Biggest debate mistakes

Bush and Kerry each missed an excellent opportunity last night to clarify important distinctions in their positions. I can't say I was terribly impressed by either of them, though the debates were somewhat useful in helping me develop my opinions of them and this race.

Bush's big missed opportunity was this: He said, in answer to a question about Iraq, “the enemy attacked us,” and Kerry jumped all over it, saying that Saddam Hussein didn't attack us, Osama bin Laden did. Bush, in his response, simply stated (paraphrasing), “I know Osama bin Laden attacked us. You think I don't know that?” He then proceeded to address a different part of Kerry's statement. This was the perfect opportunity for Bush to not only show that he didn't slip up in his statement, but to illustrate an important difference between him and Kerry. He should have said, “Of course I know bin Laden attacked us. And that event changed the way we respond to threats. We didn't attack Iraq because they attacked us on September 11, we attacked because we wanted to prevent another September 11, and you agreed with me that Saddam was a threat, and authorized me to use force to prevent Saddam from carrying out the kind of attack we suffered on September 11. That is why the September 11 attack is relevant to the war in Iraq.”

Kerry's big missed opportunity was this: Bush's campaign has been portraying Kerry as a flip-flopper. So he was posed the question (paraphrasing), “When you returned from Vietnam, you asked, ‘How can you ask a man to be the last to die for a mistake?’ Are the soldiers in Iraq dying for a mistake?” Kerry answered (paraphrasing), “No; they don't have to be, if we implement the right policies there.” Wrong answer for him, I think. This answer made him look to me like he either didn't have a clear position on Iraq (was it a mistake or not?) or he was answering only for political expediency (yes, Iraq was a mistake, but if I say that, I'll lose votes). What he should have said was, “Yes, it was a mistake to go into Iraq the way we did. But it is not a mistake for us to stay and finish the job, now that we're there. We have a moral obligation to the people of Iraq, the Middle East, and the entire world to bring nations together to stabilize Iraq, to rebuild its infrastructure, to train its security forces, and to help make Iraq a safe and democratic nation. Our president made a mistake in going into Iraq when and how he did, but I will succeed in Iraq where he is failing, so that our soldiers don't die for a mistake.”

Maybe that's too much to hope for from these candidates.

Why didn't somebody tell me this earlier?

Money Can't Buy Happiness

I love public libraries

I am a heavy public library user. I typically have five to ten books checked out from the library, plus books for my kids, both for home school and for pleasure reading, plus DVDs, videos, and CDs (listening to a library copy of Elton John's Greatest Hits as I type).

Our local library (Hennepin County Library) is really excellent. They have a great website with a very good catalog system for reserving and renewing materials. Their interlibrary loan participation is excellent: I've checked out books from Yale, the University of Minnesota, BYU-Hawaii, Ricks College, and other places, at no extra charge.

They also have lots of events we have appreciated. For example, I took my kids to a magic show; afterward, they checked out several books to learn how to do magic tricks. They have regular story times where a librarian reads stories to young children and they do activities. Of course, they offer computer training, internet access, and computers for children. And that's not to mention the tax information classes, auto mechanics classes, reading clubs, author discussion groups, research services, etc. they offer.

Anytime I start feeling especially skeptical about government programs, I have to remind myself of the benefits I receive from our public library.

Still applicable

“Darkness cannot drive out darkness;

only light can do that.

Hate cannot drive out hate;

only love can do that.

Hate multiplies hate, violence multiplies violence,

and toughness multiplies toughness

in a descending spiral of destruction.”

--Martin Luther King, Jr.,

“Strength to Love,” 1963

Fall colors

As election season approaches, the colors of fall are abounding. No, not the browns and oranges of autumn leaves -- the reds and blues of election signs on everybody's lawns.

Most of the time, Republican candidate's signs are primarily red with a splash of blue, while Democrat candidate's signs are primarily blue with a splash of red. We are all familiar with the images on TV of the "red states" and the "blue states". But where did the red = Republican, blue = Democrat thing come from?

Different colors have very different connotations. Red has connotations of aggressiveness, radicalism, danger, boldness, heat: emotion. Blue has connotations of calmness, thoughtfulness, depth, patience: rationality. So who gets to decide which party is associated with which color? Do the colors accurately reflect the general character of the two primary parties? The candidates? The labels "conservative" and "liberal"?

Sneaking food into Shrek

Rarely do I see a movie at a first-run theater. It's just too expensive. Usually I just rent them, but occasionally we go to the dollar movies, which of course really cost two dollars, except on Tuesdays, when they have nostalgia or something and charge only one dollar.

