three polarities for a reflex-challenged electorate

In a fascinating, too brief interview this morning on NPR, Bob Dylan ruminated about why he went off his feed as a musician/performer, and what it took to get his mojo back. He is paraphrased as saying:

his audience was past its prime, and its reflexes were shot.

He meant the audience that had been his home, his support, his electorate since 1961.

If the presidential debates establish anything at all, it's that the fabled sober democratic citizenry of Armerica is having its own reflex, or reflux, issues. Here's how I would score Kerry's palpable-in-any-sane-universe hits against our tinpot Executor of Divine Justice:

Debate #1: Polarity: Intelligence vs. Deep Stupidity.
Proved that charges of error and incompetence, richly demonstrated, can't hold a candle to mad credence.

Debate #2: Polarity: Calm Assurance vs. Petulant Querulousness.
Lent support to the notion that pheromones of inarticulate, bursty buzzwords trigger more couch spud viagra than carefully phrased, clearly set forth positions.

Debate #3: Polarity should be: Safety vs. Danger.
The undecided will turn not on whether Bush was incorrect, but whether he is dangerous. Bush has shown he's hell and leather on witless middle Eastern dictators. Is Kerry genial enough to prick the little man into losing it, if only for a blink, rendering visible the danger Mr. Bush poses to us?