ASNN

Actually, Kerry did take a stand. You just have to read between the lines to see it.

What Kerry really communicated in this interview is that, in the face of major concerns like the economy, jobs, making America safe, and doing a better job in the War on Terror the designated hitter rule is pretty insignificant.

His answers were also fairly wise. No matter what stance he took on Pete Rose and the Hall of Fame there would needlessly be legions of armchair jocks getting their panties in a twist over something that, frankly, doesn't matter very much. I like clever, inflammatory banter as much as the next guy, but then I remember that Kerry is running for President of the United States, not interviewing for a sportscast opening.

What Kerry really communicated in this interview is that, in the face of major concerns like the economy, jobs, making America safe, and doing a better job in the War on Terror the designated hitter rule is pretty insignificant.

So he was treating this "diversion" of going to a baseball game as an opportunity to pursue his platform, rather than an actual opportunity to enjoy a game. After all, if he were *really* there to just enjoy himself, WhyTF couldn't he answer a single, solitary, harmless question?

His answers were also fairly wise. No matter what stance he took on Pete Rose and the Hall of Fame there would needlessly be legions of armchair jocks getting their panties in a twist over something that, frankly, doesn't matter very much. I like clever, inflammatory banter as much as the next guy, but then I remember that Kerry is running for President of the United States, not interviewing for a sportscast opening.

I'm not sure that Pete Rose and the Hall of Fame "doesn't matter very much" as it's far more reaching than just a baseball issue. But that aside, you don't really think that anyone would give a flying fig what he specifically answered, do you? I wasn't aware of the DH voting bloc... I just thought it was interesting that when pursued on an exceedingly simple topic, he refused to answer.

To be fair: I'm not overly excited about the state of our country with either of the two "main" candidates at the helm. Kerry was just the one that showed up during the all-important Sox win over the Yankees tonight...

WhyTF couldn't he answer a single, solitary, harmless question?

When you're a candidate for the presidency, there is no such thing as a single, solitary, harmless question. Sad, but true.

I'm not sure that Pete Rose and the Hall of Fame "doesn't matter very much" as it's far more reaching than just a baseball issue.

You're definitely on to something with this one. If you step back from the specifics of the Pete Rose situation, the question addresses the tension Christians experience between calls to both justice and mercy. If Kerry (or anyone) were able to speak a guiding principle and then apply it to the Hall of Fame it could be quite instructive. Instead, the debate always gets mired in the (cosmicly irrelevant) details of Pete's specific situation.

I really hope that not many people would be angry, politically, with the way that he would have answered those questions. If a single person changed their vote based on how Kerry viewed the DH rule, I seriously pity the future of our country. Um, I hope that isn't somehow offending you, Peter. I know how you like your baseball and all...

And I still think he should have answered. It would have been an excellent way to convey lightheartedness and a 'connectedness' with the 'common man'. Or maybe showing that he *is* a 'common man'. While some people might see through it, those armchair quarterbacks would at least maybe see that he's not a 'complete' politician, unable to relax at all. Kinda the thing Gore was plagued by - wooden, etc.

Of course, if Kerry appeared in a cartoon, and did a really good job (like gore, in the futurama episode) it'd score points with me.