Sorry, was hard to keep my focus there, blinded as I was by the racial diversity in the hall lol ...
Is this the end of the Reagan/Rove right?
- Thread starter Gabba Flamenco Crossover
- Start date
mos dan
fact music
views on mccain's speech? i didn't fancy staying up two nights in a row.
palin's speech has got a fairly rapturous reception even from the likes of the guardian, which is a bit odd. it was competent, but no more. i suppose if you lower expectations so much, then...
mccain as grandpa simpson is an interesting one josef. "i didn't DIE in world war two just so that you young people could.." etc etc
palin's speech has got a fairly rapturous reception even from the likes of the guardian, which is a bit odd. it was competent, but no more. i suppose if you lower expectations so much, then...
mccain as grandpa simpson is an interesting one josef. "i didn't DIE in world war two just so that you young people could.." etc etc
crackerjack
Well-known member
Didn't see it myself, but unanimously a damp squib, it seems. Tomasky says is was so bad it must be some devilish plot. OK, he's biased against, but the very right-wing Gerard Baker said it was "an anti-speech":
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article4680017.ece
this from buddy who has trouble registering specifically to voice opinion on this, asked me to quote:
craner
Beast of Burden
DRILL BABY DRILL!
I was surely not the only person to note that new Republican catchphrase and wonder whether it had been informed or inspired by Mario Bava's Italo-horror masterpiece Kill Baby Kill!
Couple of comments on the McCain speech only because I've been out flaneuring all day and just managed to catch it on C-Span.
If he loses, which I still think he will, it won't be because of his "maverik" character and his long bipartisan & anti-corruption Senate record (which has rubbed up Republican hardliners over and over again, and shows Obama's Senate / Chicago record to be both very partisan and mildly corrupt) but because he cannot deliver a speech.
I mean, it was REALLY badly delivered. Cameras constantly zoomed in on black females and Republican Babes and war vets in the audience throughout, and yet coudln't help alighting on two males faces yawning wildly. Which, was, I think slightly embarrasing, in comparison to the weird rapturous euphoria that gripped Obama's boring and monotone and insubstantial speech.
McCain's speech was better written in many ways. It was a strange speech to deliver to a hardcore Republican base audience (he mainly turn up to these events) because of the emphasis on "reform" and "change". In a way, that's clever, because reform emphasises Palin's local record in that regard, and change steals one of Obama's big buzz words.
But at every mention of these two words, with their accompanying anti-"pork barrel politics" and "special interest" messages, the applause was distinctly muted. Unlike every mention of tax cuts, the Surge, the Roosevelt-Reagan tradtion, religion, Vietnam. And, also contrasted the passage on Palin, as well as Palin's over-effusive reception. (Now, you see, she could deliver a speech, had the drilling issue in total command, as well as the God and Guns thing: so her reform and anti-corruption agenda was well-balanced out. Not for McCain. This odd balance is, however, a reason the ticket might appeal to those ominous "floating voters".)
Significant portions of the Republican convention have NO appetitie for McCain, this is obvious still, and I sensed a quiet but resiliant opposition to Him + Reform & Change.
It's dangerous tactics, is it not, to stake out this line, when the Republican's have been running the country for 8 years? It's hardly on-message. It's a not so subtle critique of the Bush years, and members of the administration, notably, I think, Dick Cheney.
I thought it was an uncomfortable, tense speech to deliver, given in an appropriately awkward manner.
It was interesting to be reminded (or informed for most of you, I suspect) of McCain's Navy and Vietnam and Senate years. How can Obama's resume stand up to this in any way?
I would still like one Dissensian to give me a run down of Obama's career that goes beyond him writing numerous memoirs about how unique and interesting he is and several unremarkable Senate years.
I was surely not the only person to note that new Republican catchphrase and wonder whether it had been informed or inspired by Mario Bava's Italo-horror masterpiece Kill Baby Kill!
Couple of comments on the McCain speech only because I've been out flaneuring all day and just managed to catch it on C-Span.
If he loses, which I still think he will, it won't be because of his "maverik" character and his long bipartisan & anti-corruption Senate record (which has rubbed up Republican hardliners over and over again, and shows Obama's Senate / Chicago record to be both very partisan and mildly corrupt) but because he cannot deliver a speech.
I mean, it was REALLY badly delivered. Cameras constantly zoomed in on black females and Republican Babes and war vets in the audience throughout, and yet coudln't help alighting on two males faces yawning wildly. Which, was, I think slightly embarrasing, in comparison to the weird rapturous euphoria that gripped Obama's boring and monotone and insubstantial speech.
McCain's speech was better written in many ways. It was a strange speech to deliver to a hardcore Republican base audience (he mainly turn up to these events) because of the emphasis on "reform" and "change". In a way, that's clever, because reform emphasises Palin's local record in that regard, and change steals one of Obama's big buzz words.
