What is this? Bash the Bush kids night? Almost every blogger on the right that I bring up is dumping all over the Bush Twins this evening.
People need to get a firm grip on the mouse before they select "Save." This pusillanimous dogpiling is lame, halt and betrays a lack of anything substantive to say. The main thing there is to say is short and sweet: "We're not voting on the kids this year so it really doesn't matter."
That's it, but can we stop? No. The Corner's kvetching -- with Goldberg and Lopez in a cross-posting liplock. The cable pundits are ranking on them from wild rank to medium to mild as you tune from CNN to MSNBC to Fox. You can hear the New York Times sending out The Gang of Four to sober up Maureen Dowd. Even the usually well-balanced Reynolds and Roger Simon are throwing brickbats at these feckless 22-year-olds. (Although Reynolds has been bringing in some other reactions that even this out -- that's why he's valuable.)
I shudder to think what's going on at IndyMedia and other moonbat breeding and roosting farms. We can expect their heads grafted onto various obscene poses and bodies within the hour.
Little wonder their parents keep them out of it.
Everybody just needs to hit the brakes and stop this frantic blogeration over every little nit that pops up for picking at the convention. There is bigger game to be bagged and bigger issues to illuminate than the question of how good, bad, sharp, lame, or indifferent a couple of cloistered 22-year-old girls are when trotted out onto a stage in front of the nation.
I seriously doubt that 1.5% of the ladies and gentlemen blasting their bits across the Net tonight could come off one tenth as well.
This is not to say we saw the reincarnation of Winston Churchill as the Doublemint Twins tonight. It's only to say that , for crying out loud, they are twenty-two years old and have the general mental furniture of most twenty-two year olds.
They came out, they said their lines, they said "Hi" to Grandma, they introduced their Dad and they exited. No big thrill? Well, so what?
Not every moment can be a perfect gem, folks.
Posted by Vanderleun at August 31, 2004 8:51 PM
I agree. The Bush twins didn't isntantly become the greatest orators the world had ever known but they introduced their parents and showed the world that they a strong family. That matters to many people.
And the hamster line was funny.
Posted by: Dave Justus at August 31, 2004 9:18 PMI am glad you are back and refreshed!
I agree with your comments on the Bush girls,
and think it is petty of the people who seem to
think their high expectations should be met?
I just said this in another post and glad to find
out you agreed.
jeeze...
anyone remember bill clinton answering the boxers or briefs question?
I thought that was awful, not pro... icky... people loved it.
everyone is not a political junkie pundit. the twins tonight were about people who tuned into the thin network coverage momentarily. they touched more people than many realize with their... "realness?"
Posted by: vtrtl at August 31, 2004 10:12 PMI'm a big GWB supporter.
But when I was 22 years old, I was a Special Agent with the Bureau of Investigation in a large state. I worked undercover narcotics, and when my cover was burned, general criminal. I was married. I had a house.
The point is, yes, the twins are young. But not THAT young. A lot of people who are the same age have real responsibilities. You have to stop being a giggling idiot sometime. A good time for them to do that would have been BEFORE last night.
_______________
I was particularly galled at Old Fred Barnes, who opined that (rough transcript) "the President's wife and daughter have no place onstage at the party convention. We aren't electing a royal family; they have nothing to do with public policy or the direction of the country."
NOTHING? What about the power behind the throne, Fred? It's well known that Laura is a calming influence on her husband, and the energy and humor of the darling daughters must surely lighten the load for the Leader of the Free World. Besides, what is a party convention if not a party?
http://sisu.typepad.com/sisu/2004/09/my_worry_is_arn_1.html
Posted by: Sissy Willis at September 1, 2004 6:32 AMYou had me until you said, "I seriously doubt that 1.5% of the ladies and gentlemen blasting their bits across the Net tonight could come off one tenth as well."
Many of the people criticizing the twins write and speak for a living, whether as pundits, attorneys, or otherwise. Even bloggers who don't fall into that category -- the popular ones at least -- are mostly quite good at communcating. Besides, you've really set the bar low. 1.5% of them? One tenth as well? Anyone who managed to find the stage would do one tenth as well, unless they vomited on the lectern.
Posted by: Spoons at September 1, 2004 6:44 AMThe twins were there for the same reason as Laura: to soften, a bit, the image of their dad. They made jokes about their own underage drinking, rather than pretending it never happened. They tried to be funny (though they were hardly amusing). They confided their parents' pet name for each other.
Reporters, pundits and city dwellers may have been annoyed or repulsed, but I believe this move was aimed at the average American, who (rightly) thought, "Oh, what sweet girls" and (with luck) "Nothing like those upitty Kerry kids."
Posted by: growler at September 1, 2004 9:21 AMCate Edwards, daughter to John and Elizabeth is exactly the same age as Jenna and Barbara and somehow she managed to get through her convention speech without making an ass out of herself.
Posted by: UofAZGrad at September 1, 2004 9:54 AMGlad to see you return, V, welcome. I'm with you on this ... I thought they were light-hearted and human and kinda funny and just, you know, cute.
Some people really need to lighten up a bit. Life is short, and all that.
Posted by: Jeff Brokaw at September 1, 2004 2:10 PM
HOME