Official: 2008 Democratic National Convention

[Gatorubet]

Originally Posted by Bucklion

Jesus, look at all the hippies jump all over me

My only real point was that anyone can deliver a speech that's gone through more edits than Rich Rodriguez's contracts and been practiced more than punting at Notre Dame.

That's the really silly part we commented on, as it is not true. We put your ass in front of the nation with the White house on the line in a make or break moment and you likely stammer and stutter your way into political oblivion. Why don't you get your butt down to an appellate court and see all the people trying to deliver a cogent message on something important - like their client's case? You'd be surprised at how many smart and well educated people can't give a good presentation after writing the thing, having it edited by skilled collegues and practicing.

We get that you can't give her the credit she deserves.

['BusNative]

Originally Posted by kinch

To be fair, James Carville and CNN said the same thing.

I'm sure he did. He and FOX would have criticized from the opposite side if they didn't do the "get to know us" speech. There was no way that last night could have satisfied all of the various ways that they could have been criticized.

Ob/Subjectively, I thought it was a perfect speech.

[Bucklion]

Originally Posted by Gatorubet

That's the really silly part we commented on, as it is not true.

OK, perhaps it was poorly phrased, maybe I should have been clearer and said that a good delivery of a completely vetted speech doesn't necessarily mean anything, other than she can deliver a well-rehearsed speech.

[Gatorubet]

Originally Posted by Bucklion

OK, perhaps it was poorly phrased, maybe I should have been clearer and said that a good delivery of a completely vetted speech doesn't necessarily mean anything, other than she can deliver a presumably well-rehearsed speech under an incredible amount of pressure.

FI

And you are entirely correct Bucklion, it means nothing, other than the fact that she is one of the reasons for Obama negatives, and if she fails to make a good showing her husband could lose a close election for the Presidency. The Clinton supporters were looking for a reason to dislike her. They know she and Hillary are not buddies. It was really not just a puff piece, as it has some substantive effects if poorly done. She and the speech writers hit a perfect note in a difficult crowd.

The Patently Unstable Menopausal Anarchists would crucify her if she did poorly.

[OSUsushichic]

YouTube - Michelle Obama Speaks at the DNC

[jimotis4heisman]

im seeing a lot of jfk in all of this.

big stadium.

in some ways to to michelle also as fashionable, pretty, smart, personable. she seems to appeal to be a type that nearly anyone wishes to date, with her sporty backround etc.

irish vs african american (dont kid yourself on an irish catholic and their history)

the only difference is that obama doesnt have some sort of historical legacy.



in all honesty i lean right of center. economically probably more than lean. id love to vote for obama, i really would. i think it could be such a good thing for our country, for african americans, really many minorities. i just have a hard time voting for a guy that is that far off to the left. bidens a good pick but hes a really an interesting pick. like mccain or cheney hes short temepered and prone to the public mistake.

i havent decided but i think i may once again me be voting note out of enjoyment but as the less worser of two...

[BayBuck]

Originally Posted by Gatorubet

That's the really silly part we commented on, as it is not true. We put your ass in front of the nation with the White house on the line in a make or break moment and you likely stammer and stutter your way into political oblivion. Why don't you get your butt down to an appellate court and see all the people trying to deliver a cogent message on something important - like their client's case? You'd be surprised at how many smart and well educated people can't give a good presentation after writing the thing, having it edited by skilled collegues and practicing.

We get that you can't give her the credit she deserves.

Oh please--Michelle Obama's always been solid in front of a microphone, it's just her predilection for speaking her mind too directly that has made her a liability in her husband's campaign, and this speech was all about smoothing out her image. I had no doubt she could stand up there and deliver a well-rehearsed speech (in front of what I wouldn't quite call a difficult crowd for the presumed Democrat candidate) without peeing her pants, but we've seen the real Michelle before, and saying the all right things in a convention speech doesn't suddenly make her a whole new person.

[BayBuck]

Originally Posted by jimotis4heisman

i just have a hard time voting for a guy that is that far off to the left ....
i think i may once again me be voting note out of enjoyment but as the less worser of two...

+1

[Bucklion]

Originally Posted by Gatorubet

That's the really silly part we commented on, as it is not true. We put your ass in front of the nation with the White house on the line in a make or break moment and you likely stammer and stutter your way into political oblivion. Why don't you get your butt down to an appellate court and see all the people trying to deliver a cogent message on something important - like their client's case? You'd be surprised at how many smart and well educated people can't give a good presentation after writing the thing, having it edited by skilled collegues and practicing.

We get that you can't give her the credit she deserves.

Dude, seriously, settle down...do you know me? Do you know anything about me? I haven't spoken in front of the nation, but I have spoken in front of some pretty high-powered academics multiple times...and I didn't "stammer and stutter my way into oblivion", but thanks though. That aside, I've seen some really smart academics who can't give a talk to save their life either. And I've seen some who give a great talk that are so full of [censored] they're oozing it. What's your point, other than to insult me? I gave her credit for a great delivery...I just said it didn't mean anything other than she has great delivery. Sorry I'm skeptical of the greatest couple in the history of America, but they're basically career politicians and activists...I'm skeptical of all of them as a group until I hear them say some substantive things, which I haven't heard much of yet. "We love America and we're going to change Washington" just isn't enough yet.

