Are you watching the RNC?

I'm a former republican who became an independent after the takeover of the party by Dirty Dickie Nixon.  However, out of fairness, I feel I have to give a listen to them.

I'm not feeling very fair though.  Why are these people so conformist?  I haven't seen so many black suits and red dresses since the last RNC.  Then there are the delegations all dressed the same, like some kind of square dance team - Texas has identical red shirts and straw (I think) cowboy hats.  Another delegation is all dressed in blue denim shirts.  I long for the craziness of the DNC.  They had some music but nobody was dancing in the aisles - the just sat demurely in their seats, clapping in time or sort of bouncing their heads.  What duds.

Then there's this little tidbit

http://www.washingtonindependent.com/3934/rep ublicans-lobbyists-party-with-hookers-and-blo w

I suppose they have to let off all that pent up steam somehow. 

The speeches so far are about what you'd expect.  Fred Thompson talked about McCain's life, but stopped with him being a POW.  didn't he have a life after that?  Not one mention of his two marriages and all those kids. 

I intend to stick with this.  Who knows, maybe there will be something said or done that will change my jaundiced mind.

What do you think of it?  And feel free to disagree with me - I don't mind - it's called free discourse.

One caveat: no discussion of Sarah Palin - we have a thread for that already.

I'm watching the American election preparations with interest.  We've likely got one coming up in Canada on October 14th, which won't be much to speak of, but check out who's likely going to be on the slate for the next federal election!  Babe-raham Lincoln has nothing on Justin Trudeau!

"I've learned quickly these past few days that if you're not a member in good standing of the Washington elite, then some in the media consider a candidate unqualified for that reason alone," Palin said in excerpts of her speech to the Republican convention, released in advance.

"But here's a little news flash for all those reporters and commentators: I'm not going to Washington to seek their good opinion. I'm going to Washington to serve the people of this country."

 

I think that qualifies as coming out with guns blazing?

Original Post by kathygator:

I was referring to my state of mind in 2000, peaches. In 1996, I had very serious concerns that the Reps were indeed going to reverse Roe V Wade, and did 'vote for my uterus' in that election. :)

 If Roe V Wade is overturned (which I don't think it will be), abortion does not become illegal.  It goes from a national issues back to a states issue.  Each state decides how they want to handle it, and federal money no longer goes towards abortion. 

Original Post by laura42:

Original Post by kathygator:

I was referring to my state of mind in 2000, peaches. In 1996, I had very serious concerns that the Reps were indeed going to reverse Roe V Wade, and did 'vote for my uterus' in that election. :)

 If Roe V Wade is overturned (which I don't think it will be), abortion does not become illegal.  It goes from a national issues back to a states issue.  Each state decides how they want to handle it, and federal money no longer goes towards abortion. 

 Regardless of how anyone feels about abortion, why does anyone think that federal money should go toward it???   It's something that someone chooses to do...except in cases where the mother's life is in danger.

Can someone please explain this to me?

I was attempting to watch it, but ended up walking away.

I can't wait to see them fail.
If not, I'm going to cry.....

That's a shame, jblarghp.  As a voter, I like to watch both sides.  It can be very informative...even if you don't agree with everything.

I attempted!
I'm definitely planning on watching McCain's speech tomorrow.

It was a good speech.  The delivery was acceptable, not brilliant.  She certainly got in some good attacks on Obama.  I thought that Guilanni's speech was good too.

At least you attempted.  It's more than I can say for alot of people  :-D

Puh-leeeze! Guiliani's speech was a crass appeal to the lowest common denominator.  I know it's basically a rally but would a show of class hurt anyone? THIS is precisely what people are sick of in politics.  Or at least I am. Bleh.

I specifically tuned in to see Palin. She did indeed perform very well. The speech was beautifully written and she delivered it with style.

I caught the last 10 minutes of Guiliani's speech and agree that it had crass appeal. It seemed to me to be one big insult after another. The insults seemed not only aimed at Obama, but anyone who was a democrat as well. He did do a good job of warming up the crowd for Palin.

Really? I thought her delivery was good and the speech was effective if the intent was to fire up the republican base. I thought it was probably too negative to appeal to any undecided voters (although I am decidedly partisan so maybe my bias is getting in the way).  I didn't think the appeal to fear, hatred, and use of sneering "humor" were especially beautiful, myself.

First off I want to apologize to Clairelane about not fully sticking with the one caveat.  I watched part of the RNC last night but was so bored out of my mind I had to turn it off.  I turned it again today and stepped away as I got bored but did anxiously wait to see how Palin's speech went. 

