Recent Blogs
Blog Archive
Blog Archive
Thursday, August 28th, 2008
DNC Winners and Losers
Even though I'm not a donkey, I am a political junkie (certifiable). So I have been watching some of the extended coverage of the DNC. Before the second coming speech tonight, let's analyze who has sparkled and who has not.
Let me hand out these awards:
1) Bill Clinton- No wonder this guy was President twice. Stage presence. Before we even talk about policy (which is just going to appeal to the same old, same old supporters), this man has a commanding way about himself to communicate. He was in Reagan's league. He (and Biden) have been the only two to make any detailed reasonings on why someone should vote for Obama. It was a great speech, albeit 3 times longer than the time allotted!
2) Hillary Clinton- While her endorsement of Obama lacked any meat, she did what she needed to do, and she was sincere about it. If it weren't for Bill, this would have been Obama's running mate. Will her supporters suck it up and go for Barack? Probably, most will. She's the favorite in 2012 if Obama loses.
3) Brian Schweitzer- Who? The Governor of Montana. This man brought the house down, warming up for Hillary. I could easily see this guy in play nationally in the next cycle or two. Don't know how he is policy-wise (can't be that liberal to get elected in Montana), but he is a gifted communicator who connects well to audiences.
Honorable Mention: Joe Biden. While his speech was full of exaggerations and inaccuracies about John McCain, it still had an effectiveness about it. Strong speaking, which he is known for. The GOP better find a tough VP today who can spar with him in the debate.
Thumbs down: Mark Warner, Former Governor of Virginia, Keynote Address. Bad choice to pick him, even though his star is rising. Good choice to bump him out of the primetime slot, because it was weak. He leads the league now in falsely accusing McCain and distorting his record, and lost my respect (which I once had for him). While he will win his Senate race in the Fall against a weak GOP candidate, the speech was severely lacking the energy and truth needed to make a real dent.
No, don't worry faithful readers, I'm not voting for Obama. But I will give credit where credit is due.
Side note: Can anyone defend to me the Obama camp claim that green energy will produce 5,000,000 new jobs in this country? The number just sounds contrived. And besides, wouldn't many of those jobs just be replacing old energy jobs? One would think so. It sounds a lot more like politics than substance to me.
DNC Winners and Losers
Even though I'm not a donkey, I am a political junkie (certifiable). So I have been watching some of the extended coverage of the DNC. Before the second coming speech tonight, let's analyze who has sparkled and who has not.
Let me hand out these awards:
1) Bill Clinton- No wonder this guy was President twice. Stage presence. Before we even talk about policy (which is just going to appeal to the same old, same old supporters), this man has a commanding way about himself to communicate. He was in Reagan's league. He (and Biden) have been the only two to make any detailed reasonings on why someone should vote for Obama. It was a great speech, albeit 3 times longer than the time allotted!
2) Hillary Clinton- While her endorsement of Obama lacked any meat, she did what she needed to do, and she was sincere about it. If it weren't for Bill, this would have been Obama's running mate. Will her supporters suck it up and go for Barack? Probably, most will. She's the favorite in 2012 if Obama loses.
3) Brian Schweitzer- Who? The Governor of Montana. This man brought the house down, warming up for Hillary. I could easily see this guy in play nationally in the next cycle or two. Don't know how he is policy-wise (can't be that liberal to get elected in Montana), but he is a gifted communicator who connects well to audiences.
Honorable Mention: Joe Biden. While his speech was full of exaggerations and inaccuracies about John McCain, it still had an effectiveness about it. Strong speaking, which he is known for. The GOP better find a tough VP today who can spar with him in the debate.
Thumbs down: Mark Warner, Former Governor of Virginia, Keynote Address. Bad choice to pick him, even though his star is rising. Good choice to bump him out of the primetime slot, because it was weak. He leads the league now in falsely accusing McCain and distorting his record, and lost my respect (which I once had for him). While he will win his Senate race in the Fall against a weak GOP candidate, the speech was severely lacking the energy and truth needed to make a real dent.
No, don't worry faithful readers, I'm not voting for Obama. But I will give credit where credit is due.
Side note: Can anyone defend to me the Obama camp claim that green energy will produce 5,000,000 new jobs in this country? The number just sounds contrived. And besides, wouldn't many of those jobs just be replacing old energy jobs? One would think so. It sounds a lot more like politics than substance to me.
