In case you missed The Choice 2004, last weeks two hour Frontline special on President Bush and Senator Kerry, it is now available for viewing online. This program takes a good look at both of these men through their personal and political history in the most impartial way I've seen to date.
Says producer Martin Smith, "these two men couldn't be more different. Bush leads from the gut, Kerry from the head. Bush is drawn to certainty, Kerry embraces complexity. Bush is ambitious, Kerry is more cautious and conservative."
I watched this last week and found it very interesting with a few tidbits that I've never heard from the cable news crap being thrown about these days. For anyone who has avoided listening or reading the sensationalism found in print and on the air, The Choice 2004 is well worth the time and potential emotional investment.
And as always, the group at WGBH has done a spectacular job with providing more in-depth information on the web for those who have alredy seen the program.
Join the fray by reading through and commenting at the end.
Excellent. Lets just hope that people watch it instead of Fox "news".
I have to say the episode made me appreciate Kerry a bit more, but also, I must say, made me understand and actually respect Bush a bit more.
When he says he never waivers, he's not kidding, when you see clips of him in short sleeves and a tie saying "I'm for lower taxes and less regulation." They don't really politicize his national guard record, and they show his story through the 80s that I hadn't heard before.
I came away from it thinking Bush was much more human but at the same time I see that Kerry is much more presidential in the classic sense of global dipolmat.
oops, I meant to write this:
When Bush says he never waivers, he's not kidding, when you see 1978 clips of him in short sleeves and a tie saying "I'm for lower taxes and less regulation" you can hear the same phrases today.
I thought it was a great insight to both men's history, but I couldn't help thinking it was quite biased toward Kerry. He comes out seeming like a saint, while Bush seems much like how many view him... a driven man of privilege, who has a unique ability to have absolute faith in his "instinct," to the exclusion of everything else.
The program reinforces much of what I already felt about both of these candidates, but I really think that Kerry's faults (opportunism, obfuscation, etc.) need to be weighed as well in an examination of this sort, if it is to be taken seriously by any in the Bush camp. (Or maybe that's just wishful thinking.)
Programs like this (presenting a "balanced" perspective on "both" candidates) only preserve the duopoly by implying that there are no other choices. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy: by insisting that other candidates are not viable choices, they become non-viable choices. Were media outlets to provide coverage of even second tier candidates (those that might actually manage to get 0.5% or more of the vote), I think we'd see their popularity increase. Look at media coverage of relatively successful non-Duopoly candidates in the past -- Jesse Ventura, Ross Perot, etc.
Matt, I was thinking the same thing — surprised how both Bush and Kerry have been throwing out the same sound bites for decades.
You know, it was bad enough when I had to come up with a domain name that will last generations, now I have to start coming up with my future campaign rhetoric.
I'm going to need a whiteboard.
"...while Bush seems much like how many view him... a driven man of privilege, who has a unique ability to have absolute faith in his 'instinct,' to the exclusion of everything else"
I went to prep school, the same one Jame Baker went to actually. I've seen and experienced the lives of the priveleged and uber-wealthy as kid growing up, even though I'm from the blue-collar subarbs of Houston. Everything I've seen and read about Bush reminds me of the kind of guys I went to school with, so I wasn't shocked by the news that Bush is indeed a rich-white kid hardly ever forced to confront his opinions about his worldviews in the real world becaue of the cocoon he grew up in.
Bush came off that way on Frontline because he *is* that way. Bush has had every opportunity one could imaigne to prove he is something else, and he has failed to act on any of those opportunities. Frontline did nothing to heighten or degrade Bush. They just let the facts about his life, his own words and his own actions show who he is.
I went to school with lots of guys like that, and they were clueless about the hardships of life without money. I've seen it before and it's probbly why I have a special distaste for Bush and his worldview.
I agree, I think Bush was presented in an absolutely straightforward way, with the beginnings of his faith based presidency taking form. I believe this in particular to be the catalyst that has transformed him from just another unchallenged silver spooner into the champion of the new religious right, manifest as leader of the world's most formidable superpower. This is a combination I personally find to be extraordinarily problematic. The article in the NYT mag this past sunday about Bush's faith-based presidency was one of the more frightening essays I've read recently. Somehow I missed the episode of Frontline that dealt with this subject in depth (The Jesus Factor), but they have it as well at the WGBH link Greg provided initially.
I agree with John Kerry. How do we know that a war in Iraq isn't going to give birth to a whole new generation of anti-americanism. In Europe, G.W. Bush is not popular. Republicans seldomly are. But in the Arabic Middle-East, Americans are not only unpopular, they are hated. Along with the invasion, the Bush administration gave the impression of trying to inforce American values upon Iraq. Bush's determination, or should I say calling, and actions will not make this world a safer place. Although I truly believe that is what he ment. This CBS program confirmed my opinion on Bush: he seems like a nice guy, but he is not a good president.
Jeez. I already sent in my absentee ballot. I guess I'll have to watch the playoff games instead.
I think it is odd that people portray Bush as this rich kid/guy and Kerry as some kind of mainstream "man of the people." This same Kerry that has this mansion there and that summer house here, the guy has more money than 99% of any of us will ever see. Sure, Bush comes from money, but yeah, Kerry isn't much different.
They both want to speak for me, the middle class. I'm not sure either one of them really understands what it is to struggle as a middle class American when they say things like that. But it seems to me that Kerry says things "to say them" and Bush really means what he says. I do see Bush as a more solidly grounded candidate and Kerry as more of a politician.
And if I hear the term "he looks presidential" one more time, I will throw up.
Anyway, the point is Kerry is just as much a rich boy as Bush is, so I wouldn't get too much on my high horse about that one. In fact, most of your 'good ol boys' in Washington are rich boys. America has always been run them, and probably always will. They are generally the ones that have the means and the contacts, as well as the education, to make runs at public office. Yes there are exceptions, but they are few.
"I think it is odd that people portray Bush as this rich kid/guy and Kerry as some kind of mainstream 'man of the people.'"
I respectfully disagree. Kerry has never been presented as anything other than a privileged blue-blood, which is one of the main points here... Bush *does* try to come across that way, even though he has lived his life taking advantage of his situation (Kerry has taken advantage also, but without the facade of being 'one of us...,' and he has demonstrated through his actions the willingness to abandon privilege and serve along with his fellow citizens).
i'll be sure to check this out...my professor mentioned it in my international political economy class, but i didn't think about it again until i read your entry.