Holy crap. Why don't debates ever take place like the one I just saw between John Bolton and Jon Stewart? Whatever Bolton's reputation in the UN, he's eloquent, concise, intelligent, etc. and Stewart is, well, he's Stewart. They both presented legitimate arguments addressing each other's points directly and countering them, and no one got emotional. I probably learned more about conservative viewpoints then Fox or the MSM would ever teach me.
What did I learn? That Bolton, whom I'm assuming is a Republican, sees the relationships between the executive office and the government bureaucracy as one that stifles the President and limits his ability to preside effectively. Stewart on the other hand feels that bureaucracy is not the main problem (though it is a problem), and that the level of secrecy behind the President's closed doors damages Stewart's idea of democratic theory (a term Bolton brought up, one on which neither explained clearly), thus reducing the 'democraticness' of our government as a whole. Bolton sees this secrecy as essential to allowing the President to receive candid opinions and that these people should be judged by their performance rather than their words (he loses there, if one sees Bush's administration as a miserable failure), to which Stewart points out, well the opinions don't seem to be justifying the current level of performance.
All in all the best debate I've ever seen considering the amount of time given. Let Stewart be the moderator of the next presidential debates, I say
Daily Show with John Bolton
Wednesday, March 21, 2007Posted by Captain Melons at 9:51 PM
0 comments:
Post a Comment