Nice blog. Its refreshing to see someone from the "other side" respectful of good campaigning and candidacy. Even if you don't agree with their policy at least you can see their strengths and use that to reason when forming a decision about who you are going to vote for. I don't feel like most people are like that, in general.
I think most people vote for a party or candidate because their parents are voting for that party or candidate, or have for years. I don't vote for the party but for the candidate in most cases. I try my best to take in equal amounts of information from both sides so that I give each candidate a fair chance.
My views on the DNC last night pretty much align with what you said with the exception of Biden's inaccuracies on McCain. I actually watched his speech twice and thought everything he said was accurate with what I have read/heard. What exactly did he say that was wrong?
Two of them that come immediately to mind are this:
-getting accused of voting down a minimum wage hike 19 times, because he doesn't care about families. While I don't have all the research, this must be a distortion if you know how Congress works. What is almost certain is that these bills were either tacked on to a larger piece of legislation McCain voted down, OR they had junk tacked on to them (suck as pork spending) that caused McCain to vote no. Congressional votes are way more complicated than Biden let on. How many times did McCain vote for a minimum wage hike? We were never told. That would give me a better clue as to whether or not McCain saw a need for this. It was a political stunt, plain and simple.
-the whole Afghanistan argument was nonsense. Biden blasted McCain for saying 3 years ago that our mission there had succeeded, since we were not reading about it anymore. Then said we should listen to Obama, who said 1 year ago we need to send more troops there. What a ridiculous comparison! 3 years ago, everyone felt Afghanistan was hugely successful, outside of the capture of OBL. And in that 2 year span between McCain's statement and Obama's, history change. Evil resurged. Conditions altered. I'm sure McCain feels otherwise now, and to say 3 years ago that we had succeeded doesn't necessarily say we had permanently succeeded. It's a little like someone saying in 2004, "New Orleans is a large, thriving, growing city in the United States," and then being called a fool in 2008 for saying that 4 years ago. What's missing is the reality of Katrina, of course. That's what Joe essentially did. Biden was looking for contrived weapons in this line of thinking, not arguments. Sadly, many will buy into them and believe the accusations without doing the homework.
Anyway, you didn't mention Michelle's speech - any thoughts? Also, who's your favorite for McCain's VP pick? (sorry if you already mentioned that elsewhere, I've been gone from the internets lately.)
Bill and Michelle's speeches seemed like they really didnt have their heart into it.
I wonder if Barak will finally give specifics tonight.
As for McCain's veep, I've drunk too many of the speculations to be clear.
Romney? Maybe. Wouldn't be too bad.
Pawlenty? Maybe. Better than Romney, but won't immediately attract voters (if at all).
Lieberman? Doubtful. Might start to give McCain a lot of trouble, though.
Ridge? Maybe. Though pro-choice, I think he and I would agree on almost everyone else. Might help get PA to go red.
Palin? Please! She rules! But only 2 years in the governship of Alaska means probably not. Not yet.
Rudy? Nah. Though he's a pretty good attack dog.
Jindal? One day, my friend. But not this time.
Huckabee? I'd be fairly happy, but this ain't happening.
Petraeus? Doubtful, but would be a slam dunk pick. Good luck trying to attack him! I recommend drinking drano as a safer alternative to going after this war hero politically.
I don't know who it's going to be. I'll say Pawlenty or Ridge. But I hope it is someone more dynamic than those two.
McCain might leak his pick tonight before the Obama speech. I think that would be a great move. Distract the coronation and build momentum heading into the RNC. Prediction: tonight doesn't pack the punch they hope it does. They have raised the bar of expectations higher than Obama (or anyone?) can meet.
Does your wife know you hate women?
Because she's intelligent and well educated?
Did you scarf down your fat balls with delicious greasy HFCS sauce?
http://images.salon.com/comics/tomo/2008/04/28/tomo/sto...
That said, it was wonderful seeing a functional black family achieve such a thing as the nomination of a major political party for President. I'm sure if I was older, I'd appreciate such a thing even more. The best thing, IMHO, that could come out of an Obama Presidency would be that there is racial healing in America and more health in black family life. I just hope those two things can happen by other means :^)
I agree, I think Obama winning the election could do more for racial healing than anything since Martin Luther King Jr.'s march on Washington AND their beautiful family could help promote health in ALL families' lives, not just black families.
Brian, what does IMHO mean? I'm too old to get some of this code!
