Comments on: CONVENTION DISCUSSION – Open Thread

By: matchles

matchles — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 01:29:55 +0000

It’s not supposed to impress. I’m communicating here. I’ve never caught on to the shorthand style of internet posts, so I write the way I would write a paper.

Regardless, what about Michelle’s speech gave the impression of insincerity? Or preempting the response below. What about an Obama presidency is racist or sexist?

I’m just looking for concrete examples that we can discuss. Please show me that your position is rational.

By: Katherine

Katherine — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 22:24:50 +0000

Calm down, my father was in the military and mom taught school. We were VERY middle class Catholics. 7 children. My point was that she tries to paint herself as coming from the hard scrabble south side poor kid, and if you’re truly struggling as a general rule BOTH parents must work. As evidenced by the current state of affairs where we have more latch key kids than not. She’s a middle class kid who went to Ivy league colleges, big deal. But nice jab about my mom, way to go!

By: rw

rw — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 21:21:50 +0000

“I don’t think an Ivy League education, Harvard Law, a Chicago corporate firm, her career at the University of Chicago, etc. prepares anyone for the intense media coverage a presidential candidate’s spouse is under.”

But it gives the sophistication to speak without offense. It, by its very natured, coaches you in civility, discretion, a semblance of diplomacy. It does, but in her case it has not. Besides, it’s not if this would be her first time under the spot light of being the candidates wife.

Never mind the gratuitous remark of being proud “for the first time”. What about her evidently mean-spirited remark when asked if Hillary defeated her husband, and Hillary were the nominee,: a blank stare, after miffed surprise by the interviewer, she actually said: I HAVE TO THINK ABOUT IT. Contrast mind you, with the intense pressure Hillary and her supporters are being exposed to vote for nobody husband.

My conclusion is this woman is so mean-spirited that she has acquired none of the refinement and sophistication that her background should have given her. Otherwise, I have to think that she is just ‘stupid’, an affirmative action product.

The gaffes that you cite as a comparison are of a personal nature. Nothing to do with the natural givens of politics: love your country, support your party, respect your party base.

By: NO for O

NO for O — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 16:01:48 +0000

She still gave her “old” speech about how this country is still not right, but can be wrighted by O. It was packaged a teensy weensy bit nicer, but same old tired “what is wrong with this country” message. Ick.

By: DancingOpossum

DancingOpossum — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 15:58:55 +0000

Notice how the biggest applause Michelle got during the whole speech was when she mentioned Hillary’s name? HAHAHAHA!!!

Also notice how the new poll numbers showing a FURTHER drop for Obama in the polls (as of today he’s lost Florida) has led to today’s flood of desperate, whining Obamabots?? Too funny.

“Oh we come here for amusement.” Suuuuuure you do. Please, please, read us the story about how the One is cruising to a historic landslide victory on the strength of the Ground Game, we never get enough of that one!!

By: NO for O

NO for O — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 15:58:42 +0000

Too late…dumbass stated he was in another city when asked by his daughter last night. He actually had a cue card in front of him and still made the booboo.

By: NO for O

NO for O — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 15:56:40 +0000

Dull & uneventful, just like O.

By: nobamaever09

nobamaever09 — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 15:39:49 +0000

Clintons should boycot DNC. It is so clear that Obamas camp are trying to destroy Clintons. On one side they playing Friends, and then a nife to their backs.

By: sarobinson4320

sarobinson4320 — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 15:33:42 +0000

If that comment refers to my response, then no a nerve wasn’t hit. I’m just amazed at the level of venom and mis-information on this site.

By: sarobinson4320

sarobinson4320 — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 15:22:05 +0000

How about Rangel is being investigated in NY for influence peddling and the unfortunate fact that he has multiple rent controlled apartments. How about not giving the Repubs more ammunition than they already have. Why does everything have to be about the Clintons?

By: sarobinson4320

sarobinson4320 — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 15:17:00 +0000

People you lost. Get over it. Obama played by the rules as they were written. Your girl actually tried to change the rules as the game was being played. However, I do understand how you feel because if Hilary were the candidate I would not support her as I’m not a “hard working white American.”

By: sarobinson4320

sarobinson4320 — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 15:09:37 +0000

Uh, no. Chelsea did not attend public school. She attended Sidwell Friends which is a private, quaker school in DC. In fact, that was an issue when the Clintons got to DC, whether or not they would send her to public school. You people will say anything.

By: SZ

SZ — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 14:18:22 +0000

In all fairness, it was a well-written but speech. Her delivery, however, was a bit forced and breathless — perhaps the product of too much rehearsal/coaching. The sentimentalism was laid on nice and thick, but she needed to do that, from a political perspective.

What really irked me was the choreographed video “phone call” at the end, with Daddy Barack beaming at his wife, and the girls chirping scripted lines (“Hi Daddy!”; “I love you, Daddy!”). The kids are sweet, but this whole epilogue was clearly staged.

The speech was emotionally manipulative, but the bit at the end had me groaning aloud.

By: Postmaster

Postmaster — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 14:14:52 +0000

well, TwoTermObama, use your finger and CLICK!

By: Ken in IL

Ken in IL — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 13:44:12 +0000

She could have talked about the tough job he did in the state Senate – redrawing his district to include wealthier neighborhoods and excluding the poorer ones.