Style Weapons

I didn’t hear the full debate – I caught bits and pieces over the radio via am border stations, by virtue of a very cold night and the extended wavelength it grants. Bits and pieces, because the reception was uneven, switching back and forth between stations (in my truck, then at home) as the signal waxed and waned.
Because I had no visuals to distract from the actual content, I didn’t conclude that Kerry had won the debate. I didn’t know it was a game, so I didn’t keep score. I was listening – not watching facial expressions, or counting the seconds of pause or wondering what was in the notes I didn’t know Kerry was writing. I was just listening to the words.
Little of what I heard surprised me. I’ve been following the candidates too closely over the past couple of months for that. I heard portions from both that I knew were scripted, framed with the expected “talking points”. It was all relatively predictable.
Except for this. I was in the truck, and I remember sitting up straight in my seat and looking at the radio in disbelief. I couldn’t believe what I had just heard. Hugh Hewitt can’t believe it either and he’s inviting further commentary. And like me, he’s not so sure that Kerry won this debate. No one is talking at all about the content of Bush’s remarks. It’s all about delivery. Kerry had “better style”. Smooth and polished. “On the offensive”.
Now that a couple of days have passed, the discussion is moving to the details of Kerry’s statements, the contradictions and factual errors – the things I noticed at the time because reception was sketchy and I was trying hard to listen. The questions are coming from unfamiliar and usually friendly places.
Style mattered in the post Cold War decades, when Clinton debated Bush, when Dole debated Clinton. Smooth delivery and facial expression and reaction mattered when Bush debated Gore (*sigh*). Style got you before the camera, a night in the Lincoln bedroom, invited to the important parties. Average Americans in peacetime focused on fashion, on affluence, on upward mobility, and when those things are important, style is important.
Then, Islamic terrorists flew three commercial jets into the heart of the free world. And they scored style points, huge style points, style points to end all style points…. even if the actual substance of the attack boiled down to taking advantage of a few sleepy security screeners and an uncomprehending crew. They framed their argument in spectacular, riveting, technicolor style. Wow. People sat up and paid attention. It was “just like a movie”.
Yet, even before the morning ended, the substantive weakness was realized. Without camera coverage, or eloquence, or focus groups to poll, the last intended victims – ordinary citizens – interrupted the message, ovewhelmed what little substance there was, and slammed it into the dirt in a field in Pennsylvania. The era of “style over substance” felt the impact.
John Kerry didn’t.

“the United States is pursuing a new set of nuclear weapons.�It doesn’t make sense.“

Nuclear weapons are substance. They may represent the very epitome of substance. No one has ever had to debate the finality and deadly effectiveness of a nuclear weapon to enhance its military authority.
Caught in the tortured convolution of his logic centers, Kerry doesn’t comprehend this.

“You talk about mixed messages.”

Nuclear weapons as “messages”?
John Kerry would be commander in chief of the most powerful military the world has ever known. He will defend his nation with resolve and dedicate himself to winning the war against Islamic terrorism.

“We’re telling other people, “You can’t have nuclear weapons,” but we’re pursuing a new nuclear weapon…”

He pledges that he will support the military with all the resources required to get the job done. He has the experience, has the means, he has the will to achieve victory.

” that we might even contemplate using“.

Just let him be very clear with the enemies of the United States about one important principle – that there are some weapons that the President only keeps around for show.