Oh yeah, we got 'em, girl!
Brian, although I am not a self described political junkie as you, I do try to do my reading. One of the things I keep asking about and no one seems to be able to respond in an intelligent manner is why the Republican party is so gung ho on McCain. I know the obvious reason...clinching enough votes for the nomination, duh! 8 years ago when he was trying to run for the presidency, his own party threw him under the bus. The rest of the party labeled him as too soft and wishy washy and now they're all about him. His politics haven't changed. That's pretty darn hypocritical. I'm assuming you plan on voting for McCain. Is it the lesser of 2 evils for you, or is it more than that? And something else I recently learned about was the Keating 5 scandal and his role in it. I'm really surprised the media hasn't starting beating that drum. Maybe they will after the convention. If not, could it be a media bias? Just some thoughts!
Soundchick, thanks for the affirmation of my open-mindedness. That is always a personal goal about most things.
People are excited about voting for McCain because they do not want Obama. It's that simple: this election is about Obama. McCain is not the GOP dream candidate, but in the minds of conservatives, he is a great improvement from Obama. We don't want anyone's taxes raised. We don't want any more voluntary killing of life in the womb (this is our view, let's save the abortion debate for later). We think government can be more of a problem, than a solution. We think the world is more dangerous than many Democrats will acknowledge. We want Supreme Court Justices who interpret law by the letter and not by the cultural flow. We don't think the United Nations is a very competent body to depend on, even though we wish it were so and have labored with the hopes it would be- so there are times we have to act with perhaps few friends behind us instead of the whole world. McCain helps us achieve, possibly, some or most of that.
So no, it isn't hypocritical- I'm not about to get a Johnny-Mac tattoo on my lower back, or even the peel-off variety from a box of Corn Flakes. We ain't all that thrilled with him. But all the GOP rising stars are 45 years old or less, and need time to ripen, so here we are. And just like '96, the GOP seems to always nominate the "next in line." Most Republicans are not "all about McCain," but we would say, "he's the best we've got to choose from now!" He was my third choice in the primaries behind Huckabee and Thompson. Lesser of two evils? In some sense, yes. McCain, to me, represents a better candidate than Dole (96) a little worse than Bush (2000), but better than Bush (2004) and much better than President Bush (2004-2008). He's no Reagan, but he has the experience to make America better and keep America as safe as possible.
I learned about the Keating 5 too, and believe McCain was not found guilty of anything else but some poor judgment (others I think were legally found guilty of crimes).
Brian, your blog was very well done!
I do want to add that I have enjoyed watching much of the DNC and thoroughly appreciated Michelle's speech!! I thought she did an outstanding job and I loved seeing the girls "talking" to their dad via satelite!! The Obama family is precious and I really feel then can relate to the all-American family in today's insecure world.
"I think a lot of Republicans might feel differently however if they were truly poor in their adult lives and in need of assistance to help feed their children or themselves."
Wrong - at least form me - I have been adult, living in low income houseing and forced to apply for food stamps, medicaid and WIC. I used those programs for a short period of time to get us through a rough part of life and I have no problem with funding those programs for short term use. But the programs are being used as a lifestyle and an excuse for people to sit on their asses and not bother to try and take care of themselves. Anytime a pregnant, jobless married woman with no insurance can walk through the door of the welfare office and be turned down because her 2 year old Toyota truck (a bare bones truck that came with no A/C and no back bumper, with a cracked windshield) is worth too much money, yet there are people picking up their "I had another baby" check and food stamps after parking their practically brand new Cadillac out front - there is a problem. When you are in a grocery line and the people in front of you pay for their order with food stamps and are talking about how their dog is gonna eat so good that night because of the steak they just bought him - there is a problem. Menawhile - in my cart were the cheapest things I could find to feed my family. We had no pets because we could not afford them. So I have been there and I still say we need to cut the government programs. There is too mush waste in our government and we need a small, less intrusive government.
You wrote: "We want Supreme Court Justices who interpret law by the letter and not by the cultural flow." Not to take this thread too far off track, but I couldn't disagree more. The law has to be dynamic. It if didn't change because the cultural mores and values of our nation changed, then slavery would still be legal in parts of the country and women couldn't vote. (I'm guessing there are some people floating around here who might be OK with that...) Two extreme scenarios, I know, but hopefully you see what I'm saying.