[Gatorubet]

Originally Posted by Bucklion

Dude, seriously, settle down...do you know me? Do you know anything about me? I haven't spoken in front of the nation, but I have spoken in front of some pretty high-powered academics multiple times...and I didn't "stammer and stutter my way into oblivion", but thanks though. That aside, I've seen some really smart academics who can't give a talk to save their life either. And I've seen some who give a great talk that are so full of [censored] they're oozing it. What's your point, other than to insult me? I gave her credit for a great delivery...I just said it didn't mean anything other than she has great delivery. Sorry I'm skeptical of the greatest couple in the history of America, but they're basically career politicians and activists...I'm skeptical of all of them as a group until I hear them say some substantive things, which I haven't heard much of yet. "We love America and we're going to change Washington" just isn't enough yet.

Oh, I'm settled. I read your first post, and like I say, it appeared that you were dismissing the speech entirely. I posted too soon, having hit the submit and not preview button, and had edited the post before I saw your level headed reply. That is why I followed up three minutes later and tried to lighten it up.

I admit that it chaped me a little bit for somebody to respond to what I thought were a number of valid points by a "look at the hippies" post. Basically, I responded to my perception of your desire to discuss the thing in a reasonagble manner. My bad, as I agree with about all you posted.

[Bucklion]

Originally Posted by Gatorubet

Oh, I'm settled. I read your first post, and like I say, it appeared that you were dismissing the speech entirely. I posted too soon, having hit the submit and not preview button, and had edited the post before I saw your level headed reply. That is why I followed up three minutes later and tried to lighten it up.

I admit that it chaped me a little bit for somebody to respond to what I thought were a number of valid points by a "look at the hippies" post. Basically, I responded to my perception of your desire to discuss the thing in a reasonagble manner. My bad, as I agree with what about all you posted.

No problem bro...things can get a little heated from time to time, and there's no body language or tone on a message board. At least I didn't go ekeen on you and start telling you about my women and cars and [censored]

Basically the "hippie" comment was an inside joke that was before your time here I think...no offense intended, quite the contrary actually. Sushi and I especially used to toss those types of terms around whimiscally when over-the-top people would start trying to take over the poli board.

NOTE: That didn't mean I thought you were being over-the-top, just that I was using the term playfully.

[Gatorubet]

Originally Posted by BayBuck

Oh please--Michelle Obama's always been solid in front of a microphone, it's just her predilection for speaking her mind too directly that has made her a liability in her husband's campaign, and this speech was all about smoothing out her image. I had no doubt she could stand up there and deliver a well-rehearsed speech (in front of what I wouldn't quite call a difficult crowd for the presumed Democrat candidate) without peeing her pants, but we've seen the real Michelle before, and saying the all right things in a convention speech doesn't suddenly make her a whole new person.

Actually, it would shock me if you or I have the slightest clue what the "real" Michelle Obama was like. You have it figured out, so you can tell me what the real gal is like.

[Gatorubet]

Originally Posted by Bucklion

No problem bro...things can get a little heated from time to time, and there's no body language or tone on a message board. At least I didn't go ekeen on you and start telling you about my women and cars and [censored]

Basically the "hippie" comment was an inside joke that was before your time here I think...no offense intended, quite the contrary actually. Sushi and I especially used to toss those types of terms around whimiscally when over-the-top people would start trying to take over the poli board.

NOTE: That didn't mean I thought you were being over-the-top, just that I was using the term playfully.

Oh...and my "eat a bag of dicks" macro was stuck.

I'm working on about four hours sleep right now, so I'll try not to get upset.

It's just that Dayton is still missing.....

['BusNative]

What really kills me is the no-win nature of people's comments.

She delivers a very, very good convention speech, and some here - and many one the media - say that it was too polished. What?

Leading up to the convention (and still now), media types (and relatively few here) repeated the idea that people "didn't know" Obama, so Michelle gives - what I thought was - an amazing "here's all about us" speech. Still, media types immediately said that she should have talked more about the issues. Are you [censored]ing serious? Could you imagine Laura Bush discussing "the issues"? That's not the First Lady's role in a convention (especially a first convention, MAAAAYBE in the 2nd if your name is Hillary) to discuss the issues.

So how was Michelle supposed to get credit then? Alot of the comments I've been hearing on the news have been the ol' 'damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't.'

[jimotis4heisman]

Originally Posted by 'BusNative

What really kills me is the no-win nature of people's comments.

She delivers a very, very good convention speech, and some here - and many one the media - say that it was too polished. What?

Leading up to the convention (and still now), media types (and relatively few here) repeated the idea that people "didn't know" Obama, so Michelle gives - what I thought was - an amazing "here's all about us" speech. Still, media types immediately said that she should have talked more about the issues. Are you [censored]ing serious? Could you imagine Laura Bush discussing "the issues"? That's not the First Lady's role in a convention (especially a first convention, MAAAAYBE in the 2nd if your name is Hillary) to discuss the issues.

So how was Michelle supposed to get credit then? Alot of the comments I've been hearing on the news have been the ol' 'damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't.'

you hit it on the head. it was a no win situation. you cant hit all the points and you certainly have to brush with a broad stroke. i didnt see all the speeches i watcher hers. she did a very good job. it wasnt perfect and i think you forget t heinze kerry's "evita" speech at the last convention....