But at every mention of these two words, with their accompanying anti-"pork barrel politics" and "special interest" messages, the applause was distinctly muted. Unlike every mention of tax cuts, the Surge, the Roosevelt-Reagan tradtion, religion, Vietnam. And, also contrasted the passage on Palin, as well as Palin's over-effusive reception. (Now, you see, she could deliver a speech, had the drilling issue in total command, as well as the God and Guns thing: so her reform and anti-corruption agenda was well-balanced out. Not for McCain. This odd balance is, however, a reason the ticket might appeal to those ominous "floating voters".)
Significant portions of the Republican convention have NO appetitie for McCain, this is obvious still, and I sensed a quiet but resiliant opposition to Him + Reform & Change.
It's dangerous tactics, is it not, to stake out this line, when the Republican's have been running the country for 8 years? It's hardly on-message. It's a not so subtle critique of the Bush years, and members of the administration, notably, I think, Dick Cheney.
I thought it was an uncomfortable, tense speech to deliver, given in an appropriately awkward manner.
It was interesting to be reminded (or informed for most of you, I suspect) of McCain's Navy and Vietnam and Senate years. How can Obama's resume stand up to this in any way?
I would still like one Dissensian to give me a run down of Obama's career that goes beyond him writing numerous memoirs about how unique and interesting he is and several unremarkable Senate years.
craner
Beast of Burden
Rundown on the Creationist stuff:
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gV5jvU52RD3WBflzbmSu5l6zwOqAD92V3VQG0
You know, this sort of talk doesn't sit easy with me, but when the media hysteria hits, and suddenly we think that Palin would use a VP ticket to obsessively force American kids to dig Creationism in classrooms, my reaction is...well, what did she say? And it wasn't much. The liberal media line is simply distortion, inflation.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gV5jvU52RD3WBflzbmSu5l6zwOqAD92V3VQG0
You know, this sort of talk doesn't sit easy with me, but when the media hysteria hits, and suddenly we think that Palin would use a VP ticket to obsessively force American kids to dig Creationism in classrooms, my reaction is...well, what did she say? And it wasn't much. The liberal media line is simply distortion, inflation.
D
droid
Guest
Its called desperation.
Not being in the navy, and not particpating in murderous illegal wars is a good starting point.
Not that I think Obama is any great shakes. His popularity has fallen with each shift to the right and lets face it, we're talking minor differences in policy within a very narrow framework.
A worrying fact is that the Republicans dont need to win, they just need to get close enough to be able to cheat convincingly. Its happened twice now and the mechanisms are in place for it to happen again.
D
droid
Guest
LOL. Goddarn liberal media in their fancy New York offices.
D
droid
Guest
The 'liberal' media is nothing but a neo-KKKon myth and you know it! 
No, if he loses, it will be because his 'brand' (e.g., maverick within his own party, POW, very old man) has nothing to do with the economy, and barring ugly infusions of racism and more culture wars, the economy will be what decides the election.
His speech, apart from revealing to all precisely how elderly, slow moving, slow speaking, and unfit health-wise he is to be president (this was clearly not the McCain of yore, as this fellow is now extremely old, shockingly old in comparison to his former self), offered no new economic ideas, and parodied with lies those already proposed by Obama.
His economic 'message' in the speech, furthermore, amounted to fluff rehearsals of the same tired Republican economic policies that have ruined the country, coupled with a litany of falsehoods.
To most political observers not religiously attached to right-wing ideology, McCain's candidacy has become something of a joke -- a joke that may still win, of course, unfortunately.
And Droid is correct: no matter what the final tallies are on election day, corruption on the part of the Republicans may well turn the election for a third time. Republicans are world-class experts at this form of corruption, among other forms of it, of course. If you support McCain, you side with one of the most corrupt political parties, and administrations, in modern democratic history.
vimothy
yurp
I wish you could sort of fuse Obama and McCain's economic policies together. I like the pro-corporate, supply-side stuff from McCain's camp (encourage job creation), and I like the pro-middle class tax cuts from Obama (make globalisation attractive again). Also, Obama seems to have a plan for health care, which is, er, important. Obama-McCain, anyone? Obama def. needs to get some better dudes advising him on the military, though.
vimothy
yurp
In a tactical sense, I guess the Palin nomination is genius. Is it ten years out-of-date? Maybe. Maybe motivating the hard-core is not the real issue for conservatives, though I guess alientating them (i.e. McCain) is not a smart game-plan either. (Apparently he wanted to pick Lieberman?) I can't help but look at Palin and think "what.the.fuck." Was it Douglas Holtz-Eakin who said yes she's got charisma but they're having to spend all their time briefing her on policy, about which she basically has no idea. And she's running for McCain who also doesn't know a damn thing about economics. Balls. Can anyone see her at diplomatic meetings with foreign leaders? Think that some unscrupulous Machiavelli would be better. Maybe she's some sort of female Reagan (fingers crossed), but at this stage, who knows? VaR: couldn't be more serious. It's great to fuck off the liberals, Oliver, but I watched her during her (excellent) speech and worried.
vimothy
yurp
Apparently it's true:
SARAH Palin was hailed as “Ronald Reagan in a dress” yesterday — by the former President’s son.
Michael Reagan, 63, said watching the vice-presidential hopeful was like seeing “my dad reborn — only this time he’s a she”.