As far as McCain being the lesser of two evils is concerned, I've really enjoyed watching the far right-wingers deal with McCain. My favorite radio station in Bloomington changed overnight to a 24 hour conservative talk station (Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity, Levine, Savage, etc.). I kept listening and have for a year now. It makes the drives to Champaign go quickly and honestly I find it endlessly entertaining. Anyway, during the primaries, they all lambasted McCain big time. But when it was clear he would be the nominee, they had to do back flips to get on board. But, as one of them said, Obama is wrong 110% of the time; McCain, only 60%. So that's something I guess. How do you galvanize a base around that though?
Anyway....I'd also like to say that I look forward to debates with Brian, as you are always respectful and intelligent, and I hope you know that I respect your opinions as well.
justmeg- when was the last time the republicans actually decreased the size of government and taxes...without blowing up the deficit? It really doesn't count when you just spew 'small govt., lower taxes', and then pass the bill to the democrats and leave them to be the responsible ones. Yes, I absolutely agree that republicans slash funding for social programs, like school lunch and education funding, for instance, but I don't remember a president in my lifetime(Reagan, Bush1, Bush mini) that actually followed through with any of the small government bs.
-Reagan blew up the budget with his war on drugs, that has proved to be very profitable for terrorists and king-pins. It's simple supply and demand. He also had his many pet wars, and financed many of today's wack-job dictators.
-Bush1 had the Gulf War
-Bush mini, well, throw a dart at the board. Take a look at the current deficit compared to when he took office.
That reason is a cop-out. That says to me that you vote that way because that is what's comfortable to you. That's how your parents voted, etc. That's fine, but it simply isn't true that republicans make the government smaller and more efficient, they are just very, very good at selling that horseshit to you.
The elitist thing-
People that call intelligent, powerful, respectable people elitists are ignorant, jealous, and disappointed in themselves for not turning out better than a forty something year old black woman, born to a normal middle class family, who worked her butt off to become the person she is.
Get over your tractor driving, Budweiser drinking, livermush eating ass and do something with your own life that you can be proud of.
By the way, did you miss the fact that Budweiser was sold to a Belgian company? The only thing that Lady McCain did was be born into an uber rich family that delivers beer for Bud, among others. They are a distribution company that now delivers crap beer made by Belgians.
How the fuck does that make her any more an American than Michelle Obama?
The proud to be an American thing-
This is probably no surprise, and I won't be running for president or first lady in my lifetime, but I have rarely been proud of my country in my lifetime. The times that I have been generally have nothing to do with politics. I am proud of my family, I am proud when I see people reach out to help others. I am proud that there are some people brave enough to stand up and protest, and I am proud that we are able to do that, but I am rarely proud of American politics and policy(which is half-assed and half-true at its very best), and am absolutely appalled at how we continue to deny equal rights to all people, and even allow some to starve and die of curable diseases.
I'm out. You guys are Matt free for the weekend. Sorry for the spew.
And also, Budweiser tastes like urine.
Oh, and Budweiser doesn't taste like urine, it tastes like ass.
Do you mean "out classed" b/c she ("Lynn") was born with a silver spoon in her mouth and wears more makeup than Bozo the Clown?
http://dcf.wisconsin.gov/w2/wisworks.htm
The first time I head an interview with Michelle Obama I said to my husband, I like her, she' not lying. To label.her an elitist-I just don't get it. She has worked hard all her life and is a wonderful role model for women, period. We are not voting for first spouses, we are voting for our next president. Picking the spouses apart I think is a diversion and distraction.What I am seeking is a change from the mess we have been in, I don't have the words or knowledge to be any more specific. I do strongly believe that the way you live your personal life is a revealing look into your heart and what your real ethics are. I just can't vote for McCain just because he was a prisoner of war. I can't vote for someone who is part of the existing political quagmire. I am going to take a leap of faith and vote for someone I believe really will take us in a new and better direction. I have been wrong more than I have been right in my political choices and its hard to take a risk and even vote at all. I am grateful to be an American and to even have the priveledge to express my views and the freedom to express my doubts and disappointment in our leaders of the past. I don't want to loose this priveldege so I will continue to vote.
I am proud of the United States' performance and attitude at the Olympics.
I am proud of the United States' scientific advances, including our gains against cancer and our research on Mars.
I am proud of the United States balancing a budget (both parties deserve credit) in the 90's.
I am proud of the United States' efforts to fight AIDS in Africa.
