Watching Lurch’s….err Fred Thompson’s speech last night (I can only take so much bloody shirt waving at once) something struck me.
The Democratic convention looked like America. The Republican convention looks like a country club.
A segregated country club.
Loading ...
My thought as I watched these old men speak is that the Daddy party has now become the Grampa party.
In my family, Grampa is lovable, sometimes grumpy, repeats the same stories about the past, can’t hear very well, but pretends to listen.
He spends his time digging through clippings and stories about family history, and tries to make sure people remember the big events of his life.
The Republicans today are similar. Except not lovable.
Oh yeah, John McCain was a POW, so he has a lifetime free pass.
Well at least that explains McCain’s free pass. Where the heck did Obama’s come from?
Has the RNC released any demographic breakdowns on the delegates and alternates? Not just a geographic one, but gender, ethnicity, religion, etc.
If a thought as clichéd, oft repeated and thoroughly obvious as that “struck” you I think it can be safety assumed you haven’t been paying much attention.
MRW - Yes, I have a demographic breakdown. 100% American.
KH — and I think you’re an anonymous blowhard whose self righteous lecturing has gotten tired. Sean
All over America people are looking at this convention and saying those in attendance don’t look like America. They don’t look like the people in my neighborhood, my work or my shopping mall. They look like a segment of America but certainly not like the America we all live in.
Whether it is like a country club or an old folks home… the RNC is not an accurate portrayal of our America. I find that some how encouraging.
Sean,
Good to know. I think your thoughtless repetition of political clichés and nescient punditry perfectly represent the type of mindless drivel which continues to reduce our countries political discourse, and hope for each other, to ever lower levels.
Then.go.some.place.else.
Hear.hear.
Think of me as your sites very own version the peaceful protesters at the RNC. I come to you for the same reasons they go to St. Paul.
The difference between me and those that drove to the Xcel to voice their opinions is that I’m saving the planet by not using fossil fuels to do it.
I to was struck by how desperately the news camaras were scanning the convention floor looking for anyone different, i.e., not old and white.
I cannot fathom how freaking boring it must be.
KH-
Where do you imagine electricity comes from? Magic pony generator?
And yes…the republican party does NOT look like America. Pointing it out when it becomes most evident does not warrant criticism.
the nonstop parade of delusion that is the RNC convention just wasn’t worth watching to me. I tried, I really did. But I agree with many points above. At least it is glaringly obvious as to how our country slipped down the toilet these last few election cycles. Sadly, obviously, not everyone has learned their lesson. If this failed party somehow pulled off a close election, what a sad reflection of human ignorance!
In all honestly, as a moderate who has crossed over and voted for D’s on occasion, I would have considered looking at some of the Democratic candidates this year. But I won’t for three reasons. Rip them all you want, but this is how one person thinks:
1) The Reid / Pelosi show of the past two years showed me that the Dems have nothing better to offer America. For someone like me to cross over and vote for the Dems, I need to see that they are going to make good decisions and do it in a way that gets things done. I’ve seen neither, and I believe that more Democratic power will lead to more of the same. I’d rather roll my dice on McCain being the maverick he was through most of his Senate career (prior to the past 2 years) than voting for a certain swing to the way left.
2) You have not put up candidates that can appeal to a moderate who does their homework. Sure, Obama’s speeches are fun and energizing. But speeches are just speeches. Show me someone who is willing to go against their party. Lifetime, McCain is one of the more moderate Republican Senators and Palin worked her way up by going against the Republican kingpins. Obama and Biden are 2 of the 5 most Senators in all of Washington. Mark my words — had Bayh or Richardson been the Democratic nominee, I would have taken a very serious look.
3) I think our best work in DC gets done when we have a strong President who does NOT control both houses of Congress. It is a healthy friction. The Dems will run away with this election anyway. I’m going to do what I can to make sure they don’t get to 60 Senators and a complete trifecta of power. I truly worry about what that would do to my kids’ generation in terms of big promises that our future generations cannot fulfill.
With that said, I’m the first to agree with the Republican “brand” is down right now. It needs to come back in a way that is not catering to the evangelical right. We need to see Paul Ryan and Tim Pawlenty up there speaking, not Michelle Bachman.
I’ll be voting for and sending whatever money I can to McCain, Coleman, and Paulsen, but will be surprised if Obama isn’t our next President.
Oh, and Fred Thompson’s speech was incredible. It was Bill Clinton’s speech, told in a Bill Clinton way, only for a GOP audience. Each party has their storyteller who embellishes, simplifies, and is a hit with his folksy tone. Yours spoke last week, ours spoke last night. Goosebumps.
DtM - you want to reward the GOP for their stewardship these last 8 years, knock yourself out.
