Forums | MacLife

Obama really answered about every criticism past and anticipated. The "tax and spend" stereotype, the "nanny state" stereotype", the "big government" stereotype...

Also, the Langston Hughes reference tickled my English degree.

Farmerkev wrote:

Beat what?
The convention?

Yeah.  Not the spectacle, but the impression it leaves.

ShnickyShnack wrote:

I do wish Obama could've favored us with some of the ol' inspirational speakin'. But I guess he couldn't.

Oh well, maybe at the inauguration, eh?

There was more than enough of that there for me.

Oh yes. The debates are so very useful. The way that they allow the candidates to assert their positions, intelligently refute the opponents' positions, respond to the insightful questions of the moderators...

(P.S. That was sarcasm)

Tallgeese wrote:

Oh yes. The debates are so very useful. The way that they allow the candidates to assert their positions, intelligently refute the opponents' positions, respond to the insightful questions of the moderators...

(P.S. That was sarcasm)

They put them under pressure, off script and we can see who doesn't know their smurf and smurfs up.
It's a bit like going to see a band live and realizing they actually suck if a studio isn't doing mix magic.

Farmerkev wrote:

Tallgeese wrote:

Oh yes. The debates are so very useful. The way that they allow the candidates to assert their positions, intelligently refute the opponents' positions, respond to the insightful questions of the moderators...

(P.S. That was sarcasm)

They put them under pressure, off script and we can see who doesn't know their smurf and smurfs up.
It's a bit like going to see a band live and realizing they actually suck if a studio isn't doing mix magic.

Nah. Anyone whos seen a good number of live shows knows that a lot of times a band can have everything together and yet go over like a lead balloon, yet I could go see a band where the people jumping off stage unplugged the guitar, the singer steals the drummers cymbals and tossed them into the audience in a fury, everything self destructs and yet the band was on fire (perhaps literally), and THAT would be the show I'd rather have seen.

What I mean is, people will always see what they want to see and be happy and amazed to see it, and the performance of someone "under pressure" in a debate is crap. Composure and presentation, thats all a debate really exhibits, not political theorizing or demonstration of leadership. People exercise their well worn ideas and its a style contest. The subject is always outside of the lines.

Hitler was a great orator, might have been a great debator, I suppose there are some politicians in the US government he might have been able to appear superior to and win the debate- do you suppose it would have showed the superriority of his ideals or program? Not in a million years.

Last edited by StaticAge (2008-08-28 11:09 pm)

Call me crazy, but I liked the introductory speech better than Obama's speech. I wasn't entirely impressed by Obama's speech. It was just alright for me. I think I heard McCain's name more than anything else. At times, I felt he went too far out of his way to attack him. For example, when he was talking about oil prices and McCain's being in office while the price of oil has risen. It could very well be that I missed the point, but that didn't make much sense to me. I did like that he addressed certain issues such as him being unAmerican and that sort of stuff.

everlong205 wrote:

ShnickyShnack wrote:

I do wish Obama could've favored us with some of the ol' inspirational speakin'. But I guess he couldn't.

Oh well, maybe at the inauguration, eh?

There were fireworks. And Sheryl Crow. That certainly counts for something. Don't forget Stevie Wonder and the Boss.

Seriously, its alll pomp and circumstance. All Mcain has to do is come out and reiterate the whole rock star thing and peg obama as unserious, not ready and shallow, but one who puts on a great show.
He can say something like "I had a great time watching the event the other night. That Obama is a real rockstar. I heard some great tunes and saw some great specatle and fireworks.But ladies and gentlemen, we are here to elect a president to lead this country, not a rock star. Is Sheryl Crow singing  A Change Will Do you Good going to balance the budget or get wasteful spending in line. And aren't we all sick of that song anyway just like we are of the endless hope and change rhetoric, which is about as deep as that sheryl crow song? Sounds great on the radio for the first few days, but who wants to hear it now? Is Stevie Wonder singing Signed Sealed Delivered going to deal in any way with the housing crisis or adress what's happening in the world?  If you want a rock star, go see Aerosmith. Now lets get back to the serious business and past the demagoguery and snake oil and elect grownups to lead this country. I won't waste your time trying to surround myself with celebrities trying to use showbiz and glitz to cover the fact that I have little experience or gravitas."
Of course, not in those exact words of course.

And on a personal note, I'd feel gyped actually if I went there and didn't hear Freebird at the end. What kind of retro concert is that? Where were all the Obama lighters. Why didn't Obama do an encore? He could end on the MLK speech. Then all the obamiacs could hold up the obama lighters and after a few minutes Obama could come back out for an encore of "hope and change". Ridiculous.

  You should put aside the partisanship and listen to his speech.

