Joho the Blog
An Entry from the Archives

« Me on CBS Radio || Back to Blog | Brand new bouncing baby blog »

July 28, 2004

Tuesday night scorecard

Ted Kennedy: The speech a monument — and the best Senator in history — would give.

Howard Dean: That afternoon when talking to 1,000 screamiac supporters, he let loose and reminded us why we stood in the snow for him. For the speech to the Convention I would only have stood in light hail.

Barack Obama: The good news for Hillary is that she might get State Department when Obama is President in 2012.

Ron Reagan: Good to hear about this adminisration's embrace of medieval science from Reagan's bad boy. A staid presentation, but every degree of passion would have been taken as a sign of a kink in his psychology.

Ilana Wexler, the twelve year old: Conventions should have a "You must be taller than this to ride" sign on the podium because it's so rare that trotting out a kid — no matter how wholesome, enthusiastic and charming — can make it over the tackiness hurdle. I don't know if Ilana did because the frequency of her amplified voice was above my hearing range. (Seriously.)

Teresa Heinz Kerry: He talk was literate and artfully constructed, but was the point to prove that she's too intelligent to raise her voice? Even so, I thought there was a bit of the "Shove it" Teresa in the multi-lingual opening: Juggling while unicycling, saying, "Yo, Bushes, let's see you do this!" Nevertheless, I'm a total sucker for appeals to new Americans. Does anyone love our country more?

Posted by D. Weinberger at July 28, 2004 09:39 AM


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Tuesday night scorecard:

» Don't Hold Your Breath, Hilary from the american street
Jenny Greenleaf's recent post is a good demonstration of what I had hoped to see more of from the Democratic Convention bloggers than the 'Hey, look at me, I'm on TV!' we've been getting. As a delegate, she attended an... [Read More]

Tracked on July 28, 2004 12:31 PM

» From an Arab-American from Loose Democracy
From a reader who requests anonymity, and who gave me permission to post this version with identifying info removed: As for your Tuesday night scorecard: My scorecard matches yours. When Barack Obama started speaking, I got goosebumps. But further into... [Read More]

Tracked on July 30, 2004 09:47 PM

Comments

Excuse me? Hilary might get state department when Obama gets president?

Hilary Clinton who has more years of experience, and is already in office?

What about Obama getting State after Hilary is elected?

You know something? For all the liberal male 'support' of women in politics, the Republicans will most likely be the first to elect a female president.

Posted by: Shelley | July 28, 2004 10:35 AM


Shelley, it was my way of saying that Obama roused the crowd more than Hillary did.

Having said that, I love Hillary and I'd stand out in the snow for her, but I don't know if she can get elected, mainly for bad reasons. And, yes, I agree that the Reps are likely to be the first to elect a woman or a person of color.

Posted by: David Weinberger | July 28, 2004 11:37 AM


You mean the Republicans will elect a (white) woman OVER a person of color, right?

Posted by: Joe | July 29, 2004 09:02 AM


We are in the wrong war, with the wrong opponent and at the wrong time. The real long range problem is the economy. Look at the Nat. Debt, the amount of money to service the debt every year. I have written to the I.H.T., the N.Y. Times and every columnist about his problem. I don't believe President Bush has done one correct thing in his 3 & 1/2 years. Why do not more people read Time, Newsweek, U.S. News, the Times and I.H.T.? John R. Stewart

Posted by: John Stewart | July 29, 2004 11:44 AM


I have to disagree with you on the Republicans will elect a woman president before the Democrats. Simply put the Democrats have more women in the pipeline than the Republicans.

Republicans getting a man of color to the White House is a much greater possibility. The only real candidate on the horizon for the Dems is Mr. Obama and he just now is getting to the limelight. If (and when) he wins the Senate seat in IL he still will have to put a little record on the resume. Dems can get away with nominating one guy for a top post with less than one term in the Senate, but two in a row is stretching it.

To the point on the kid - I thought she did a wonderful job in front of the crowd. I hope my 9 year old daughter would be that confident in that same position. The only problem was she sounded programmed. But a kid who takes politics into her own hands like that you gotta like.

To John Stewart - I largely agree. 4 years ago when W started to become a leading figure in the race I thought, "how can the Reps nominate a guy who has basically failed at everything he has tried to do before being elected governor and even there the Texas governor is probably one of the three weakest positions structurally of the 50 states). On the plus side he has given the Dems lots of ammo to run on this fall.

One last thing - Vice President Cheney stated in a speech last night that the terrorists would see a Kerry election as a sign of weakness and that the terrorists always attack when they perceive weakness. Maybe he should look at when the terrorists attacked us - a little over 7 months after he and W assumed office. Mr. Pot let me introduce you to Mr. Kettle.

Posted by: Allen | July 29, 2004 01:10 PM


On Barack Obama's Speech:
Without question, Mr. Obama delivered one of the most stirring keynote addresses in recent political history. His oratorical style is personally engaging and personal history, a testament to the opportunity inherent in the American Dream. In these respects, he is not unlike many political leaders.

Before we elect him president, however, it should be noted that his story is but one page in the chronicles of American citizenship. Equally compelling and engaging figures exist in modern politics - most notably, General Colin Powell. If I am not mistaken, he too was once was referred to as possibly "the first black president of the United States" by many pundits and voters.

To be sure, Mr. Obama's speech was timely and eloquent. It was not, however, the watershed event that many are making it out to be. He is a Democrat, from a mostly Democratic State who delivered a predictably democratic message to a Democratic audience. He has yet to be tested in the scorching fire of partisan politics at the national level. He has yet to be subjected to the intense scrutiny of the national press which has withered more seasoned and inspired individuals. The honeymoon will soon be over for Obama. Will he fair as well against equally talented and gifted conservatives? We'll see!

Posted by: Yaliktono | July 29, 2004 01:34 PM


We are in the wrong war, with the wrong opponent and at the wrong time. The real long range problem is the economy. Look at the Nat. Debt, the amount of money to service the debt every year. I have written to the I.H.T., the N.Y. Times and every columnist about his problem. I don't believe President Bush has done one correct thing in his 3 & 1/2 years. Why do not more people read Time, Newsweek, U.S. News, the Times and I.H.T.? John R. Stewart

MiC

Posted by: Mic | August 11, 2004 07:32 AM


Post a comment

Guidelines for Commenting

Basically, you can say what you want. (Click here for the fine print.)

If you haven't left a comment here before, your comment may be put into a queue for me to approve. Sorry for the delay. Blame the damn spammers.