Doug Lief Lief is a third-year
psychology and English student who has fewer multiple personalities
than this column suggests. Contact them at dlief@ucla.edu. Click
Here for more articles by Doug Lief
Hello and welcome to another exciting Monday morning here in
beautiful downtown Westwood as we gear up to analyze another
confrontation between two battle-hardened opponents, Al Gore and
George W. Bush today on “Debate 2000: RAW is WAR.”
I’m your host, commentator Doug Lief, and we’ll be
taking a look at the winners and losers in this week’s
debate. With me in the studio as always is my conservative
colleague Douglas Lief (no relation to me of course) and as always,
Trivial Pursuit champion Dennis Miller.
Let’s take a look at the opening 20 minutes of the Boston
debate, shall we? Now Douglas, Gore spent an awful amount of time
talking specifics on the numbers of both his tax cut, and
Bush’s tax cut. Do you think Bush did an adequate job of
dispelling Gore’s claim that most of the Bush cut goes to the
upper 1 percent?
Absolutely, Doug, and let me tell you why. Bush’s strategy
of name-calling Gore’s calculations “Washington fuzzy
math” was a brilliant move to separate himself from the geek
vote. If there’s one thing the American public has shown time
and time again, it’s that they suck at math, and they want a
leader who can represent those values. I myself only went as far as
geometry in high school, and never took fuzzy math, especially not
the highly advanced Washington variety. Besides, Bush’s
father called Reagan’s plan “voodoo economics”
and he eventually became president. I learned that from
“Ferris Bueller’s Day Off.”
 Illustration by ZACH LOPEZ/Daily Bruin Point well taken,
Douglas. What do you think, Dennis Miller?
Well jeez, Jonesy, it’s like I’m in Plato’s
allegory of the cave with Humbert-Humbert over here, I mean,
Jesus!
Dennis Miller, you are a useless human being.
I second that, Doug.
Anyways gentleman, let’s move on to another important part
of the debate: presentation. Personally, I thought both candidates
stayed on message, and left it up to the American people to decide
whom they liked based on the issues. Douglas?
Well one problem for me was the whooshing sound that kept
occurring while Bush was talking. Sources at the debate
headquarters informed me that it was either caused by Al Gore
confidently huffing over his opponent’s answers, or the sound
of excess air escaping from George Bush’s head. Either way,
the candidates should have been prepared for this eventuality.
Don’t you agree, Doug?
Yes. It’s a simple matter of debate etiquette to keep from
venting idiot gas during the procedure, so as not to affect the
audience. Dennis?
Well babe, it’s like Morris Travers and Sir William Ramsay
out there.
What the hell are you talking about?
Doug, I think Dennis is making an obscure reference to the two
British co-discoverers of the noble gas xenon.
Yeah babe, 1898 was a rockin’ year in chemistry.
Rockin’ like Neils Bohr on laudanum.
Oy. Douglas, let me address one of the most important issues of
the presidential election ““ the upcoming Supreme Court
nominees that the next president will almost certainly make.
Moderator Jim Lehrer asked Bush point-blank about whether or not he
would appoint justices who would overturn Roe v. Wade and outlaw
abortion.
Yes, now here’s where I thought Bush really came on
strong. He often accuses Gore of avoiding the issues and not
actually answering the questions posed to him directly. Here, Bush
showed not only is he willing to accuse Gore of avoiding the issue,
but he is willing to lead by example by avoiding issues himself.
Doug, it is a classic example of a leader who is willing to
illustrate his opponent’s shortcomings by adopting them as
his own.
But Douglas, shouldn’t Bush hide his shortcomings?
See, there you go again with your fuzzy words. I swear if I had
a nickel for every time I didn’t know one of them big words
of yours I’d have 57 cents by now.
But 57 isn’t divisible by five.
Doug, now you’ve got that fuzzy math thing going again. I
swear you must have invented the calculator.
Jeez babe, it’s like a pentium/eniac imbroglio out here,
babe.
Shut up, Dennis!
Listen Doug, this is your problem: you can’t see that Bush
is an inviter, not a divisionater. As a governor for almost seven
years, Bush has worked with both Republicans and Democrats to get
things done. You remember when Lehrer asked Bush about
emergencies.
Douglas, Bush couldn’t even remember when Lehrer asked him
about emergencies. He said, “What was the question
again?”
Exactly. That shows he has his mind on other things, bigger and
better things than this debate. Anyway, he told a very compelling
story about how he bridged the partisan gap to put out a fire in
Texas.
What’s partisan about a fire? A fire starts in a state,
the governor says, “Go put it out.” Somebody puts it
out. Governor shakes hands and kisses babies, end of story.
No, that’s not the end of the story. You think a liberal
bleeding heart like Gray Davis would have the diplomatic know-how
to put out a fire? It takes good old-fashioned Republican common
sense. A liberal would just give that fire a hand-out of water. We
put that fire out in Texas by initiating a tax cut for the upper 1
percent.
How does that work?
Simple, you give the rich more money, they go out and invest in
pools and sprinkler systems. Furthermore, they develop strip malls
over potentially flammable wildlife reserves. This brings in
revenue and reduces the number of trees, which Ronald Reagan
pointed out are responsible for more pollution than anything
else.
Douglas, that brings me to another issue: the Alaskan land Bush
wants to drill for oil. Shouldn’t we leave some of our
precious natural land unspoiled?
Oh sure, today you liberals tell us we can’t drill for oil
in Alaska. Tomorrow we can’t turn the Grand Tetons into a
tobacco plantation. Are you going to cry when we blow up your
precious “moon” for strategic military position?
You know, guys, babes, if I may interject a word here.
You’re missing out on the big picture. The important point of
these debates isn’t to expound on the issues of the day like
Cicero. It’s about concealing the true evil intents behind
both parties. We all know the Republicans are anti-choice,
environment-ruining oligarchists with no sympathy for the sick and
poor who don’t want the government in our lives, except of
course in our bedrooms. We all know the Democrats are like Kane
crying for his Rosebud in Xanadu, giving everybody everything they
can, except what they actually want. But in the debates, they put
all that ugliness aside where you can’t see it, so they can
dicker over five dollars of a social security check like twin
Shylocks cutting coupons out of the Sharper Image catalogue. And
that’s the big picture, folks.
Well Dennis, on that note I think we can conclude this edition
of “Debate 2000: RAW is WAR.” From the left, I’m
Doug Lief, thanks to my partner on the right Douglas Lief, and
encyclopedic comedian Dennis Miller. As we say here, keep bickering
better for bigger and better!