Chickenhawk wrote:

well, the "rockstar" ad-hominem didn't work the first time, I suppose mccain could be foolish enough to try it again.

I'm actually looking forward to him doing just that.

ScifiterX wrote:

everlong205 wrote:

niggs0026 wrote:

Call me crazy, but I liked the introductory speech better than Obama's speech. I wasn't entirely impressed by Obama's speech. It was just alright for me. I think I heard McCain's name more than anything else. At times, I felt he went too far out of his way to attack him. For example, when he was talking about oil prices and McCain's being in office while the price of oil has risen. It could very well be that I missed the point, but that didn't make much sense to me. I did like that he addressed certain issues such as him being unAmerican and that sort of stuff.

Exactly, he was trying to pin everything on the mere fact the Mccain was in the senate when it occured. (He does that a lot by the way). He also did it with his assertion that Mcain says he'll follow Bin Laden to hell but he wont even follow him to a cave. MCAIN IS NOT PRESIDENT. MCAIN DOESN"T MAKE MILITARY POLICY. NOONE KNOWS WHICH CAVE BIN LADEN IS IN AT THE MOMENT OR WHETHER HE'S ALIVE. AND DEMOCRATS CONTROL CONGRESS RIGHT NOW AND THEY ARE NOT SEARCHING IN CAVES AS WE SPEAK EITHER. Does he really want to go toe to toe with mcain on dealing with terrorism?
Also, Wasn't Biden also in the senate when oil prices rose? And Biden is his running mate. How do we know that all the issues that have affected the country in the past 30 years aren't in fact Biden's fault? I blame Biden. For everything!
Of course one couldnt blame obama for anything that occured in the senate, because as with everything else he has no experience there. He hasnt' even served a full term at this point. He has shown no history of reaching across the aisle, nor a hint of politics other than as usual.I hear a guy talking a whole lot of guff, and he has nothing to back up his words at all. Nothing. At least Biden has a history of being in govt. At least Mcain does. Obama even takes credit for having the courage to vote against the Iraq war and he wasn't even in the senate at the time. And he was appeaing to an antiwar base to get in office. It would be corageous if he did in fact vote for the war in that case. Rather it shows that Obama is great at giving people what they want to hear.


His politics of change are a fraud.

McCain's actions and statements are statements are fair game, as are Obama's. If you don't want those attacked, you don't do things worthy of attack. While Obama did tear McCain a new on a new one over that (and honestly I've seen worse on that front in 2004, 2000, 1996, 1992, 1988, & 1980), he did avoid making actual character attacks. We will see if McCain can do the same on the Republican convention.

What are you talking about? A third term of george bush is not a character attack? Impylying that conservatives are trying to take all gains away from poor people to give to rich people is not a character attack? Thats the whole democratic playbook, and all its talking points. You'd think that this is a country that isn't doing anything for its people based on the dem rhetoric. Meanwhile we are already spending the vast majority of our budgets on entitlement programs created by govt that are supposed to address the needs of the people that haven't in fact worked and are bankrupting us. You'd think this is the worst economy in the history of economies. When today we got a report that it grew by 3%. I'd certainl agree that its not the best economy of all time, but we are not in the midst of the great depression either. Yet that's alll the talking points put out by the dems. And populism aint going to balance the budget or make companies strong. yet all this is Bush's fault. Excuse me. Dems have controlled congress now for almost two years. Where is the great reform emanating from the dems?  They can't even stay in session to vote on drilling for oil, despite the fact that oil prices are killing the little guy.

Certainly Obama can make attacks on Mcain, I expect it (and vice versa). That's what politics are about. I'm saying though that I see through Obama and his house of mirrors. It's certainly the most manufactured attempt at seizing power that I've ever seen in my life, and of any candidate in the past decade or so I can't think of one who had less of a resume than Obama. barely any govt experience. Nothing that says he actulaly will reach across the aisile or that he is really a politician of change (funny when in Chicago he was business as usual). And in fact he has a past that show he has anything but sound judgement. His only executive experience being serving on a board  for years with an unrepentant terrorist who tried to blow up the pentagon. He even said hedidn't have the experience to run for president. That seems to be one of the few truthful things he's uttered.
Suddenly he's passing off his lack of experience as if it were a virtue. and suggesting he has judgement. Where?

Last edited by everlong205 (2008-08-29 1:06 am)

everlong205 wrote:

ShnickyShnack wrote:

I do wish Obama could've favored us with some of the ol' inspirational speakin'. But I guess he couldn't.

Oh well, maybe at the inauguration, eh?

There were fireworks. And Sheryl Crow.

I bet they saved a ton of money on toilet paper.
Not to mention, the way she soaks up the sun solves global warming.

MC Rove keeps it real.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYZre8kEsuw