Between the Lines
by Anthony Asadullah Samad

Candidate “Flip-Flop” versus President “Flim Flam:”
How’s A Nation To Choose? Let’s Count The Ways…

The first debate between President George “Dubyah” Bush and Democratic Party Nominee, Senator John Kerry was billed as the “great condition,” given all the stipulations put on the debates. Warm and fuzzy it was not. Nor was it come out swinging at the bell. Bland and distant might be a better description as rules to minimize the height differences, pointed responses (candidates talking to each other) and “space restrictions” (to avoid any repeats of the 2000 debates when Al Gore got into then challenger Bush’s space) mitigated any chance of the type of spontaneous action that make debates great. Instead we had a classic question-response-rebuttal-rebuttal response, “everybody talk to the moderator” type of debate that pitted Kerry, framed as a habitual “flip-flopper” against President Bush, who War on Terror turned War on Iraq has been seen as the ultimate flim-flam. Just to clarify—one who flip-flops is one who changes their mind frequently, one who “flim-flams,” according to Webster’s dictionary is one who engages in deception. Both came into the debate trying to establish something; Kerry—that he is not Mr. “Flip-Flop,” and the President—that he didn’t “flim-flam” the nation going to war in Iraq.

There was much cynicism over whether we even needed a debate, given “the spin” of parties that has much of the nation cool on both candidates. But let’s be clear, John Kerry needed this debate like the disciples needed Jesus. Kerry needed to “fish for men” and the debate was “the way” to salvation. Without the debates, Kerry can’t shake his flip-flopping image and can’t close the gap between he and Bush, that has been anywhere from six to twelve points in the polls. The people needed to see Bush put the “flip-flopper” fastball to Kerry, and Kerry needed to hit it out. Well, I wouldn’t say that Kerry hit it out, but he didn’t strike out on it either. Kerry addressed the President’s repeated “mixed messages” insinuations with one of the best retorts of the night, “I made a mistake talking about the war; the President made a mistake in invading Iraq—which is worse?” I’d give him a double. On the other hand, Kerry put the “Iraq” fastball to the President and what we heard was the same classic George “Dubyah” “flim-flam” that we’ve heard the whole time we’ve been in Iraq. All the classic one liners, “Iraq was a threat,” “the world is safer with Saddam Hussein in jail,” “We must pursue terrorism wherever it hides,” the same ole, same ole, but he never addressed how we started out in Afghanistan and ended up in Iraq. Kerry constantly hit the President on this question and Bush swung and missed every time. I tried to be objective, but I have to admit, when the President said, “The best way to make the country safe is to stay on offense (stay in the war)” and “renew the Patriot Act,” he lost me. It wasn’t much of a debate from that point. However, Kerry even hit him with a line from his daddy’s (George H. W. Bush’s) book as to why he didn’t invade Baghdad in 1991—it was because there was no exit strategy. Well, as we now know, his daddy was right. Baby Bush didn’t listen to Daddy Bush on that account—oh, that’s right, the President doesn’t read—but back to the debate, and when hit with question after question as to why he ignored military advisers, policy advisors, U.N. advisors and his own party advisors, after blinking five times and stammering through the worse case of brain-freeze you’d ever seen, you know no more than when he sent the troops to Iraq. Looking at both candidates, neither of which are perfect, I’d vote for a person that will change their mind when shown in error than a person too stubborn to admit he is in error. That’s how you choose between two candidates not daftly labeled. You go with the one that did the most to dispel his label, and that was Kerry.

Most of the pundits and the post debate television polls almost unanimously showed Mr. Kerry won this debate. His responses were crisp, his analysis sharp and his justification for his change of position on the war, at least--momentarily, deflected the “flip-flopper” jacket that the Republicans had successfully put on the challenger. The President, on the other hand, was stammering—no command of the issues (supposedly his strong suit), had bad body language and did little to erase his flimsy rationalization of how the nation ended up in Iraq. He was still President “Flim Flam,” thank ma’am, by the end of the debate. Bush proved he can’t be trusted to tell the nation the truth about the war and shouldn’t be allowed to lead four more years. At least now, after one debate, you don’t have to follow what you heard—you can follow what you saw for most 90 minutes, one candidate shake his image, and the other fake his office. That’s how you can choose who won. Maybe now, we’ll have the race all was predicting. Kerry finally found his way.

We would love the hear from you! Please send your comments and feedback to betweenthelines@blackweekly.com

About Anthony Asadullah Samad .

Anthony Asadullah Samad is a national columnist, author and managing director of the Urban Issues Forum. His upcoming book, 50 Years After Brown: The State of Black Equality In America is due out in 2004. He can be reached at www.AnthonySamad.com

Meet Me At...

Last evening over 40 Blackweekly.com members watched the first presidential debate at the Napa Valley Grille in Westwood. The post debate debates on the patio were both stimulating and informative. Please join us on Friday, October 8th, for the 2nd "Meet Me At" presidential debate viewing mixer.


Meet Me At...
The Napa Valley Grille
1100 Glendon Ave. in Westwood,
(310) 824-3322.
NO COVER.

5 p.m. to 9 p.m.
Presidential Debate starts at 6 p.m.