But until the GOP fails at the polls, guys like republiCon Ron Carey will be running states like Minnesota, and they’ll continue to call good and decent intra-party challengers like Colonel Joe Repya “the enemies within.”
The GOP needs to clean house, but you want to sweep it under the rug.
TPT -
That is where our points of view diverge. If it was a Cheney / Boehner ticket, it would be one thing. But a McCain / Palin ticket is cleaning house. I know that the DNC last week tried to drill the mantra “4 more years of Bush” into everyone’s heads, but upon closer examination, in an ironic way, crusty old John McCain gives us the freshest voice in Washington. Not fresh from inexperience, but fresh from a new attitude. Liberal pundits are saying that we’re lying by saying Obama doesn’t reach across party lines (I don’t beieve we are), but you all were definately deceiving people by saying McCain would be 4 more years of Bush.
I have a feeling this is one of those topics where I ain’t going to convince you otherwise, and vice-versa.
“Oh, and Fred Thompson’s speech was incredible.” Wow — you sure set your standards low…
Say what you want about Thompson’s speech, but I will never forget it. Few speeches do I remember after 1, 3, 5, or 10 years. Reagan’s Normandy speech is one, Obama’s 2004 DNC speech is one. There are a few others. But last night’s was great. Sure it was a bio, it wasn’t particularly about policy, but it was a great speech. Funny - on MSNBC, Keith Olberman immediately made a big deal about how often he cleared his throat, while the other 5 pundits, some liberal, all gave the speech an ‘A’.
The best part:
“We need a President who understands that you don’t make citizens prosperous by making Washington richer, and you don’t lift an economic downturn by imposing one of the largest tax increases in American history.
Now our opponents tell you not to worry about their tax increases.
They tell you they are not going to tax your family.
No, they’re just going to tax “businesses”! So unless you buy something from a “business”, like groceries or clothes or gasoline … or unless you get a paycheck from a big or a small “business”, don’t worry … it’s not going to affect you.
They say they are not going to take any water out of your side of the bucket, just the “other” side of the bucket! That’s their idea of tax reform.
My friends, we need a leader who stands on principle.”
DantheMan, I agree 100%,
The choice of Sarah Palin was completely different than the choice of George W. Bush as the Republican nominee, although she does play very very well to we Republicans who thought that George W. Bush was either a great President, or the Greatest President ever…….
….Which is why she is a fantastic choice. James Dobson finally threw in his support, because she is such a great choice. Obviously, everyone knows McCain didn’t cave to the Religious right with this choice because he is a maverick. He doesn’t need the funding of the religious right either, that’s just common knowledge.
McCain’s choice is anti-gay, and anti-abortion, she believes in making the Bush tax cuts pernanent, she believes global warming was not man-made, she believes in abstinence education, and believes America is a Christian nation because the founding fathers said so.
She believes in the power of incorrectly stating the positions of people who disagree with her, and is pro drilling, pro-business, and anti-Liberal.
It is common knowledge that because Russia is so close to Alaska, she has foreign policy credentials. Also Alaska is far away from Washington, so she is a Washington outsider. That is the proximity argument that everyone knows is true.
She is, in fact, much closer to Michelle Bachmann than George W. Bush, that’s how different than Bush she is.
She is identical to George W. Bush in the good ways, but is a maverick so she is different than George W. Bush, other than ideology or beliefs.
My America hat is on. Is yours, DantheMan?
Great Job Republican blogger DantheMan
TFRGW -
I was about to sign off for a couple days because I’ve been posting too much lately. I’m sure Sean and Zack are getting sick of me at the moment.
But I need to correct you on something. Sarah Palin:
is Pro-contraception
Vetoed a bill that would have denied same-sex benefits to gays
Funded wind, hydro, and biofuel energy expansion in Alaska
Increased investment in the U of Alaska research programs
Wants an exit plan for Iraq now
Do a bit of research. Does that sound like a party-first Republican? No. There is a reason Palin is a rising Republican maverick and Bachman is simply a Republican foot soldier
You got it all wrong. John Kerry was Lurch. Fred Thompson was District Attorney Arthur Branch on Law and Order.
The Republican delegates seem like robots devoid of a human quality that is difficult to describe but I know it when I see it. I just keep saying to myself, what is wrong with these people? They are an odd group. In contrast, The Democratic delegates seemed to have real emotions and seem like actual people. Their leaders could still do much better by them, and the rank and file needs to hold the Democratic leadership more accountable on things like impeachment, but I know which group I’d rather spend time with.
DTM - I’m afraid you are stuck in 20th century if you think McCain is a fresh voice. He’s given himself over to the Bush agenda on the war, tax cuts, judicial appointments, Social Security. If you think asking Sara Palin to be his veep constitutes “freshness” then you had better be able to defend him on his lack of vetting, rash decision making and his complete pandering to the party base. He is neither fresh nor a “maverick.”
