Tuesday, January 29, 2008

Better late? Really?

So I haven’t been posting on my blog as I should. I have been commenting on other people’s blogs, but that’s getting a little tiring as other people’s blogs either have no other commenters, or the comments seem to consist of “the other side is evil and you are stupid” sort of thing.

So the other side is evil and anyone who disagrees is stupid. Heh.

I will say that elections are not the place for genuine debate on issues, at least, not after Iowa and New Hampshire. I remember reading about health care plans and …. Well, I read about health care plans, anyway. Obama’s doesn’t have mandates, (Hillary) Clinton’s does. Everybody wants to control for medical errors by saying they will.

Anyway, all that’s gone. I guess the issues are something for early in the campaign, if at all. Blink and you might miss them (or sleepwalk, as most registered voters do, and you might miss them). I guess we can watch candidates react to the financial crisis; we get to see them behave like pundits.

It remains to be seen whether Bill Clinton will be pulled back now, having been let or having let himself off the leash to squeeze out some innuendos that everyone knew would be analyzed to death by the punditocracy (including us bloggers). Really, the gyrations of the punditocracy, as they try to look into the campaigns, are pretty funny. (Hillary) Clinton was never going to win South Carolina because of the black vote and/or the white vote. Obama was going to win. Edwards was going to win.

Its especially interesting when conservatives comment on democrats. They have to know it is annoying to a democratic candidate when a conservative talks about what a swell guy/girl he/she is. The candidate has to wonder, is the conservative saying this because the conservative wants to help the candidate, wants to hurt the candidate, thinks the candidate will be easier or more difficult to beat …And of course the flip side is true. John McCain looked a little like he had swallowed a bug (on camera and still had to smile) when Tim Russert brought up the NYTimes endorsement of McCain. Everyone knows the Times will endorse the democrat in the general election, so what business does the Times have making an endorsement of a republican in the primaries?

“Sound and fury”, (so far) “signifying nothing”.

No comments: