GETTING DOWN AND DIRTY
Our friend Dick Morris says "there will be blood": www.nypost.com/seven/01062008/postopinion/
opedcolumnists/there_will_be_blood_556055.htm
He'll join me live on San Diego 1700AM tomorrow morning between 5 and 9AM Pacific (and on http://www.sandiego1700.com/). He's right that Hillary won't take this lying down (so to speak... nothing naughty intended, of course). But back to the Saturday night debates:
I watched the whole thing last night. The three hour mini-series featuring most GOP and Democrat candidates. Interesting, at times infuriating sometimes mind-numbing, it was. Candidates on both sides had their moments of "huh", in addition to plenty of substance. But one of the things that jumped off the screen for me was Barack Obama being asked about a terrorist nuke going off in the US. In his explanation of what he'd do as president, he talked about the threat (some experts say it's a 30% chance or greater of bad guys nailing us with a nuclear weapon) and then went off down the lane about why we need more talks (aka "treaties") about nuclear proliferation. As if the terrorist thugs would sit down and chat about such things. Naive? Ah, but he speaks about hope and "change". In fact all the candidates are now throwing the word "change" around. The assumption is that all of America wants it, at any cost. I'm thinking about all sorts of changes people seem to be buying into. .. probably without knowing what it all means. As a backdrop, I'm also mulling how there's lots of psychological info over the years noting that one of the things people tend to fear most is: change. Specifics? Nah, it's all about warm, fuzzy promises right now. Logic and reason be damned.
opedcolumnists/there_will_be_blood_556055.htm
He'll join me live on San Diego 1700AM tomorrow morning between 5 and 9AM Pacific (and on http://www.sandiego1700.com/). He's right that Hillary won't take this lying down (so to speak... nothing naughty intended, of course). But back to the Saturday night debates:
I watched the whole thing last night. The three hour mini-series featuring most GOP and Democrat candidates. Interesting, at times infuriating sometimes mind-numbing, it was. Candidates on both sides had their moments of "huh", in addition to plenty of substance. But one of the things that jumped off the screen for me was Barack Obama being asked about a terrorist nuke going off in the US. In his explanation of what he'd do as president, he talked about the threat (some experts say it's a 30% chance or greater of bad guys nailing us with a nuclear weapon) and then went off down the lane about why we need more talks (aka "treaties") about nuclear proliferation. As if the terrorist thugs would sit down and chat about such things. Naive? Ah, but he speaks about hope and "change". In fact all the candidates are now throwing the word "change" around. The assumption is that all of America wants it, at any cost. I'm thinking about all sorts of changes people seem to be buying into. .. probably without knowing what it all means. As a backdrop, I'm also mulling how there's lots of psychological info over the years noting that one of the things people tend to fear most is: change. Specifics? Nah, it's all about warm, fuzzy promises right now. Logic and reason be damned.
<< Home