“is Pro-contraception”
Abstinence only.
“Vetoed a bill that would have denied same-sex benefits to gays”
Only after the Alaska supreme court declared it unconstitutional.
“Funded wind, hydro, and biofuel energy expansion in Alaska”
Through federal earmarks. She actually only urged congress to “allocate the maximum feasible level of funding for the programs in Title IX in the 2007 Farm Bill.” She also wrangled $500 million in federal subsidies for a pipeline.
Increased investment in the U of Alaska research programs.
“Wants an exit plan for Iraq now”
But has offered no solutions.
Splendid candidate, DtM.
I’m sick and tired of hearing the left bitch about a “lack of vetting” regarding Governor Palin. She went through the same vetting process at every other Vice Presidential candidate went through for McCain. When John McCain met with Hillary Clinton supporters in June, he specifically mentioned Gov. Palin as one of the people he was considering for Vice President. Just keep attacking Gov. Palin and her family. You’re only driving more people to McCain-Palin.
The vetting McCain did on Palin is absolutely pathetic. If he vetted the other candidates in a similar manner, it simply shows how fucking useless the McCain campaign is.
Don’t think of it as “bitching” though. I, and many other on ‘the left’ are absolutely thrilled that McCain is, once again, showing his campaign to be utterly full of fail.
God forbid “the left” should point out Palin’s obvious flaws and weaknesses. The republicans would NEVER do such a thing.
lojasmo,
What are the obvious flaws and weaknesses? I’d say she hit a home run tonight. What the hell has Obama ever accomplished?
Chris you are a complete fool… the Governor of Alaska has a BA from the University of Idaho. And she is talking about Obama not accomplishing anything? He was the first black president of the Harvard Law Review. Prominent alumni of the Harvard Law Review include Supreme Court Justices Edward Sanford, Felix Frankfurter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Antonin Scalia, Stephen Breyer and Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., Secretary of State Dean Acheson, Charles Hamilton Houston, Archibald MacLeish, Secretary of Transportation and Brown v. Board of Education attorney William Coleman, Jr., Judge Richard Posner, Chief Judge Henry Friendly, Chief Judge Michael Boudin, U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Chris Cox, former New York governor Eliot Spitzer, Harvard Law School Dean Elena Kagan, Yale Law School Dean Harold Koh, former Canadian ambassador Allan Gotlieb, former Assistant Attorney General Viet Dinh, former New York State Solicitor General Preeta D. Bansal, University of Texas President William C. Powers, and former Harvard University president Derek Bok.
Now I suppose this leadership role in such an organization is not an accomplishment? The Governor is a lying and deceitful person who 4 years ago was a mayor of a tiny town where she tried to ban books from the local library… far from a decent citizen.
Flaws and weaknesses.
1) left her town of 6500 20 MILLION dollars in debt.
2) Was a member of a group promoting secession of AK from the union.
3) Against abortion in cases of rape and incest.
4) Member of Sen. Steven’s PAC committee
5) as governor, accepted HUGE amounts of federal pork.
I have previously listed several of Obama’s accomplishements, and documented them.
Not only did she try to ban books from the library as mayor, she tried to fire the librarian for refusing to do so. That also seems to be a pattern with her ~ give me my way or I’ll get even. Nice.
amuseinc,
The difference between all of those individuals and Barack Obama is that they all went on to have distinguished careers while Obama became a community organizer. Being a top notch law student hardly qualifies onself to be President. And by the way, I love your snarky liberal elite comment about Harvard. I guess all the talk about public colleges and universities is just pablum.
Minnesota Republican blogger Chris, I agree 100%,
Everyone knows becoming a Community organizer in the erly stages of your career is undistinguished, and therefore Obama is not only ridiculeable, but unqualified.
As the Convention showed last night, there is noting more ridiculeable than being a community organizer. What a joke.
It is common knowledge this smear will continue to work very well, and independent voters will agree being a community organizer early in your career is a joke. Anyone who is thinking about being a community organizer should pay attention, doing that is a career killer.
Great Job Minnesota Republican blogger and smartest man in the room Chris
Chris in case your Republican brain doesn’t get it… there IS a difference between a Harvard education and Bachelor of Arts from a university in Idaho. That is nothing but fact.
Given your choice of a surgeon operating on your heart, do you honestly want to tell me that you see no difference in two people educated in those schools? Lawyer choice? Stockbroker choice? The word elite was not invented to make stupid people feel bad, it was invented because some people are better than others at tasks. Concurrently, accomplishments come in all kinds. I just prefer my leaders to be more academic successes than good cheerleaders.
Chris-
Obama is a sitting US senator, after having served two terms in the IL state senate. Pretty much a slam dunk for “distinguished career.”
