Hillary Clinton speech

[Peikko 1,575]

Yeah I saw this. About what I expected. No more. No less. The convention just seems to be a media event - for the purpose of politician's massaging each other's egos.

Hard to be motivated by frankly pedestrian rhetoric...

Someone always says "We're at a crossroads..." or something similar. Whatever.

Wow....both you and PH seem to on the same cynical wavelength with the DNC.

Wow? Implied criticism I presume?

It's not simply the DNC, it's the way politics is seen to be done. I don't actually believe the doing is quite so niave or nothing would ever be achieved. I am also struck by how easily the media falls into step with the gala mentality. I would like to see much more critical analysis of politicians and policies but it seems that's not going to happen either.

That said, I now understand that the convention isn't really a political event but rather a rally call, a morale booster, a way for like minded people to pat each other on the back and congratulate themselves. Perhaps these properly political events take place at other times where delegates debate and discuss party policy?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Yeah I saw this. About what I expected. No more. No less. The convention just seems to be a media event - for the purpose of politician's massaging each other's egos.

Hard to be motivated by frankly pedestrian rhetoric...

Someone always says "We're at a crossroads..." or something similar. Whatever.

Wow....both you and PH seem to on the same cynical wavelength with the DNC.

I dunno - the rhetoric is old hat in politics, but we've had nearly a year of the same old guff. I'd rather someone actually do something, rather than keep making grandiose claims about how America will be transformed by the election of candidates who just seem to be promoting more of the same via campaign slogans.

Rhetoric has a place in politics and the Conventions are like big pep rallies to get members of the Party fired up and energized for the upcoming elections. I understand a lot of it is hoo-hah, but I wouldn't dismiss it as without substance. There have been some really terrific speeches like Michelle Obama's, Dennis Kucinich, Gov. of Montana's and Hillary Clinton's. If rhetoric has any place in politics, its in situations like this.

I guess we can agree to disagree on what makes a good speech - certainly many key moments in history have been marked with political speeches. I just don't believe that this is a particularly iconic moment and I think it has more to do with backslapping than anything else.

I don't believe we are at a "crossroads", or that this election will have any real impact on the way business is done in the country. As I've said before - Obama has based his campaign on "change", but the nature of that change appears ill-defined and somewhat nebulous. Not that he should be criticised in any specific regard for this - its more that he's trying to sell himself as something new and revolutionary when by any realistic measure he isn't anything of the sort.

I don't think that McCain or Obama being elected President will make any difference to our quality of life. The biggest policy changes on things like healthcare will get bogged down in the upper and lower chambers and just like illegal immigration we likely won't arrive at a comprehensive solution to the problem.

And of course - it scarcely needs to be pointed out that the Bush presidency has done more damage to the country than can be repaired in a single term of office.

[zqt3344 21]

Yeah I saw this. About what I expected. No more. No less. The convention just seems to be a media event - for the purpose of politician's massaging each other's egos.

Hard to be motivated by frankly pedestrian rhetoric...

Someone always says "We're at a crossroads..." or something similar. Whatever.

Wow....both you and PH seem to on the same cynical wavelength with the DNC.

I dunno - the rhetoric is old hat in politics, but we've had nearly a year of the same old guff. I'd rather someone actually do something, rather than keep making grandiose claims about how America will be transformed by the election of candidates who just seem to be promoting more of the same via campaign slogans.

Rhetoric has a place in politics and the Conventions are like big pep rallies to get members of the Party fired up and energized for the upcoming elections. I understand a lot of it is hoo-hah, but I wouldn't dismiss it as without substance. There have been some really terrific speeches like Michelle Obama's, Dennis Kucinich, Gov. of Montana's and Hillary Clinton's. If rhetoric has any place in politics, its in situations like this.

I guess we can agree to disagree on what makes a good speech - certainly many key moments in history have been marked with political speeches. I just don't believe that this is a particularly iconic moment and I think it has more to do with backslapping than anything else.

I don't believe we are at a "crossroads", or that this election will have any real impact on the way business is done in the country. As I've said before - Obama has based his campaign on "change", but the nature of that change appears ill-defined and somewhat nebulous. Not that he should be criticised in any specific regard for this - its more that he's trying to sell himself as something new and revolutionary when by any realistic measure he isn't anything of the sort.

I don't think that McCain or Obama being elected President will make any difference to our quality of life. The biggest policy changes on things like healthcare will get bogged down in the upper and lower chambers and just like illegal immigration we likely won't arrive at a comprehensive solution to the problem.

And of course - it scarcely needs to be pointed out that the Bush presidency has done more damage to the country than can be repaired in a single term of office.

Sixer, now you are finally seeing what really goes on with the Democrats. And I wondered when some people would open their eyes and start asking the question you have -"What the hell change is Ovomit talking about, what are the details of this plan of his and what is he going to do?" Instead of stating in general politician buzz words all the time, and Democrats wonder how he is being beaten by McCain now in the polls, well hello, American people are not that stupid.

