October 1, 2004 by lonbud

Tweedledum & Tweedledee?

For everyone out there who worries that we face a choice between tweedledum and tweedledee in this election season, last night’s debate between George W. Bush and John Kerry made one thing perfectly clear: the choice is between tweedledum and a guy who might actually be able to handle the job of leading the most powerful nation on earth.

I believe we can leave aside for a moment questions of substance because one can always differ on and debate issues of strategy and policy. Reasonable people may disagree with Mr. Kerry’s strategic designs for recalibrating America’s foreign policy, but he cannot be faulted for failing to make his ideas clear. He at least was able to articulate his plans in such a way as to invite reasoned debate on the likelihood of their success in making the country and the world a safer place.

Mr. Bush, on the other hand, when he managed to express a coherent thought, offered nothing more than a mantra: we cannot send mixed signals to the terrorists or the troops; we must stay on the offensive; this is hard work.

I watched the debate on C-Span because I wanted the raw footage. The idea of listening to commentators from the FOX network, or CNN, or any of the major broadcast entities gave me a queasy feeling; I wanted to observe and let the candidates’ words and presence give me the tell on who is who and what is what in this election. And C-Span did a great job. They just put up a split screen so you could watch both men as they listened and spoke. No fancy angle changes or zooming in and out, just a straight shot of the two guys who would have the American electorate invest them with the power and the authority to lead the nation for the next four years.

It is inconceivable to me that anyone could prefer Mr. Bush over Mr. Kerry based on what we saw last night.

What kind of person do we expect our President to be? Do we expect someone with a bearing of strength and resolution? Someone with a command of thought and language who can think under pressure and express ideas with lucidity and clarity? Someone who can listen to a question and deliver a response that addresses the query? Or are we happy to follow someone who equates stubbornness and rigidity with strength? Should we be proud to support a leader who obviously cannot form ideas or opinions on the fly, and who struggles to express his limited range of understanding without stumbling over words and mangling his native tongue?

I saw Mr. Kerry watch and listen to Mr. Bush with a mixture of bemusement and compassion last night. Mr. Bush watched and listened to Mr. Kerry in anger, envy, and embarrassment. The body language and the facial expressions of both men told any viewer all they need to know about the character and the capabilities of the two candidates.

Was America watching?