So I took my kids to see Shrek 2 this afternoon. I conceded to the high prices (now you know why it's called a concession stand) and bought popcorn, but there was no way I was paying the high prices for their candy. So I took the kids to the grocery store before the movie and bought some treats, which we sneaked into the theater.

This disturbed my eight-year-old son, who questioned the morality of our actions. Was this a despicable immoral act I committed in front of my children? If we hadn't brought candy into the theater, I still wouldn't have spent the money on candy at the concessions. We would have just gone without. So the theater didn't lose any money because of it. (Of course, you recognize the thought process here: it's exactly the same sort of rationalization many people give for online music swapping: we wouldn't buy the high-priced albums anyway, so nobody's really losing money.)

Do I need to repent?

Oh, and by the way, I thought Shrek 2 was better than the first one.

Comments fixed

Thanks to Clark for pointing out that my comments here weren't working. I've fixed them now, so have at it! You know you've got comments just stored up...

Game review: Swap!

I'm adding a new feature to my blog: game reviews. I'm not a video gamer or role-playing gamer, though, so if you're looking for that, sorry. I'm talking about board games and card games, primarily. Feel free to suggest some of your favorites.

This first review is of Swap! Card Game, by Patch. You can find this game at Wal-Mart for about $4.

Like UNO, the point of Swap! is to get rid of all the cards in your hand. The manufacturer lists it as appropriate for ages 7 and up, but my 5-year-old was able to play without any problems. The only matching to be done is by color; there are no numbers or letters, so no reading is required. There are cards to change colors, and Slap cards where everyone has to slap their hands down quickly, but most importantly, there are cards that require players to swap hands (hence the title). This can change the game rapidly and really levels the playing field, so that children have an equal chance of winning the game. Of course, my children absolutely love it.

A round usually only lasts 5-10 minutes, so it's a quick, inexpensive, and fun family game, especially for families with younger children who know their colors and who can't wait for a chance to beat Mom & Dad. Enjoy!

How to distract your readers

I've been reading Phillip Jose Farmer's Riverworld series, and am almost finished with book three, The Dark Design. I completely agree with the reviewers at Amazon.com who comment on Farmer's “asides” that give him a chance to include his own philosophy, thinly disguised as a character's thoughts, dreams, or whatever. The later Terry Goodkind books have the same flaw. So, to you budding writers out there, avoid this error.

But, frankly, even more distracting to me is the ridiculous attempt at multiculturalism (I can only assume) by including most measurements in both English and metric system, or both 12- and 24-hour time. This results in ludicrous phrases like:

Jill had assumed, along with everybody else she knew, that the mountains were from 4564 to 6096 meters high.

What? Nobody assumes such ranges with figures like that. They'd say something like “4500 to 6000 meters [or metres?] high.” Or worse:

On the average, The River was 2.4135 kilometers or a mile and a half wide.

or

The first mate, Tom Rider also known as Tex, stood about 5.08 centimeters or 2 inches shorter than Frigate's 1.8 meters or 6 feet.

About 5.08 centimeters? Are you sure it wasn't about 5.080036 centimeters?

Whatever the merits of inclusivity, this is not one of them. Please, if anyone reading this (is anybody reading this?) is thinking of writing, never, never, never do this.

(That said, I did notice that the Ensign has started including metric system estimates (in parentheses) where relevant. They do a much better job than the above quotes.)

Vote for me!

I've seen lots of discussion about a liberal bias in the media. Well, if they're trying to prop up John Kerry's campaign, either they're doing a lousy job of it, or Kerry has a really lousy campaign.

I have my share of concerns about Bush, but if anybody wants me to vote for them, they better tell me some specifics about their ideas for governing the country, not just tell me how poor a job Bush is doing.

I can say, as well as Kerry does (or maybe better) how Bush didn't act quickly enough, or too quickly, or didn't get enough international support, or is implementing the wrong policies, or isn't implementing intelligence reforms quickly enough, or that I wouldn't have made the same mistakes Bush made. So, why not vote for me?

And what I heard of John Edwards' convention speech wasn't much better. It's nice to hear that we can have affordable health care for everyone, that we can have equal education for everyone, etc., but if you don't tell me how we can, it's just a bunch of hot air.

Give me specifics! The only specifics I've heard were that Edwards was going to pay for everybody's health care and education by making the richest 2% of Americans pay for it. There's got to be more than that.