[stuck_in_manila 0]

i was totally impressed with the speech.... she was able to show just how impassioned and sincere she is about serving this great nation.... too bad she's not running in the elections.

however, i think she failed to make the case for obama. you can't vote for someone just because they belong to your organization/party. belonging to the same party does not necessarily mean two different people will act in a certain way on important issues. hillary is hillary, seasoned by experience both as a first lady and as a senator; while obama is, as what most pundits are saying, just gloss and has yet to prove that he's got substance... his performance from being a senator is far from sterling..... just my opinion okay, don't crucify me...

too bad, i still can't convince my husband to vote this fall, coz if he will, i will ask him, nay, beg him to vote for mccain because:

a) i do love mother earth, but until such time that we've found renewable source of energy that will be able to supply global demand, which much to spare... the only way to address the spiralling cost of crude it to drill... and therefore, i cant trust somebody who will tell me some vague energy program will address this problem

B) the united states is a global leader, and is thus expected to "meddle" in international events which are, most of the time way beyond its borders. it's important therefore to have a leader that's not only eloquent, but somebody's who's had foreign relations experience; in my dictionary, a quick trip to europe just months prior to the elections does not equate to great foreign relations experience

c) and... i saw this quote on tv and i think there's no better way to say it, " would you hire a fresh grad, never mind if he's from harvard, to be the ceo of a large corporation?"

i rest my case

Edited August 27, 2008 by stuck_in_manila

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Yeah I saw this. About what I expected. No more. No less. The convention just seems to be a media event - for the purpose of politician's massaging each other's egos.

Hard to be motivated by frankly pedestrian rhetoric...

Someone always says "We're at a crossroads..." or something similar. Whatever.

Wow....both you and PH seem to on the same cynical wavelength with the DNC.

I dunno - the rhetoric is old hat in politics, but we've had nearly a year of the same old guff. I'd rather someone actually do something, rather than keep making grandiose claims about how America will be transformed by the election of candidates who just seem to be promoting more of the same via campaign slogans.

Rhetoric has a place in politics and the Conventions are like big pep rallies to get members of the Party fired up and energized for the upcoming elections. I understand a lot of it is hoo-hah, but I wouldn't dismiss it as without substance. There have been some really terrific speeches like Michelle Obama's, Dennis Kucinich, Gov. of Montana's and Hillary Clinton's. If rhetoric has any place in politics, its in situations like this.

I guess we can agree to disagree on what makes a good speech - certainly many key moments in history have been marked with political speeches. I just don't believe that this is a particularly iconic moment and I think it has more to do with backslapping than anything else.

I don't believe we are at a "crossroads", or that this election will have any real impact on the way business is done in the country. As I've said before - Obama has based his campaign on "change", but the nature of that change appears ill-defined and somewhat nebulous. Not that he should be criticised in any specific regard for this - its more that he's trying to sell himself as something new and revolutionary when by any realistic measure he isn't anything of the sort.

I don't think that McCain or Obama being elected President will make any difference to our quality of life. The biggest policy changes on things like healthcare will get bogged down in the upper and lower chambers and just like illegal immigration we likely won't arrive at a comprehensive solution to the problem.

And of course - it scarcely needs to be pointed out that the Bush presidency has done more damage to the country than can be repaired in a single term of office.

Sixer, now you are finally seeing what really goes on with the Democrats. And I wondered when some people would open their eyes and start asking the question you have -"What the hell change is Ovomit talking about, what are the details of this plan of his and what is he going to do?" Instead of stating in general politician buzz words all the time, and Democrats wonder how he is being beaten by McCain now in the polls, well hello, American people are not that stupid.

Actually if you'd bothered to read my posts in the first place - you'd perhaps have seen that my realization of "what goes on with the Democrats" isn't something that happened recently - but perhaps its new to you given that its been convenient for you to lump me and others together into some sort of bizarre "Liberal club" - even if it only exists in your head.

If I object to your criticisms regarding "Ovomit" its that they are overly sentimental, trite and insulting. Lets get that straight at least.

Edited August 27, 2008 by Number 6

[chri'stina 190]

I wasn't that impressed...it was the same stuff she has said a bunch of times already. I don't see the excellence.

[zqt3344 21]

Sixer - now you sound like Ovomit, you have been watching him too long giving strung out long nuanced answers to short answer questions. And you sire are a liberal that has finally seen the light. Praise be brother for the Lord will set you free and you shall be free at last.

Yeah I saw this. About what I expected. No more. No less. The convention just seems to be a media event - for the purpose of politician's massaging each other's egos.

Hard to be motivated by frankly pedestrian rhetoric...

Someone always says "We're at a crossroads..." or something similar. Whatever.

Wow....both you and PH seem to on the same cynical wavelength with the DNC.

I dunno - the rhetoric is old hat in politics, but we've had nearly a year of the same old guff. I'd rather someone actually do something, rather than keep making grandiose claims about how America will be transformed by the election of candidates who just seem to be promoting more of the same via campaign slogans.

Rhetoric has a place in politics and the Conventions are like big pep rallies to get members of the Party fired up and energized for the upcoming elections. I understand a lot of it is hoo-hah, but I wouldn't dismiss it as without substance. There have been some really terrific speeches like Michelle Obama's, Dennis Kucinich, Gov. of Montana's and Hillary Clinton's. If rhetoric has any place in politics, its in situations like this.

