monsters. On his gutting of environmental regulations. On No Child Left Behind. Etc.

Above all, Kerry can't be decorous, genteel, magnimous, gentlemanly, whiny or finical, as if this were a debate at the élite St. Paul's School or Jonathan Edwards College at Yale. He had better be ready for any of the tricks Rove will coach W on--and if anything appears to be a trick statement, he should set the record straight and then NOT let himself be bogged down.

He didn't in the Air National Gaurd.

Or maybe there'll be a regularly scheduled terror alert.

Have we become so jaded, so desensitized that we can actually joke about a terror alert? Part of me thinks that was part of Chimp Co.'s plan. Numb the populace into a constant state of unease--invoke terror/Al-Qaida/Hussein at every friggin moment--and then, at the opportune time, do something heroic to prove the War on an Ideology was correct all along.

Debates would only hinder that plan. Notice how that son-of-a-bitch has avoided press conferences; notice how he's avoided actually engaging in non-scripted conversation. He's an idiot with great handlers.

Now the local Miami TV stations and the Miami Herald are reporting that the 1st debate set for September 30th at the University of Miami is in jeopardy because Bush will not confirm his appearance. [registration required]

Kerry has signed on for all the proposed debates but Bush is scared of the St. Louis format for the second debate with the questions being asked by undecided voters. Now he's playing games with the Miami debate to try to get out of the St. Louis debate.

What a chump! What is he scared of? Can't he take his case to the people without being filtered through ad agencies?

[ September 17, 2004, 06:07 AM: Message edited by: KeyWest Guy ]

Bush is a completely incompenent boob! He will definitly try his best to avoid any of these debates, and the ones (or one) he does show up to will be him and his talking points. Fortunately Kerry is finally up and running. I truly can't wait to hear Kerry's plan about how to solve Iraq. Because we need a plan about how to solve Iraq and to get on with the real business of protecting our borders and managing all the WMD that are in fact loose in the world (Russia). Before the current administration f**ks us over again!

Bush is a coward! Bush is a coward! Bush is a coward! I can't say it enough!

I would urge my fellow Democrats to go to the Kerry website and check for debate parties in your area. I know I have, and there are many. I think this sounds like fun.

Shrub fina agreed to all three debates.

Shrub and I finally agree on something. Now it's up to the liberal media and the gay mafia to pack the town hall debate with secretive Kerry operatives to pepper Bush with hard questions. If you ask me, it's a great "strategery."

I think people should be careful not to "misunderestimate" President Bush or to over-estimate the willingness of his supporters to overlook his failings. He has ruled by fear -threats and implied threats, both military and political. Many assumed that the scandal over the President's National Guard service would cause patriotic citizens to abandon him. Instead many seem to wallow in denial and accept the scantiest of evidence that justifies their continued support. Debates may not change minds.

True, but in reading an article about the debates this morning, its estimated that 29% may be undecided and will be watching and listening intently.

This morning, it looks like an agreement is not finalized.
CNN Story

It looks like Bush isn't the only illiterate one in his campaign:

"No deal has been reached. Reports of a tentative agreement -- I don't even know what that means -- are false," said Nicolle Devenish, communications director for the Bush campaign, said late Sunday.

Huh, she doesn't understand "tentative agreement"? Isn't that basically what HW had with Saddam before Reagan-Bush's favorite Middle East dictator rolled into Kuwait and didn't want to leave?

I hardly "misunderestimate" W. He is pretty shrewd and canny when he wants to be, and he is going to play up that fake-phony folksy crapola act for ALL IT'S (ITS) WORTH.

The one wildcard is the "town hall" style debate, which won't be as controlled, and which will allow citizens (and anybody else, for that matter) the LONE opportunity to question W in a setting that hasn't been managed down to loyalty oaths and the usual GOP nonsense. W is worried about "hecklers," but the truth is, he doesn't want anyone to press him with any tough questions.

Instead of having gay mafia and liberals packing that debate, I'd at least like to see regular Americans--true undecideds--asking BASIC questions of W, like:

-Why do you claim the situation in Iraq is so rosy when ALL indications, including a secret report by our intelligence services (that you were given in JULY!) AND numerous reports by military and scholarly analysts, show that things are actually quite dire over there, and worsening?
-Why do you keep making claims about the economy that are NOT borne out by the facts and numerous indices, and what are your concrete plans for ending the job losses that have occurred under you (over 1.3 million since 2001) and the steady rise in outsourcing?
-What is your plan to get other nations to fund the cost of rebuilding Iraq, which is currently being foisted on US taxpayers alone, to the tune of $200 billion and counting?
-Why did you pass a Medicare bill that will allow prices to jump in 2006, penalizing the majority of seniors, and why are you allowing the current premiums to rise at a time when the economy is not growing and many seniors simply cannot afford it?
-What are you going to do about the steady rise in prescription drug prices, and why won't you push for importation of drugs from Canada and federal negotation with the drug companies, to help seniors pay for their costly prescriptions?
-Why were you pushing for cuts in overtime pay at a time when millions of American families are struggling to get by and NEED this money?
-Why are you planning to cut funding to the FAA given how vulnerable our national aviation system is during this "war on terror"?
-Why are you gutting environmental regulations yet making claims to the contrary?
-Given your recent admission of the dangers of global warming (and the results we've seen with the increase in devastating Atlantic hurricanes and the melting of the polar ice cap, both a result of the warming ocean), what concrete plans are you going to take both in terms of the US's actions on reducing pollutants, and on working with developing nations to turn global warming around?

And so on. I mean, these are BASIC questions that the media refuse to ask, so perhaps regular citizens will ask them of W. They're not Bush-Hating, but basic questions we should be asking not only of W, but of our Congress, Republicans, Democrats and independents.

Kerry is regularly peppered with questions about everything, down to his haircut (shades of Clinton & Gore), his choice of pastimes, his plans for Iraq, etc.

Since W never holds press conferences anymore, and Congress is far too passive in dealing with him, this will be the one chance we have as citizens to ask some tough questions. (God, it sounds almost like I'm talking about Haiti or Syria or something!

[ September 20, 2004, 11:51 AM: Message edited by: fantomas ]

John Kerry announced on Letterman last night that an agreement has been reached on the three debates with the third being an audience-based question format. Also, one VP debate is scheduled, too. Something tells me the "October surprise" W probably has planned will prevent all three debates.

Yep, they will find Osama Bin Forgotten in October or at least thaw him out. Oh and then there will be the discovery of the WMD in Iran and oh yes we will be told of the impending doom of a Cuban take over of the United States. We will go to code red, all the polling sites will be shut down and Marshall Law instated. We will get to vote maybe next year sometime or not at all.

Gosh, I hope I am only kidding here. eek!