McCain's RNC speech

[AlHayatZween 2]

I noticed that from a few of the other speakers as well who fixated on the 2 year old Democratic Congress while ignoring the fact that most of the damage was done during the time that they held the majority.

Not that our Democratice Congress hasn't been lacking and disappointing, but let's not also forget that Bush has vetoed any progressive bills that actually managed to get passed.

It is going to be a tough and close race, but at least it will be interesting.

Parivar, your new baby pic is adorable, btw...

hz

[Chica Yeyé 41]

The speech didn't do it for me at all. Not only because he is an atrocious public speaker; but I did not see "a plan" in it.

[Marilyn. 340]

the Republicans motto seems to be "Vote for us because we are not Obama".....

[Dr. A ♥ O 203]

The speech didn't do it for me at all. Not only because he is an atrocious public speaker; but I did not see "a plan" in it.

Sounds like you filed his speech at "The Department of Indifference" once you saw him speaking. Image is a powerful thing these days.

BTW someone said McCain said, "Me first, country second." That is incorrect. He said, "It's not me first, country second. It's country first."

I don't think Obama will win personally - which is amazing given the opportunity handed to the Democrats by the train-wreck that is the Bush administration. The GOP candidate was always going to take a hit simply for running for the incumbent party - but now the polls have them basically level.

As I said - its no surprise that the Republicans basically disavowed Bush at the convention (giving him the bare minimum time to do a perfunctory speech) - at this point nothing that the man touches at this point will work to their benefit.

Based on policies/party platform, I'd go for Obama. But policies are implemented by leaders elected at the top of the ticket.

Republicans who voted for Bush believed he would be a fiscal conservative. Their platform said so. But the guy at the top actually failed to abide by their platfor. That's just one example. Most elected to office espouse whatever party's platform to get elected. They are more often than not committed more to their careers than to the policies they publicly subscribed to. That's what McCain meant when he said "me first country second".

I discern a hint of that in OBAMA WHEN HE FLIP FLOPS. ( Do whatever to win. Understandable but puts a flag up)

More importantly, what I question is his wisdom or political maturity.

let me put it this way. Frankly, i support his policies on health insurance, social security etc.

Now if he really wanted to be POTUS because he wanted to make a difference and put those policies in place, he would do what is necessary to get there, his pride and personal considerations notwithstanding.

It doesn't take much to discern that Hillary with 18 million votes and support of certain constituencies (women, midllecalss blue collar etc). Everybody including Obama knew this. Had he picked her as VP nominee, Obama/Clinton ticket would be the dream team commanding an air of inevitability right about this time.

But he gave that option a pass because, we are told, Bill Clinton would be a problem and for this that and other reasons. I think he gave preference to his pride and personal concerns rather than to policies that he purported would make a difference to his nation.

Obama blew it. But more importantly for me, his real motives for wanting to be president become suspect.

The Republicans have owned the White House for 12 years out of the last 20, or 8 out of the last 10...and the economy is in shambles combined with wars in Iraq and Afghanistan...although the polls show it a close race, I wouldn't place any bets on the Republicans keeping the WH for another 4 years. They have done nothing to prove they deserve it at this point in history.

Interesting point.

[no name 1]

http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews...552167420080905

LOS ANGELES, Sept 5 (Reuters) - Republican presidential candidate John McCain beat Democratic rival Barack Obama in the crucial battle to attract U.S. television viewers during their race to the White House, according to figures released on Friday.

Nielsen Media Research said a record 38.9 million TV viewers watched McCain accept the Republican nomination on Thursday, slightly more than the 38.3 million people who tuned in for Obama's speech last week.

McCain's tally was believed to be the biggest commercial TV audience every for a single night of a U.S. political convention, Nielsen said.

[Dr. A ♥ O 203]

McCain's speech did absolutely nothing for me. I turned on the T.V. with an open mind but I was bored half way through and saw many other yawning in the audience while all others would interrupt his every other sentence to clap and cheer.

But there were two things he said that made me shake my head while he spoke. One, healthcare. He actually said that having a free healthcare system would be like having the government act as a third person between the patient and the doctor, and that he would try to come up with ways on how we can all afford healthcare. No, this is not what I want to hear and no, it won't happen since insurance companies only care about how to get more money out of us.

Yeah that was a moment for me too - given that this is what happens already. Who does he think denies all those claims or tells the healthcare provider what drugs and treatments they're willing to pay for?

Clearly - you can't suggest bold reforms to the healthcare system if fundamentally misunderstand the nature of the current problems.

He's also said before that the problem with healthcare is that it costs too much - but he's proposing nothing that will really change the cost of healthcare. Rather he's subscribing to that old cliches of letting the market fix itself...

I thought we learned by now that the interests of private corporations are not the interests of individual Americans.

I missed any mention on Health Care by both candidates or I didn't understand what they meant when they were explaining it to me and I tuned out not knowing what they're talking about. There is a a lot of information condensed in what they are saying.

[Dr. A ♥ O 203]

the Republicans motto seems to be "Vote for us because we are not Obama".....

That could be said for Obama's platform as well with the whole "Change" theme. What are they going to change? Who are the natural enemies? Who do they need to oust and implement this cleaning up of? Is this the Democrats cleaning house like the message they sent with lining Congresses pockets with Democrats in the last election? Is that a four year old campaign? And look what they have done? Made Democracy and change slower with out enacting any real power.

