Gone Fishing Atoning…

Shawn Green, most famous for managing to combine a pair of mutually exclusive traits (athletic prowess and being Jewish), will observe this year’s holiest Jewish holiday by playing one game against my Giants and skipping the other. He explains:

“I talked with family and friends and got advice from a lot of people. When it came down to it, I realized that I just had to do what I feel is right and what’s most consistent with my beliefs. Everyone has different ways of expressing their beliefs. For me as a Jewish person and a teammate, I feel that this is the right decision for me.”

It sort of makes sense. A compromise based on a combination of a lot of advice, even more guilt and (because fasting is part of Yom Kippur) being really, really hungry is not what I would consider outside of the Jewish experience.

I, however, have no such flexibility. The hunger is not so much of a factor since writing doesn’t take much energy and I’m almost always at least a little lightheaded for the really important posts.

For me, it’s quite simple. Both my mom and my rabbi are regular readers of this blog. In other words, I’m sitting out for the duration of the holiday. (Given his ancestry, they’re both convinced that Kerry should be doing the same…)

For my Jewish readers, I wish you a meaningful day of atonement and an easy fast. For my non-Jewish readers, you should be ashamed of yourselves (if only to empathize with us once a year).

The latest argument from the President:

You can’t lead America if you question the credibility of an ally.

Wow.

It’s all about setting expectations. And when it comes to political debates, conventional wisdom suggests that the lower the expectations are, the better it is for the candidate.

According to Time, 44% of Americans expect W to win the debates while 32% expect Kerry to win. And one assumes a significant number of Americans would give anything to see Ross Perot dust off the giant charts and show up for just one more dance.

But I wonder about the strategy of setting low expectations.

The pre-debate period should resemble the pre-fight period ahead of a big money boxing match. I’d like to see Kerry and his corner insist that he will absolutely kick ass in the debates. With an index finger poking at the chest of the American public, Kerry should announce: I’m smarter. I’m taller. I’m better. I sweat less. My make-up people are more experienced. I lick my lips in between long sentences unlike anyone else. Go ahead and doubt me. They doubted me before I buried Dean. They doubted me before I beat the hell out of Weld. I will slap the swagger right out of this chump. The President will finally have found those WMDs and they’re going to be firing out of my podium. His body will be flip-flopping on the canvas by the time I drop my four point body shot on Iraq. He’ll wish he had universal healthcare when he feels the power of my uppercut plan for securing the ports. Eye of the tiger. There is no tomorrow. Ain’t gonna be no rematch. What’s my prediction for the debate? Pain. Biatch…

Let’s face it. The media will treat this as a sporting event with pregame analysis and predictions, instant replays, and postgame commentary. I wouldn’t be surprised to turn on CNN or MSNBC and see the politicians stripping down to their undershorts for the weigh-in.

So why shouldn’t the competitors treat these nights the same way the rest of us do? It’s all about throwing a knock-out punch.

Forget expectations. The worst case for the challenger in these debates is for them to get low ratings among undecideds. The last few weeks of increasingly dirty campaigning isn’t going to lure too many of the “I’m too disgusted to pay attention” crowd.

But pre-fight trash talk will. Forget simply raising excpectations. Kerry should guarantee a victory.

Political debates have gotten to be too big to be managed by groups like the League of Women Voters or even the top news organizations. This is the age of polarized politics, two Americas, dueling networks, forgeries and freeforalls.

Is there really any doubt that the time has come to bring in Don King?

Just in case terrorism isn’t one of your top issues (and therefore Cheney’s suggestion that a vote for Kerry equals a new terror attack on American soil isn’t quite motivating you out of the undecided column), the GOP has now admitted that they are behind a multistate mailing which suggests that liberals are out to ban the bible.

Oh and by the way, they admit it, then they explain it, then they describe why it’s a valid message.

Remember the good old days when you could smear your opponent simply by suggesting that his questioning of your decisions was tantamount to supporting the enemy?

So let’s check the forecast. A vote for Kerry would mean an invitation to terrorists and an end to god. Wow. And I was already scared enough by the notion that we may have to see Janet’s boobie again.

And the Swift Boat Veterans are working on a new ad in which they describe a secret 1972 meeting in which Jane Fonda, John Kerry and Liberace discussed plans to raise Jesus Christ’s taxes.

Stay tuned for the next mailing in which the GOP uncovers John Kerry’s plot to replace the national anthem with an old Cat Stevens song.

And if you think these religious-based attacks couldn’t possibly work in the modern world, then you need to visit a few more states. There are huge portions of the country where the key election issues are god, guns and gays.

Here is the annual Forbes list of the 400 richest Americans.

Sluggish recovery you say? Not at the top.

By the way, it turns out that Wal-Mart was a hell of an idea.

“Let there be no doubt or confusion about where we stand on this. I will support a multilateral effort to disarm (Hussein) by force, if we ever exhaust … other options … If we do wind up going to war with Iraq, it is imperative that we do so with others in the international community. If he fails to do so, I will be among the first to speak out.”

So said John Kerry almost two years ago.

It turns out that when one looks at hundreds of statements about Iraq that Kerry has made over the past two years, there isn’t really any record of flip flopping.

Oh, and on the notion that Kerry should be ridiculed for suggesting that his decision to authorize the President to use force was not the same thing as suggesting the use of force was appropriate at that moment or under the circumstances of the time, there’s this:

“If you want to keep the peace, you’ve got to have the authorization to use force. It’s a chance for Congress to say, ‘we support the administration’s ability to keep the peace.’ That’s what this is all about.”

That was W’s comment in September of 2002.