De-Brief

For those surfers who have come to this site by mistake thinking it is some Lady Chatterley’s Lover type collection, I’m afraid this title too will disappoint, despite its promise, for it’s not about either Madame or I shedding our undergarments, it’s about my short dissection of the first presidential debate of 2012.

That it has consumed the chattering communication channels says a lot about us.

First, it seems to confirm, in waves, Hedges’ contention that we are a spectacle culture, more about form and show than substance. 

It also says much, at least about many males, that we place so much emphasis on “scoring,” “slamming,” “beating,” etc., and little about issues, other than our surface knowledge which politicians use to manipulate us.  It is also why falsehoods and half-lies and deceptions and deflections can be tossed out by our politicians with no lasting consequences for them from us. 

We have a traditional/corporate media that needed a shake-up of this race, an imperative to make it tighter regardless of whether it really was or is, because that increases interest, and interest equates to money.  Social media, which emphasizes money matters far less, was much more in the middle on assessments of the debate.

Yes, the debaters were overbearing (the reader can decide which, if any, was more so), yes the moderator was not as assertive as maybe could have been the case (but an argument could also be made that letting the men talk revealed more than cutting them off), yes the questions were maybe too softball or general.

Yes, one candidate with low expectations turned in a “stronger” performance than expected, and that helped that candidate.  Yes, the other, with high expectations, turned in an acceptable performance, but because it was below expectations, it was termed “soft,” “meek,” or “off.”  Yes, we Americans love a contest between two contenders.

It’s one debate.  And it only occurred between the two establishment candidates.  The other two or three real candidates, who would have provided true breadth and perspective, were nowhere to be seen.  And most Americans neither know nor care.  And that makes our democracy feebler, for our discussions and considerations have resulting gaping holes in them.

One debate.  In a month it could be forgotten.  This American obsession with the NOW can be quite a weakness, and works to the detriment of our perspective.  We never seem to remember how our obsession with, well, most everything, turned out in hindsight to be excessive.