FORUMS & LETTERS

Opinion
Debate watching in Mexico
By Jeannie Ralston
October 24, 2008 San Miguel de Allende

This is the first presidential election that I’ve spent out of the country. But that doesn’t mean that I’ve paid any less attention to the campaign. I’ve watched all four debates with intense interest—well, maybe except for the town hall debate. I think I got a little dizzy looking at McCain do laps around the stage. 

The most memorable debate for me was the first one. That’s because I watched it at what felt like the end of the earth. By the time I realized the date it would take place, my family and I had already planned to spend the weekend with two other families in Tolantongo, a remote hot springs resort in Hidalgo, about three hours from San Miguel. I had been to the gorgeous spot once before and it was so isolated up in a canyon that I didn’t remember seeing even a telephone. I was afraid I would miss the debate entirely. 

Imagine my pleasant surprise when I arrived on Friday to find a wading-pool-sized satellite dish, which was connected to a TV in the restaurant. Now came the task of convincing the management to switch it to CNN International for the debate.

“There’s a special futbol report on tonight,” the manager told me. Going up against anything soccer-related in Mexico was about as futile as programming an embroidery competition against American Idol. 

“Well, this is really important, this debate,” I said. “Actually this election will affect everyone here. Everyone in Mexico. It’ll be important for people to watch.”

“Yes, but we don’t get to vote,” he responded. “I think we should be able to vote too.”

“Really, he’s right,” my friend, a New Zealander, turned to me and said. “The whole world should get to vote on the US president, since we all have to deal with the fallout of anything he does.”

She wasn’t helping my cause. “Please,” I said to the manager. “We’ll be here eating dinner. We’ll leave a big tip.”

Finally the manager relented. “All right, all right.” He waved me off, then added, “You know you’ve got some big problems up there right now.” Being told by a Mexican that your country has big problems is an irony as rich as chocolate cheesecake—without any of the sweetness. 

We sat at the table with the New Zealand family and some European friends, while around us I noticed Mexicans casting dirty looks our way (“We want our futbol,” their faces seemed to say). Our table was riveted to the screen, anticipating a gaffe or a slam-dunk on someone’s part. Even the five children in our group were perfectly quiet, either because they understood the gravity of the moment or were hypnotized by the sinewy lines of CNN’s instant response meter. 

We all laughed derisively when McCain called himself a maverick, and I punched the air when Obama said that McCain kept acting as if the Iraq war started in 2007 with the surge, rather than in 2003. 

“Why doesn’t the old guy ever look at Obama?” my nine-year-old asked. “He looks so mad.”

“Honey, he is mad—certifiably mad,” I said. 

“And Obama is talking to the old guy and he still won’t look at him.”

After the debate came to a close, the manager immediately switched the station to the futbol report and then came over to our table. “John McCain. He is good for Mexicans I think.”

“Yeah, but not for Americans,” I retorted, as I dug up some pesos to tip him. 

As we walked to our rooms, my New Zealand friend said, “That didn’t really seem like a debate. I mean it just seemed like two people up there giving their own commercials. It’s much more rough and tumble in New Zealand.”

I agreed, but I pointed out that this was more interaction than you get in some of our debates. Our European friends thought that Obama had blown it because he didn’t chide McCain for trying to get out of the debate. They thought he was too nice, he could have gotten under McCain’s skin and made McCain blow a fuse. I countered that I thought Obama made his points but was still respectful, which should help with older voters. The last thing he needed, I told them, was to come off as cocky or snarky.

I went to bed that night and thought how small the world had become—truly. Technology has led to something like a geographic warp. Here I was in one of the most remote parts of Mexico but still I could be transported by cable TV to the center of the most important moments in the battle over the fate of the world’s superpower. My mind was in one place, my body in another. Actually, I think that this sums up the life of the ex-pat at times, and this divide only becomes more pronounced when there’s turmoil or drama in the mother country. Let’s hope that after the election and the financial crisis, life settles down in the States so we can more fully concentrate on our beautiful lives and neighbors in Mexico.

Jeannie Ralston is the author of The Unlikely Lavender Queen: A Memoir of Unexpected Blossoming. She is a contributing editor at Parenting magazine and a blogger for the Huffington Post. She lives with her husband and two sons in San Miguel and volunteers as an adviser for the lavender co-op near Dolores Hidalgo. 

Letters

Editor,

If I were still teaching critical thinking, the political ad which begins, “You’re voting for the other guy?” published on page 55 of last week’s Atención would make the perfect 10-point quiz. Here is what I would expect my students to observe for full credit. They should recognize this as an issue ad, one purporting to inform on an issue, but obviously meant to influence. They would note that the ad is not sponsored by any legitimate group, but paid for by a single person who does not appear to have any particular political credentials. This constitutes the fallacy of “questionable authority” and should raise a red flag.

The ad begins with the statement, “You're voting for the other guy? He’s not a friend of Israel!!” Hmm, could this be a reference to Senator Obama? Why not say so? The assertion about Israel, although in quotes, is not attributed to any reliable source or backed by any statistics—questionable authority again. Extra credit if you view two exclamation points as a blatant emotional appeal.

The next statement “Your man is not a friend of Jews!!” should be recognized as an invalid inference. Israel is a country with its own political history and agenda. The Jewish people, on the other hand, are a diverse and worldwide group of individuals. It is possible to disagree with some of Israel’s policies and actions without being, as implied, anti-Semitic. Again, two exclamation points do not make it so.

“So what is a person to do?” the ad asks, in an attempt to draw in the reader into this false dilemma. Do your homework and vote with your intellect, that’s what.

Go to the head of the class.

Kate McCorkle

Editor,

I would like to offer a suggestion to further the discussion regarding ideas for promoting San Miguel to the world. I feel it is important to utilize the strengths of a community and its people rather than try to import some foreign celebration that has no connection or historical relevance.

Therefore, I suggest that we study the possibility of hosting an annual, international fireworks festival. What is more authentic to San Miguel than fireworks? It could stretch over two weeks, with the first week for participating cities exclusively from around Mexico. The second week dedicated to cities from around the world, as well as the winning Mexico city, and San Miguel. It would attract tourists from around the globe and keep them longer than a drunken afternoon chasing bulls in the street. Also, tourists attracted to a nightly show of spectacular lights would be a little more refined than the urinating street folks who party at Sanmiguelada (no offense). It can attract thousands of visitors downtown each night at dusk to watch the fireworks (has to be downtown), who will then wander off to the many restaurants, theaters and galleries San Miguel has to offer. Each city who participates will bring several guests with them as well.

Initially we may not attract major fireworks cities such as Vancouver, Canada or Sydney, Australia, but it can build and grow at a reasonable cost as no major infrastructure or construction is needed. San Miguel has the perfect climate and hospitality facilities to accommodate it. Imagine thousands of fireworks, every night by one or two different cities, going off above the rooftops around the Jardin. Now there’s some noise that may attract world attention. Any comments or suggestions would be appreciated.

Don McGillivray