I am proud of the Unites States' giving billions of dollars to impoverished nations.
I am proud of the United States defeating the Taliban in Afghanistan. While still ongoing in some sense, we've made tremendous progress.
I am proud of the United States welcoming people from all nations to live here legally.
That is a list I came up with off the cuff, in about 90 seconds. If I was Mrs. Obama, I would think there was something in the 8 years of Clinton for which she could be proud of. I think she just exaggerated and spoke on feeling. Like I said, it was at least sloppy.
Go Matt!!!! And Sarah would make a great first lady!!!
Then you have numerous stories like the one about Chris Gardner, who Will Smith played in Pursuit of Happyness, about a homeless black man who became one of the top stock brokers and built an empire.
Or I can tell you about my brother who was broke, on food stamps, and built the top Physical Therapy company in the US out of his basement.
We should all be proud to be Americans. We have more opportunity here than anywhere else on earth. All it takes is a little perseverance.
Do we have too many homeless and down trodden people? Yes. But we provide welfare, free schools, transportaton subsidies, rental subsidies, soup kitchens, etc. We even have bankruptcy so people can get a chance at a new beginning.
As far as our status with the rest of the world, again we are not perfect. But we provide billions of dollars of aid to foreign countries. During the tsunami, we immediately sent relief with no questions asked. There is no doubt that we have done more good than harm. I am not downplaying the bad that we have done but on the whole, I think the world is better off with a United States of America in it
It also drives me nuts how people say "God bless America" constantly. How about "God bless The World"? There are many places in the world that in desperate need of some blessings.
Its all about the jingoistic mindset that gets perpetuated from generation to generation by such practices.
I understand what you are saying. I certainly did not mean it in a conceited way. I was just pointing out to Matt and others the many many reasons that we have to feel good about our country.
I am sorry that they get so wound up about the few challenges that we may have. Not to run from them but I think you have to look at the positives in life. As someone once told me, "Whether you think you can or you think you can't, you are usually right"
When we reach out as a nation to help people or other nations in need, it is at the insistence of the people, not policy makers. When we rise up to feed and clothe our own that have fallen, it is at the insistence of the people, not policy makers.
I have never been and never will be an America is #1 kind of person. I have seen just enough of the world to know better. I think it's naive and arrogant to neglect the greatness and obvious similarities of all people, in all nations.
God bless us all. We sure as hell need it.
George,
I agree with this: "For example our crime rates are pretty hideous and we have, by far, the largest prison population per capita in the world." But... other countries' prisons don't have cable TV, classrooms, HEALTHCARE, air conditioning, food approved by the dietitians, etc. I bet if we started cutting off guys' wee wees when it fit the crime, I bet we'd start seeing a dramatic drop, wouldn't you say?
One barometer that I use is to see where we stand in the world is to look at how many people are trying to come to our country. Based on that metric, I think we are still held in high regard.
I am impressed with this discourse. I'm proud to be an American humzooer.
I am watching Obama right now. Damn, the whole family is beautifully color coordinated!
Al Gore hit it out of the park. He was by far my favorite of the week.
..and Barney Smith was awesome.
-- moLlY iViNs
But alas, his performance was not the crowning moment of the night. That belongs to Flips! What's up yo! Hells yeah.
Rick, everything you've mentioned has to do with making money--rags to riches and all that. I think that typifies American thinking: money and self.
Maybe I'm just cynical and pessimistic, but while there are things that people in our country have done to make me proud, I'm not exceptionally proud of America most of the time.
If you'll forgive the comparison, Obama has going for him what pentecostal preachers (the really heretical ones) have going for them. Half of attracting the crowd is how you use your voice (pauses, tone, volume increases, etc.), how you project confidence. He has this mastered, no doubt. But when you hear him enough, for me, it gets a little old, and you start to focus more on the content.
I lol'd that he said about McCain, "If you don't have a record to run on, then you have to belittle your opponent." (paraphrased) Look who's talking! And I thought the speech could have flowed better organizationally- it seemed more like a loose bunchings of rhetoric and political proverbs.
However, CafePress is cool and you could create your own and sell them if you wanted to. Looks like there's a lot of places. Here's another one: http://skreened.com/someofnothing/pro-obama-barney-smit...
There are 2 "scandals" concerning her that both have pretty simple answers. More on that later.
I am a believer in constitutional amendments, so the illustration about slavery is not applicable.