“Given your choice of a surgeon operating on your heart, do you honestly want to tell me that you see no difference in two people educated in those schools?”
I want the person who has performed the most successful heart surgeries, whether they went to Stanford or St. Cloud State. That’s just me.
And we can now ask for the percentage of successful people graduated by Harvard versus the University of Idaho? Because we all know that Idaho’s Fighting Potatoes will certainly come out on top?
George W. Bush attended Yale and then Harvard. Ronald Reagan attended Eureka College. I’ll tell you who was the better leader of this nation (not W).
Colin Powell, probably the most competent member of Bush’s cabinet, attend City College in NY.
One of our favorite entrepreneurs in America, Apple’s Steve Jobs, attended Reed College and dropped out.
Great to have a good university on your pedigree, but if you can’t apply it, it means nothing.
I think amuseinc is doing excaxtly what the Republicans are hoping the Palin nomination would cause partisan Democrats to do.
As technically correct as you might be to say that a higher percentage of those attending Harvard are to be a success you have to make some politically damaging definitions to do so. You have to define success in terms that are not accessible to the vast majority of the population. A school that only accepts the very top percentage of students is by definition an elitist organization. One that hopes, with varying results, to give it’s students more tools to make more money and have more power than any other educational institution.
Every time the Democrats say that Palin isn’t qualified because she went to a state school they are insulting the hundreds of thousands that went to a state school, or weren’t even able do that. This is very important given the blue collar vote Obama lost to Hillary. I recall a Ohio union president insulting Obama supporters as, paraphrasing here, “College educated Prius drivers”.
That being siad I would feel more comfortable with somebody of Obama’s experience than Palin sitting in the Oval office.
The problems America faces are complex, nuanced and difficult to solve… you Republicans seem to want bumper-sticker answers ala Governor Palin. I do not trust her, see no sense of dignity or decency in her. She out and out lied about her own political history in her speech. She is at best George W Bush in dress as far as I can tell.
I got my degree from a state school… no shame there. I know many people both with and without degrees who are successful human beings. But none of them are running for the highest offices of our country. That is not an elitist issue. It is about trying to make sure that our leadership does not replicate the sorry record of the last 8 years.
I want smart, honorable and educated people running our government. You on the other hand seem to want to equate a Bachelors degree in Communications with a Doctorate of Law from Harvard. That is just plain stupid… no matter what school you went to you would recognize that.
Things that make you go HHMMMM….
Palin Attended 5 Colleges In 6 Years
stumble digg reddit del.ico.us news trust mixx.com
AP | Nicholas K. Geranios | September 4, 2008 05:35 PM
SPOKANE, Wash. - Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin attended five colleges in six years before graduating from the University of Idaho in 1987.
My company stopped recruiting at Stanford 5 years ago and at Duke 4 years ago. We still recruit at Gustavus, St. Thomas, and places like NDSU. We found that, while the ones from elite schools had great resumes and could interview well, they weren’t doing the job very well. Plus, they expected to get paid more because of their high brow school.
I still chuckle when I think that the Stanford hires didn’t do much for us, but we have NDSU hires running significant pieces of our company. The proof is always in the pudding.
amuseinc,
You avoided my point completely by taking a nuanced comment and turning it in to a black and white one. My point was the effectiveness of nominating Palin as political strategy, not the validity of her qualifications. Your string of comments, the repetitive attacks on her education compared to Obama’s, plays directly into the hands of the Republicans. When you continue to say that the job of president is better done by a person based on being a Harvard grad rather than a Fighting Potato how else is it supposed to be understood by the great unwashed masses of state school grads?
I in no way equated the two schools for the quality of their education. I did in fact state that Harvard was an elite organization that was focused on providing the best education possible. How you understood anything I wrote as equating the education at the two schools is strange. My guess is you simply hear what you want, when you want.
There are plenty of valid reasons to criticize Palin, religious zealotry, first amendment issues, etc. It would be best for Obama if those that support him leave the shallow arrogant school name as validation mentality alone.
KH has it exactly right. Every time you bag on Palin’s background, her college, her “ordinary-ness” you play into her hands. GWB got elected twice by playing the dumb guy you want to have a beer with, and mocking the Democrats who went to good schools and actually performed well at them.
If you want to attack Palin, go after her honesty. Her speech was full of easily provable lies. You can’t claim you fought the “bridge to nowhere” if you went on record supporting it. Point out how corrupt she is - firing state employees as governor when they wouldn’t carry out her personal vendettas. Trying to fire the town librarian because she wouldn’t ban books Palin didn’t like. McCain picked an incredibly sleazy politician to be his running mate. This “reformer” may get indicted for her corruption. Those are the easy, and important targets. If you make this about class, she wins the argument.