John and Rudy

[Wotan]

Damn, no one watched?

After the DNC threads you figure someone would have brought up these 2 speeches.

After Obama's plagiarized Jesse Jackson speech (keep hope alive) and "Ltn. Kerry reporting for duty" I expected at least one thread discussing the substance of John and Rudy's speeches.

[Westy]

What's there to say really. Conventions are pep rallies and  a chance to turn on the spin machines.  Lots of hype, empty promises and embellishments

 IMO the RNC dog & pony show is intended to re-paint the current administration to look better than it has been.  Trying to spin Bush and his cabal as "moderates"  (lol)

 But also IMO neither MCain or Guliani matter in the over all scheme of things as they won't be in the White House after Nov 2nd.



 *note re: the DNC;  I didn't listen to Obama either nor any of the speakers at the DNC conclave either.  And what I did hear from Kerry and Edwards were lots of promises with no specifics. But Kerry cooked his goose for good when he said he'd have done the same as Bush did by invading Iraq.

[Krusher]

Originally posted by Wotan
Damn, no one watched?

After the DNC threads you figure someone would have brought up these 2 speeches.

After Obama's plagiarized Jesse Jackson speech (keep hope alive) and "Ltn. Kerry reporting for duty" I expected at least one thread discussing the substance of John and Rudy's speeches.

I watched it.  

McCain has never been my favorite republican but he made a good case for the Bush re-election last night.  If he follows up that speech with more of the same, he will help Bush and be well on his way to the presidency in 2008.

Rudy's speech went a bit to long but he also made a serious case for the Bush campaign.  I like Tom Ridge, but I really think Rudy would make a better Homeland security chief.

After months of the democrat 911 widows being used to bolster Kerry it was nice to see a few voices form the other side.  I realize they were props but they were very effective props.

Too bad the networks have decided the people are not interested in conventions this year.  You would think this election was not very important by the lack of serious coverage on their part.

[Charon]

I'm an equal opportunity convention ignorer. The last time I heard anything unexpected in a political speech was "The Axis of Evil." Though there is some lingering professional interest in watching the speechwriters' methodoloy and craftsmanship at presenting the messages and the speakers' ability to present the messages.

Charon

[midnight Target]

I just can't decide until I hear John Stewart's spin tonight.

Actually they were pretty good speeches.

I wonder if Rush will accuse the RNC of being disingenuous for hiding its radically conservative side during the convention? He accused the Dems of trickery by having a "centrist" convention. I guess what's good for the donkey is good for the elephant.

[Westy]

You know what would really tune folks in?

A face off between Moore and Limbaugh.  A bare knuckle, pointy toe'd fight to the death (or at least an unconcious, bloody pulp) match.  





"Too bad the networks have decided the people are not interested in conventions this year. You would think this election was not very important by the lack of serious coverage on their part."


 lol.   the networks are covering this convention with the same exact amount of airtime as the DNC and they whine....(see Archie "Eagler" Bunkers topic on it from yesterday)

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

Westy, he "said" conventionS, note the emphasis on the S. Was a shot at media in general, not for lack of coverage due to bias, but for lack of coverage in general.

[Westy]

I stand corrected.    I'm used to Krushers partisan stance and  thought he meant the RNC only

 IMO these conventionS get too much air time as it is.  They are party "pep rallies" and listeners/viewers are fed a week long stream of spin formed out of carefully crafted hype, out right embellishment and more empty promises than you can swing a stick at.

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

Originally posted by Westy
I stand corrected.    I'm used to Krushers partisan stance and  thought he meant the RNC only

 IMO these conventionS get too much air time as it is.  They are party "pep rallies" and listeners/viewers are fed a week long stream of spin formed out of carefully crafted hype, out right embellishment and more empty promises than you can swing a stick at.

I agree. Conventions have been of little relevance for a couple of decades now. I'm actually dissatisfied with both parties, the system, and the process. Alas, I fear we are mostly stuck with it all due to inertia.

[Krusher]

whoops virgil covered it,  no need for a double point.

[rpm]

PBS has extensive coverage of both conventions for those without cable access. CSPAN provides coverage for those with basic cable.

I'm with MT, waiting on Jon Stewart's perspective.

[Eagler]

the lack of "coverage" of the hooters on fear factor was much better - LOL

whats up with the guy they had on pbs - his eyes - looked like something from the Exorcist

[Coolridr]

Originally posted by rpm371
PBS has extensive coverage of both conventions for those without cable access. CSPAN provides coverage for those with basic cable.

I'm with MT, waiting on Jon Stewart's perspective.

You can lump PBS is with the ultra-liberal NPR therefore not worth watching the RNC with that sort of coverage.

[lazs2]

When is Arnie on?   He will be worth watching...  

All in all.... the republicans have a lot more sensible and interesting people on than the democrat parade of fruitcakes.

lazs

[rpm]

Originally posted by Coolridr
You can lump PBS is with the ultra-liberal NPR therefore not worth watching the RNC with that sort of coverage.

Hmm, gavel to gavel coverage is a bad thing now? Make up your mind!