The Official Republican Convention Thread

[Bravo1-3]

I thought he was going to cry for a few minutes.

Now Kerry is going to give a statement tonight in Ohio that attacks Bush/Cheney for "attacking his patriotism and his military service" I distinctley remember hearing Cheney say "I commend him for his service in vietnam". I remember Zell Miller saying "I don't question their (Kerry, Kennedy) patriotism, I question their judgement."

Now it seems that people are starting to call Zell Miller a racist. I wonder if they knew he was a racist when he gave the key note address in 1992, or when he worked for the Carter and Mondale Campaigns?

[Doc]

I thought this was a great convention. Good sequence of speakers.

There were people trying to disrupt it but I don't think the ordinary American identifies with these fringe groups. It only showed me how desparate these people have become.

Solid reasoning does not become desparate. It prevails.

[Sacamuelas]

I really enjoyed the last portion of his speech. I had that mysterious allergic reaction kick in again where my throat feels like its swelling up and my eyes exhibit mild Epiphora during the President's words about our Fallen.
Damn beer from Holland, must be allergic to this stuff.


Note- I know, I used a two dollar word, trying to impress the new Doc with my fancy lingo. LOL It means excess tearing for all you who didn't feel like googling.

[The Reaper]

Originally posted by Bravo1-3
Now it seems that people are starting to call Zell Miller a racist. I wonder if they knew he was a racist when he gave the key note address in 1992, or when he worked for the Carter and Mondale Campaigns?

See, follow the media, neither Zell, nor Robert Byrd (a former Klansman known to use the "n-word" on the floor of the Senate) are racists as long as they are part of the Democratic party, toeing the line.

We know this because we are told that Democrats cannot be racists. That pejorative is reserved for supporters of the Party of Lincoln.

That parallels the lack of attention to military service during the two Clinton elections, when the Republican candidates were bonafide war heroes, and now, wartime service was the theme of the DNC.

I am waiting for Kerry to call Bush a coward for being a member of the Guard during the Vietnam War. Equating Guard service with cowardice when so many Guardsmen are deployed right now fighting the GWOT will alienate large numbers of them and their families.

This was a great example of how to run a convention, particularly when compared to the exclusionary Democratic Love Fest.

Oh, yeah, and the NYPD gets a BIG gold star, in my book! Well done!

TR

[Roguish Lawyer]

This may be an unpopular view, but I thought the POTUS's speech sucked. His speechwriter and all who signed off on the speech should be fired. He had a shot at a 10-15 point bounce, and because of this lame speech, he'll be lucky to get 5-7. I am deeply disappointed.

I give the speech a "C."

[Doc]

Originally posted by Roguish Lawyer
This may be an unpopular view, but I thought the POTUS's speech sucked. His speechwriter and all who signed off on the speech should be fired. He had a shot at a 10-15 point bounce, and because of this lame speech, he'll be lucky to get 5-7. I am deeply disappointed.

I give the speech a "C."

You're entitled to your view.

How could the POTUS done better in your opinion?

Doc

[pulque]

I thought it was a great speech. I watched it to see what all the fuss was about. I mean, what PS.com folks like and/or love about President Bush. I was not disappointed. I have been yearning to hear presidential optimism and future plans for 3 hard years.

I feel reassured now that if he should he win, he will be an inspiration to many of those who serve this country with courage and loyalty overseas.

[JGarcia]

I too got misty eyed during that speach of his. I disagree with you RL, in that i think POTUS hit his mark with that speech.

I have Dish Network TV, so I scrolled down into the 9000's channels to see what the left is saying. I think they are reeling from the RNC, and are making "hate fillled rhetoric" ...I am amused at Kerry's thoughts on the RNC, specifically what he had to say RE: Cheney's speech. Cheney as all of you know, applauded Kerrys service and attacked his voting record.

Kerry is saying he will not have two people who got out of serving question his service, or words to that effect. He's grasping at straws on his way down the tube. I hope.

As a guardsman, who served in OIF, I concur with you TR, Kerry and other Dems have alienated many of us with their derogatory comments about the guard. Absolute hogwash. I still remember DNC lawyers trying to prevent absentee votes from servicemen being counted in Florida during the last election fiasco, DO YOU?