Palin’s stirring speech at the Republican convention on Wednesday night was watched by 40million people across the US.
And Michael, a broadcaster and writer whose father was President from 1981 to 1989 — said: “I’ve been trying to convince my fellow conservatives that they have been wasting their time in a fruitless quest for a new Ronald Reagan.
....
“I insisted he was one of a kind. I was wrong!”
Describing Palin’s speech as “electrifying”, he added: “Welcome back, Dad, even if you’re wearing a dress and bearing children this time around.”
Michael Reagan, 63, said watching the vice-presidential hopeful was like seeing “my dad reborn — only this time he’s a she”.
Palin’s stirring speech at the Republican convention on Wednesday night was watched by 40million people across the US.
And Michael, a broadcaster and writer whose father was President from 1981 to 1989 — said: “I’ve been trying to convince my fellow conservatives that they have been wasting their time in a fruitless quest for a new Ronald Reagan.
....
“I insisted he was one of a kind. I was wrong!”
Describing Palin’s speech as “electrifying”, he added: “Welcome back, Dad, even if you’re wearing a dress and bearing children this time around.”
vimothy
yurp
This is pretty smart though:
Democrats regard their policies as self-evidently in the interests of the US working and middle classes. Yet those wide segments of US society keep helping to elect Republican presidents. How is one to account for this? Are those people idiots? Frankly, yes – or so many liberals are driven to conclude. Either that or bigots, clinging to guns, God and white supremacy; or else pathetic dupes, ever at the disposal of Republican strategists. If they only had the brains to vote in their interests, Democrats think, the party would never be out of power. But again and again, the Republicans tell their lies, and those stupid damned voters buy it. ...
Because it was so unexpected, Sarah Palin’s nomination for the vice-presidency jolted these attitudes to the surface. Ms Palin is a small-town American. It is said that she has only recently acquired a passport. Her husband is a fisherman and production worker. She represents a great slice of the country that the Democrats say they care about – yet her selection induced an apoplectic fit.
For days, the derision poured down from Democratic party talking heads and much of the media too. The idea that “this woman” might be vice-president or even president was literally incomprehensible. The popular liberal comedian Bill Maher ... noted that John McCain’s case for the presidency was that only he was capable of standing between the US and its enemies, but that should he die he had chosen “this stewardess” to take over. This joke was not – or not only – a complaint about lack of experience. It was also an expression of class disgust. I give Mr Maher credit for daring to say what many Democrats would only insinuate. ...
Voters in small towns and suburbs, forever mocked and condescended to by metropolitan liberals, are attuned to this disdain. Every four years, many take their revenge.
The irony in 2008 is that the Democratic candidate, despite Republican claims to the contrary, is not an elitist. Barack Obama is an intellectual, but he remembers his history. He can and does connect with ordinary people. His courteous reaction to the Palin nomination was telling. ...
The problem in my view is less Mr Obama and more the attitudes of the claque of official and unofficial supporters that surrounds him. The prevailing liberal mindset is what makes the criticisms of Mr Obama’s distance from working Americans stick.
If only the Democrats could contain ... their consequent distaste for wide swathes of the US electorate, they might gain the unshakeable grip on power they feel they deserve. ...
The Palin nomination could still misfire for Mr McCain, but the liberal reaction has made it a huge success so far. To avoid endlessly repeating this mistake, Democrats need to learn some respect.
Because it was so unexpected, Sarah Palin’s nomination for the vice-presidency jolted these attitudes to the surface. Ms Palin is a small-town American. It is said that she has only recently acquired a passport. Her husband is a fisherman and production worker. She represents a great slice of the country that the Democrats say they care about – yet her selection induced an apoplectic fit.
For days, the derision poured down from Democratic party talking heads and much of the media too. The idea that “this woman” might be vice-president or even president was literally incomprehensible. The popular liberal comedian Bill Maher ... noted that John McCain’s case for the presidency was that only he was capable of standing between the US and its enemies, but that should he die he had chosen “this stewardess” to take over. This joke was not – or not only – a complaint about lack of experience. It was also an expression of class disgust. I give Mr Maher credit for daring to say what many Democrats would only insinuate. ...
Voters in small towns and suburbs, forever mocked and condescended to by metropolitan liberals, are attuned to this disdain. Every four years, many take their revenge.
The irony in 2008 is that the Democratic candidate, despite Republican claims to the contrary, is not an elitist. Barack Obama is an intellectual, but he remembers his history. He can and does connect with ordinary people. His courteous reaction to the Palin nomination was telling. ...
The problem in my view is less Mr Obama and more the attitudes of the claque of official and unofficial supporters that surrounds him. The prevailing liberal mindset is what makes the criticisms of Mr Obama’s distance from working Americans stick.
If only the Democrats could contain ... their consequent distaste for wide swathes of the US electorate, they might gain the unshakeable grip on power they feel they deserve. ...
The Palin nomination could still misfire for Mr McCain, but the liberal reaction has made it a huge success so far. To avoid endlessly repeating this mistake, Democrats need to learn some respect.