I, like a couple other posters on here, feel it's important to see both sides conventions. 

I have noticed that so far what I have seen, is more of an attack on the dems and the media than it is talking specifically about issues.  I keep hearing talk that Obama isn't getting specific with his plans but that is exactly what I just got out of Palin's speech.  I am hoping to see more tomorrow when McCain speaks though. 

Now, is it just me or did Palin also get a dig on her fellow repulicans in regards to them not electing McCain the last times he ran?  I'm watching the commentaries right now and haven't heard them say anything about that and it has left me wondering if I heard that for real or what. 

Original Post by splitrail:

"But here's a little news flash for all those reporters and commentators: I'm not going to Washington to seek their good opinion. I'm going to Washington to serve the people of this country."

I thought that was pretty to the point. She's serious about making a difference and helping the country, which is what every election is about.

But, on topic, I'm watching the RNC, just like I watched the DMC. It's better to be well informed about both sides, than just ignoring one party and not even considering what they have to say. People that can vote owe it to all those that can't to make a decision based on facts- not the candidates' personal lives or the media's spin on their beliefs or issues.

Both parties have something to offer and everyone should give each the benefit of the doubt. You can't seriously think you'll make a knowledgable decision if you don't know both sides.

Original Post by emilyaussie:
 She's serious about making a difference and helping the country, which is what every election is about.

The only problem is she has pretty much no experiance. Obama has been running for president longer than shes been a governer. And if they get elected she's just one breath away from being president. It's just not smart.

 

I try to watch the republican convention as much as I can, however I can only take small doses of republicans. I'm afraid if I hear too much of them at one time  i'll destroy my TV in rage.

You know those "Washington elite" and media she insulted?  They will eat her alive.  This is where her lack of national experience shows.

What struck me especially, and not just in her speech, is they all talk about small town life and the heartland and the problems faced by people who live there.  Not one word about the cities and the problems faced by city dwellers.  Since most of the population is in cities, she, and the whole party, is not speaking to them.  It could cost them.

I didn't hear Giuliani's speech, but I did hear Huckabee's speech.

I thought it was a very good speech up until he said that Sarah Palin had gotten more votes running for mayor of Wasilla than Joe Biden got running for president.

Not true - not by a long shot.  She got something like 1500 votes during two separate campaigns; Biden got over 76,000 votes before he dropped out after Iowa.  So darn it, why'd he have to throw in that whopper and spoil an otherwise excellent speech???

I still think that Huckabee was the republican's best option - he is so likable - he is a great, persuasive speaker, and coming from a poor background could never be called elitist or have to worry about how many homes he owns --because he's also a populist.  But I guess he wouldn't change his views on everything like McCain will so they couldn't choose Huckabee.  oh well...  (actually, I don't know for sure how many homes he owns, but I don't think it's more than 2)

There were a lot of whoppers. I guess Lieberman didn't remember that Obama worked with Republicans on the issue of keeping nuclear weapons out of the hands of terrorists, and on many other bipartisan efforts.  Leiberman knew it was a lie, but he said it anyway. 

Newt Gingrich, of all people commented that running a governor's office with a staff of eleven, can't compare to running a Senate office with 69 staff members. 

I'm so dissapointed in McCain for taking the very low, Karl Rowe road.  I saw nothing like this at the DNC.  They blasted their opponents on the issues and there were some distortions, but nothing like this.

agree. Was disappointed in Leiberman. Thompson was predictable, as was Guiliani. Palin fell way short of the mark, for non Republican home viewers.

Although the point was firing up the base, it's still her first nationally televised speech. Bold-faced lies, un-subtle digs and barbs - no real message here. Nothing in the whole convention thus far that compares to Michelle, Hillary, Joe or Barack.

Loved Cindy McCain's snaffu re: Roe v Wade. When Catie Couric asked if she was for overturning it, her first response was 'no' but then she back-peddaled and said it should be left up to the states. At least Cindy McCain is pro-choice. :)

Palin: Taxes are too high ... he wants to raise them. His tax increases are the fine print in his economic plan, and let me be specific.

The Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes ...

See for yourself what your taxes will be under both Obama and McCain:

http://alchemytoday.com/obamataxcut/

Who is Sarah Palin talking to? The wealthy people of this country who have over $5,000,000? Because that's what McCain considers "wealthy", and that's where McCain draws the lines in his tax bracket.