That single act showed me exactly what the Dems think of the Soldiers.

As many have said, being a 'war hero' wasnt important in the two Klinton elections, why is it now? I often wonder why the GOP never brings up these kinds of things the socialists have done or the empty arguments socialists have made when it is convenient for them to be on one side of the issue or another depending on the time of the year.

[DanUCSB]

Eh, I think I might have to be with RL on this one. It had a couple of good moments, but it was bland and fairly uninspiring most of the way, with the constant irritation of the constant applause screwing up the flow. Par for the course, though.

He did do a good job of saluting our servicemen (and women), and did a good job of laying out specifics for his second term, something Kerry has been lacking. Sounded dignified and presidential, which is a plus.

Sorry George, but the moments I'll remember from the RNC are "Spitballs!" and my Governator intoning, "And for all you pessimists about the economy, I say: Don't be an economic girly-man!"

[The Reaper]

I think the speech was about a 99 of 100 for Bush.

He is not "The Great Communicator", or Bill Clinton (got to give him his props, he could work a room), Giuliani, Schwarzenegger, or Miller.

His style of communication is better in a small setting, or one on one, and he had no option to not follow a better orator without hurting the cause.

Frankly, I think he did the best he could with what he had, and could have done far worse. How could you ask for more?

By the way, RL, I will settle for a 1 point lead and a 1 vote victory in the Electoral College.

TR

[Guy]

Article in the current issue of Newsweek about the POTUS.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5853701/site/newsweek/

I heard someone say the other day...

"It's not only about your journey...it's your destination!"

[DanUCSB]

Originally posted by The Reaper
By the way, RL, I will settle for a 1 point lead and a 1 vote victory in the Electoral College.

Sounds like the old joke:

Q: What do you call the guy who graduated dead last in the med-school class?

A: Doctor.

[Airbornelawyer]

Originally posted by DanUCSB
Sounds like the old joke:

Q: What do you call the guy who graduated dead last in the med-school class?

A: Doctor.

Q: What do you call the guy who graduated dead last from USMA?

A: Lieutenant.

[Roguish Lawyer]

Originally Posted by Doc

How could the POTUS done better in your opinion?

1. Generally speaking, the speech was just not well-written. There are good speeches and bad ones, and this one was mediocre. It wasn't so much the delivery as the text itself that I disliked. Too few sound bites, weak rhetoric and little substance from a public policy point of view.

2. He should have catered more to the media. The speech did absolutely nothing to try to secure a positive media spin on the speech. It did not attempt to respond directly -- or at least did not do so adequately IMO -- to any of the issues constantly raised by the press. This was a lost opportunity.

3. What exactly were the domestic policy accomplishments? And what is the agenda? I thought this was all incredibly weak. He left himself open to attacks for this. I am a rabid Republican and I was disappointed in his lack of policy leadership. Can you imagine how a moderate would react?

I didn't give the speech an F. There were no gaffes, so it was OK, I guess. But I do not believe that the speech won a single vote for the President. It was good enough and probably made existing supporters happy, but this is a very important speech -- one that can actually get people to get out and vote, move from undecided or even change sides. I believe it was a missed opportunity.

But what do I know?

[Doc]

Originally Posted by Roguish Lawyer

1. Generally speaking, the speech was just not well-written. There are good speeches and bad ones, and this one was mediocre. It wasn't so much the delivery as the text itself that I disliked. Too few sound bites, weak rhetoric and little substance from a public policy point of view.

2. He should have catered more to the media. The speech did absolutely nothing to try to secure a positive media spin on the speech. It did not attempt to respond directly -- or at least did not do so adequately IMO -- to any of the issues constantly raised by the press. This was a lost opportunity.

3. What exactly were the domestic policy accomplishments? And what is the agenda? I thought this was all incredibly weak. He left himself open to attacks for this. I am a rabid Republican and I was disappointed in his lack of policy leadership. Can you imagine how a moderate would react?

I didn't give the speech an F. There were no gaffes, so it was OK, I guess. But I do not believe that the speech won a single vote for the President. It was good enough and probably made existing supporters happy, but this is a very important speech -- one that can actually get people to get out and vote, move from undecided or even change sides. I believe it was a missed opportunity.

But what do I know?

Thanks for your reply.

Doc