Home > Uncategorized > Back in the time of Lincoln and Douglas…

Back in the time of Lincoln and Douglas…

September 26, 2008

Living back in Lincoln-Douglas’ time must have been no picnic.  No Tylenol!  No modern medicine, no Internet.  It was right before our bloodiest war took place (around 10 times as many US fatalities as in Vietnam). So time travel?  No thanks.

But one good thing… when those debates took place, people read them.  Sure, they saw pictures of the participants but the ideas took center stage.  It wasn’t tone of voice, it wasn’t who was better-looking or had the best makeup. The smooth delivery of a talking point didn’t have advantage over halting delivery of a thoughtful reply.  They could go over a paragraph again and again if they wanted to.

I’m not watching tonight’s debates.  Will look for transcripts tomorrow.  Will watch video clips after I’ve read the transcripts.

Liveblogging the debate:

  • BBC News

  • Vote For Science
  • I’m also not planning to watch W The Movie, a bio on GW Bush from Oliver Stone.  That’s just what we need in the current debate, isn’t it?  An over-the-top bio on the lame duck.  Regressives will seize upon any perceived inaccuracies and rally their base as if it had anything to do with anything what some Hollywood producer has to say.
Categories: Uncategorized
  1. September 26, 2008 at 23:13 | #1

    Interesting concept in today’s age, chose candidate based on ideas.

    I watched the last 10 minutes of the debate and got the idea I didn’t miss much. I guess, personally, there isn’t much a debate is going to change. Not that I can’t be persuaded, but I have already seen and read enough to know who I’m going to vote for.

  2. September 27, 2008 at 00:11 | #2

    Read the transcripts just now (well after it ended).  Looks as scripted as every other presidential debate.  Both knew what to say to what attacks, and they seemed to basically be allowed to deliver their mini speeches.

    I’ve watched a few US politcal interviewers over the years, and I am not impressed.  They don’t seem to have a killer instinct like Jeremy Paxman http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Paxman.

    The Michael Howard interview mentioned is on YouTube.  Although Paxman has said on a number of occasions this question about the prison service was to fill time, there was no reason to ‘fill time’ this way.  It looks like a he has found a weakness, knows he has, and is determined to exploit it.  When a top politician evades a yes/no question then you know something is up.

  3. September 27, 2008 at 02:07 | #3

    I’ll be interested in what you think of the debate, George.  So far as I can see, there were no new positions taken by either candidate. Of course, I didn’t expect any new, but it would have been nice if someone had shaken things up a bit.

  4. September 27, 2008 at 08:11 | #4

    Not only do I now watch “debates”, including the one last night, I don’t read the transcripts, either (or, of course, watch replays). I did, however, while channel surfing (there was nothing on TV last night!), run across the CNN HD broadcast of the debate. I stayed only long enough to see the little scorecards up and down the sides. What a load of B.S.! Maybe they should get a guy with a hook.

  5. September 28, 2008 at 08:50 | #5

    Obviously, I meant “Not only do i not watch debates . . . ”

Comments are closed.