Historically and more than likely it will be Obama that wins this election. However, it is the Republicans who admitted last night that there was curruption within and that they too planned to clean it up but at the same time extend the hand to the Independents and the Democrats to have a say in process not tell them we're going to make the choices and kick you all out. They have a responsibility to the people to answer to us and they made themselves accountable. Things aren't just going to be decided by one man. We just experienced that with Bush for 8 years and from what I've heard Obama saying he's the one going to be making the tough descisions cleaning house. This leads me to believe our Democracy will be at a stand still with investigations run wild while the economy stays sinking and troops are dying during this change.

Almaty may have a point about McCain in October. He needs to keep his energy up and show the wisdom of his political years when addressing the ever eloquant "star studded" Obama who may bring just the drama people want to watch. Instead of focusing on important issues.

I too am looking forward to the Presidential Debates in what 21 days now?

[Fandango 1,440]

The party that created the mess is now the party that will save us all from it. pathetic!

Both parties created this...rest assured.

Its hard to be bowled away by talk about national security and "enduring peace" - Bush talked about his quest for peace until it had all but lost meaning (and until his moral credibility was spent). Do we really have to just mention peace and security and let that be the end-all.

Personal anecdotes are all well and good - but everybody has them.

Not everyone has POW for 5 years stories If anyone is qualified to understand what our military faces, it's him...I think it's a bit demeaning to call it 'anecdotal'.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I noticed that from a few of the other speakers as well who fixated on the 2 year old Democratic Congress while ignoring the fact that most of the damage was done during the time that they held the majority.

Not that our Democratice Congress hasn't been lacking and disappointing, but let's not also forget that Bush has vetoed any progressive bills that actually managed to get passed.

It is going to be a tough and close race, but at least it will be interesting.

Well this lot are certainly pretty adept at putting themselves in the beleaguered minority (victim) role. No change from Bush really.

[Ban Hammer 13,622]

Not everyone has POW for 5 years stories If anyone is qualified to understand what our military faces, it's him...I think it's a bit demeaning to call it 'anecdotal'.

:thumbs: :thumbs: :thumbs:

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The party that created the mess is now the party that will save us all from it. pathetic!

Both parties created this...rest assured.

Its hard to be bowled away by talk about national security and "enduring peace" - Bush talked about his quest for peace until it had all but lost meaning (and until his moral credibility was spent). Do we really have to just mention peace and security and let that be the end-all.

Personal anecdotes are all well and good - but everybody has them.

Not everyone has POW for 5 years stories If anyone is qualified to understand what our military faces, it's him...I think it's a bit demeaning to call it 'anecdotal'.

Everybody has a story was my point. But now that you mention it - and with respect for McCain's POW experience, I've never heard this listed as a credential for leading a country. He's also notoriously quick-tempered - as if he didn't actually learn patience under those conditions.

Nothing really came out of those conventions except for self-congratulatory back slapping and pandering to mawkish sentimentality.

[britty 1]

The party that created the mess is now the party that will save us all from it. pathetic!

Both parties created this...rest assured.

Its hard to be bowled away by talk about national security and "enduring peace" - Bush talked about his quest for peace until it had all but lost meaning (and until his moral credibility was spent). Do we really have to just mention peace and security and let that be the end-all.

Personal anecdotes are all well and good - but everybody has them.

Not everyone has POW for 5 years stories If anyone is qualified to understand what our military faces, it's him...I think it's a bit demeaning to call it 'anecdotal'.

McCain's PoW serves a purpose to demonstrate that he is a bigger person than any we know. Who can honestly say that having their arms repeatedly broken, their teeth knocked out, and their face smashed by rifle butts, would still turn down an offer of early release in full knowledge that the beatings and torture would only get worse if the release was refused? McCain has served his country with honor and the utmost bravery because he loves his country. How can that level of patriotism and sacrifice notbe a credential for leading a country.

Edited September 6, 2008 by britty

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Ulysses S. Grant won the civil war. It didn't stop him from being one of the shittiest US Presidents in history.

Quite simply - outside his opposition to torture McCain's experiences in Vietnam have little relevance to his career as a politican. It doesn't qualify him to run the economy or decide how to reform the healthcare system.

Edited September 6, 2008 by Paul Daniels

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

I don't like seeing McCain's POW experience diminished. Although I'm not voting for him, this is how the Economist positions it:

Mr Obama may write eloquently about the agony of trying to work out how a mixed-race kid fits into America’s racial mosaic, but Mr McCain has endured actual physical torture: having his ribs cracked and his teeth knocked out and being stuck in solitary confinement for shouting obscenities at his jailers. None of this necessarily means he would make a good president. But it makes people take him seriously when he says he serves a cause greater than his own self-interest.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I don't like seeing McCain's POW experience diminished. Although I'm not voting for him, this is how the Economist positions it:

Mr Obama may write eloquently about the agony of trying to work out how a mixed-race kid fits into America's racial mosaic, but Mr McCain has endured actual physical torture: having his ribs cracked and his teeth knocked out and being stuck in solitary confinement for shouting obscenities at his jailers. None of this necessarily means he would make a good president. But it makes people take him seriously when he says he serves a cause greater than his own self-interest.

Well stated.