Re: Palin's Speech
Sep. 4th, 2008 12:12 amThat was way more boring than crazy. How do VP candidates get away with talking about their family for what seemed like half of the speech?
Even the little ticker thing at the bottom of the screen agreed with me. It couldn't even find quotes from the speech to run, and just stayed blank most of the time.
However, this convention still wins for crazy with the moment when Romney announced "radical, violent Islam is evil, and he will defeat it" (which happened to be the moment I turned on the TV, for a particularly creepy beginning), and the crowd went wild. And it sure seemed to me like they'd be cheering just as much without the adjectives in front of Islam.
Even the little ticker thing at the bottom of the screen agreed with me. It couldn't even find quotes from the speech to run, and just stayed blank most of the time.
However, this convention still wins for crazy with the moment when Romney announced "radical, violent Islam is evil, and he will defeat it" (which happened to be the moment I turned on the TV, for a particularly creepy beginning), and the crowd went wild. And it sure seemed to me like they'd be cheering just as much without the adjectives in front of Islam.
no subject
Date: 2008-09-04 04:24 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-04 04:29 am (UTC)tortureenhanced interrogations. Although the undertone of 'he suffered, so he deserves to win now' is pretty creepy too.no subject
Date: 2008-09-04 04:43 am (UTC)I didn't even mind as much as usual when the dog had a fight with a skunk ten minutes before showtime. De-skunking a big powerful dog is still better than having to listen to Sarah Palin deliver a speech written by a Bush speechwriter. If I weren't an Obama supporter on pure policy issues, I think I'd still have to be on aesthetics alone; can you imagine what it's going to be like if we have to listen to this woman talk for a minimum of four years?
no subject
Date: 2008-09-04 04:57 am (UTC)I was really interested to see her speech, since I've never heard her give one before (or heard of her at all, before Friday), but the whole thing was just boring, vague, and not well-given. I keep wondering if I was a Republican, if the Democratic speeches would have seemed as transparently propagandist, incorrect or simplistic, and, well, bad, or if the Republicans are all just objectively worse speakers.
no subject
Date: 2008-09-04 05:12 am (UTC)No, I don't think so. Something was up with the Democrats this year: I've never seen or heard such a run of really excellent speeches. Even people who're often boring or difficult to listen to were on fire this time. I'd worry that this was me being partisan, except that I have outside confirmation. Not only was there the Pat Buchanan incident right after Obama's speech, but there's a little snippet in this week's New Yorker about a couple of McCain operatives at the Democratic convention, listening to the speeches and getting talking points blasted out to the media in real time. And those guys were despairing over the quality of the speeches, and wishing they were running against somebody else.
Unfortunately for us, it isn't always like this. I can remember many, many years in which I avoided listening to Democrats as assiduously as I avoided listening to Republicans. But this year, it's different. If you were a Republican you'd probably be insane with rage listening to this stuff, but it wouldn't seem transparent and simplistic and propagandist in the same way that the Republican stuff does now. Or at least, I sure as hell don't think it would.
no subject
Date: 2008-09-04 06:13 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-04 06:30 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-04 02:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-04 08:09 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-04 08:09 pm (UTC)