The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email
Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

There were a few other observations I had of the Democratic debate last night that didn't make it into my column:

--John Edwards' insistence on calling the War on Terror a "bumper sticker" reveals a desperation on his part, making it pretty clear that he won't be the nominee. If you give the benefit of the doubt to Edwards, he is making the intellectual argument that while we do need to fight terrorism, categorizing it as a "War on Terror" can be used for propaganda purposes to justify all sorts of things. But in a political context, such nuances don't get conveyed, and Edwards comes across as someone who doesn't think terrorism is a problem. This gave Hillary Clinton the oppourtunity to establish herself as more hawkish by declaring that as a New Yorker (it's been over six years and I still can't get over that) "I have seen first hand the terrible damage that can be inflicted on our country by a small band of terrorists." Edwards' progressive populism will win over a certain portion of the left, but in the end the party will go with a more mainstream candidate, just as Democrats ditched Howard Dean at the end to go with John Kerry.

--It's been pointed out on other blogs, but for the second debate in a row, Bill Richardson bombed. I always thought Richardson would make a strong vice presidential choice given the fact that he is governor of New Mexico, which is a crucial swing region, he is Hispanic, and is the candidate with the strongest resume. I thought he'd be an especially great fit for the VP slot if Ovama were the nominee, because Obama would have to pick somebody more experienced than he is to reassure voters. So, I've been quite surprised to watch Richardson struggle through another debate. His answers were rambling and often off topic, and he was overly eager to tout his experience. He was at his most juvenile when after a question about Darfur, he said "I was there" about 83 times.

--Joe Biden evidently thinks that the candidate who yells the most looks the most presidential. He's wrong.

topics:
Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton

Leave a comment

Leave a Comment

N.B. We encourage readers to share and discuss their thoughtful and relevant comments about this Spectator article. Comments are routinely monitored and will be deleted if profane, bigoted, or grossly impolite. Please be respectful. (And don't feed the trolls!) Thank you.

Related Blog Posts

More Blog Posts by Philip Klein

http://spectator.org/blog/2007/06/04/loose-democratic-debate-though

ADVERTISEMENT

The Spectacle Blog

At Least He Apologized

Ross Kaminsky | 8:34AM

Gallup: Veterans Prefer Romney

W. James Antle, III | 5.28.12

Markos Moulitsas is Scum

Quin Hillyer | 5.28.12

Weekend Political Wrap-Up, Memorial Day Edition

W. James Antle, III | 5.27.12

An Honor Flight Story

TAS Staff | 5.26.12

WaPost Criticizes Romney's Lack of Rhythm

Aaron Goldstein | 5.25.12

SPONSORED LINKS

Special Feature

Better that we become a nation of choosers rather than beggars. Our symposium on choice from the May, 2012 issue:

A Time for Choosing

James Piereson

The Road from Serfdom

Stephen Moore and Peter Ferrara

FLASHBACK TO: 1984

Clip of the Day

Most Popular Articles

Meet the Flukes!

F. H. Buckley | 5.25.12

In Search of Muhammad

Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi | 5.25.12

The Wisconsin Turning Point

Peter Ferrara | 5.23.12

Age and Kyl

Quin Hillyer | 5.25.12

Follow Me

Jay D. Homnick | 5.25.12

How About the Record of DOE Capital?

William Tucker | 5.25.12

The Great Debate

R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. | 5.24.12

Markos Moulitsas is Scum

Quin Hillyer | 5.28.12

ADVERTISEMENT