Debate Round One
Thursday, September 30th, 2004Posting from my Treo. Since I tend to think in tables, I like Hugh Hewitt’s summary of the debate. I largely concur on Hugh’s read of Lehrer’s lean. I sat with a (paper) notebook and scored each question’s valence B(ush), N(eutral) or K(erry). What especially struck me was not the bias in questions but Lehrer’s repeated employment of the discretionary extra minute to give Kerry another shot or to blunt a Bush hit. It may be my bias for Bush but it seemed that Lehrer employed the discretionary follow-up rapidly when Kerry needed help and Bush had to push Lehrer to allow follow-ups Bush wanted.
The post-debate spin was as predicted and likely to make little difference as the broader public that watched the debate isn’t going to spend hours having spin-meisters tell them what they really thought and heard. We political junkies now have blogs, radio and cable to break MSM’s spell.
I do wish President Bush had found a phrase to deal with charges of sending soldiers in harm’s way without the latest body armor and armor plated vehicles. Since I was there and witnessed the insurgency’s birth and adaptation over the summer of ‘03 to this past February, and since my reserve component logistics unit deployed with our basic authorized equipment, I have some knowledge of the groud truth.
The truth is that the switch from last generation to newest “Intercepter” body armor was completed in Iraq in the most dangerous places first. My own outfit had some very resourceful troops, who took some of our old kevlar vests (after new vest issue) and sandwiched them between plywood panels to build a pillbox for a machinegunner in back of a soft (thin metal) side HMMWV. I personally witnessed this vehicle survive an IED blast when I was just behind it. Did the job fine. The plain truth is that the Army, for *decades,* has seriously under-equipped its support troops and under-resourced combat convoy training for those troops.