I guess we can agree to disagree on what makes a good speech - certainly many key moments in history have been marked with political speeches. I just don't believe that this is a particularly iconic moment and I think it has more to do with backslapping than anything else.

I don't believe we are at a "crossroads", or that this election will have any real impact on the way business is done in the country. As I've said before - Obama has based his campaign on "change", but the nature of that change appears ill-defined and somewhat nebulous. Not that he should be criticised in any specific regard for this - its more that he's trying to sell himself as something new and revolutionary when by any realistic measure he isn't anything of the sort.

I don't think that McCain or Obama being elected President will make any difference to our quality of life. The biggest policy changes on things like healthcare will get bogged down in the upper and lower chambers and just like illegal immigration we likely won't arrive at a comprehensive solution to the problem.

And of course - it scarcely needs to be pointed out that the Bush presidency has done more damage to the country than can be repaired in a single term of office.

Sixer, now you are finally seeing what really goes on with the Democrats. And I wondered when some people would open their eyes and start asking the question you have -"What the hell change is Ovomit talking about, what are the details of this plan of his and what is he going to do?" Instead of stating in general politician buzz words all the time, and Democrats wonder how he is being beaten by McCain now in the polls, well hello, American people are not that stupid.

Actually if you'd bothered to read my posts in the first place - you'd perhaps have seen that my realization of "what goes on with the Democrats" isn't something that happened recently - but perhaps its new to you given that its been convenient for you to lump me and others together into some sort of bizarre "Liberal club" - even if it only exists in your head.

If I object to your criticisms regarding "Ovomit" its that they are overly sentimental, trite and insulting. Lets get that straight at least.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I wasn't that impressed...it was the same stuff she has said a bunch of times already. I don't see the excellence.

She endorsed Barack because as a career politician her career would be over if she went against the entire party. Her speech was basically lip service - nothing particularly inspiring in there.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Sixer - now you sound like Ovomit, you have been watching him too long giving strung out long nuanced answers to short answer questions. And you sire are a liberal that has finally seen the light. Praise be brother for the Lord will set you free and you shall be free at last.

This line of reasoning is more or less what I would expect from you.

Feel free to carry on with your delusions.

[HAL 9000 96]

Crazy as a goat I tell you.

As for the speech... it was really well said fluff-power that protected her future and showed the nation she is not a petty lunatic. As opposed to the really well said fluff-attack we'll see from the Republican'ts in their very own political masturbation session in Minneapolis.

[chri'stina 190]

I wasn't that impressed...it was the same stuff she has said a bunch of times already. I don't see the excellence.

She endorsed Barack because as a career politician her career would be over if she went against the entire party. Her speech was basically lip service - nothing particularly inspiring in there.

Yeah, but she already had endorsed him. I think her speech right after conceding to Obama in the primaries was better.

Crazy as a goat I tell you.

As for the speech... it was really well said fluff-power that protected her future and showed the nation she is not a petty lunatic. As opposed to the really well said fluff-attack we'll see from the Republican'ts in their very own political masturbation session in Minneapolis.

There weren't any attacks(against Repubs) by any Dems at the DNC? I think it's funny how people only think Republicans are good at attacking the opponent. Everyone is biased according to who they like more. (yeah I am too, I'm sure)

Edited August 27, 2008 by Parivar CSK

[Jenn! 918]

From what I saw of it (I fell asleep), I think she made it pretty clear that her supporters should support Obama and not McCain, which I think was the goal. She did what she had to do. And I liked her orange suit.

[HAL 9000 96]

I wasn't that impressed...it was the same stuff she has said a bunch of times already. I don't see the excellence.

She endorsed Barack because as a career politician her career would be over if she went against the entire party. Her speech was basically lip service - nothing particularly inspiring in there.

Yeah, but she already had endorsed him. I think her speech right after conceding to Obama in the primaries was better.

Crazy as a goat I tell you.

As for the speech... it was really well said fluff-power that protected her future and showed the nation she is not a petty lunatic. As opposed to the really well said fluff-attack we'll see from the Republican'ts in their very own political masturbation session in Minneapolis.

There weren't any attacks(against Repubs) by any Dems at the DNC? I think it's funny how people only think Republicans are good at attacking the opponent. Everyone is biased according to who they like more. (yeah I am too, I'm sure)

Sure, she's not going to change her mind on her endorsement of Barack all of a sudden. That would be just much too theatrical- even for the War Party coming out of the McCain campaign.

The difference on the attacks is that the DNC is attacking for the most part on actual issues of importance to Americans while the McCain camp is still hung up on trying to exploit non-issues that are pathetic at best- yet do tend to sound a tune with those susceptible to such frivolous politik.

[chri'stina 190]

You have to admit, you are biased.

[HAL 9000 96]

From what I saw of it (I fell asleep), I think she made it pretty clear that her supporters should support Obama and not McCain, which I think was the goal. She did what she had to do. And I liked her orange suit.

I'm sure that the Republicans would have found a way to attack Obama even if she bent over and gave the speech praising Obama through her rear end.

You have to admit, you are biased.

Of course- towards issues.