brief review (democratic)

i promised a review of the democratic national convention as early as wednesday, and i nearly shrugged it off. but since i dont feel like reading and the only thing playing on my tv is gustav. because my memory is only slightly above par, i apologize for the lack of depth.

nacy pelosi- D. she passed. i didnt remember her for making any major mistake, but i also simply didnt remember her. as a chairperson and a major part of this convention, its safe to say she was a political nonfactor. her speech was rife with the same old bullshit she feeds us about how much progress is being made (when nothing substantial has been), laden with bush-bashing, and characteristically insincere.

michelle obama- B+. mrs. obama did a phenomenal job of fulfilling the role she needed to. she offered up a back story for the family in very clear terms, delivered one of the better speeches of the night, and managed to appear both relatable and extraordinary. she has such a wonderfully american story to tell, and, having seen her on the campaign trail before, i expected nothing less articulate or heart-warming.

jesse jackson jr.- A+. this may have been one of the best political speeches i have ever seen. its a shame that my roommate and i may have been the only ones who actually did see it. it was at once a call for unity and a sweeping condemnation of the wrong path we have gone down over the last few years, both palatable and unsettling. he drew on the entire breadth of american history and inspired me, personally.



mark warner- F. much like the speaker of the house, i found mark warner's delivery to be subpar at best. he uses too many hand gestures, feels phony, and criticizes bush for not handling september eleventh using the political goggles of 2008. come on. he stuck with the four more years bit. the only thing neither bland nor offensive in this speech was a vague reference to how we need to focus on competing with china economically. even that, he shied away from a little and gave no specifics for. worst major speech of the convention. no doubt.

teddy kennedy- B+. the moment was moving. the speech called for unity. i thought he might overshadow hillary, which concerned me because honestly, this was only a good speech. it draws all of the lore because of his situation. he effectively and civilly argued for a move forward. he passed the torch to the next generation of politics.

hillary clinton- A-. she accomplished what she needed to. simply put. she addressed all of the issues that she fought so hard for during the primary season. ive always disliked miss clinton quite a bit, but she won me over with her entire performance at this convention. her speech had wit and class. she didnt stray from her beliefs. her move for acclamation was one of the most moving moments in the last 30 years of politics. well done.

bill clinton- A. these grades are based on the speeches, not overall performance. thats why bill beats out his wife. i didnt know if it was possible, but he managed to be more engaging and impressive than any other public appearance since his presidency. pointing out the similarities between his narrative and obama's worked very well for him. and... he's bill clinton, master of words.

john kerry- B. john kerry is not a speech giver. he's not charismatic. but somehow, he managed to come off with a really good performance. his criticisms were concise. his speech was self-deprecating. honestly, this is the best i've seen john kerry. his and al gore's were the only other democratic candidacies i was even sentient enough to criticize.

joe biden- B-. he fulfilled the role of the attack dog and drove home the 90% percent with bush comment. he was a safe pick. he stayed away from the mouthing off he's known for. his son delivered a better introduction than his speech, mostly because of the emotional ties he had to the issues.

tim kaine- C. he tried too hard to tie himself to the obama story. he went with same vague bush attacks, but his story about his work in nicaragua or honduras was a little interesting. he came off as a pretty amicable guy, but his effect was limited. he didnt stand out.

bill richardson- C. he hyped up the spanish-speaking audience. bill and tim courted the latinos of the audience which was actually refreshing. it feels so divisive when that segment of the audience is isolated. thursday could basically be summed up with these two phrases.
"si se puede" and "mccain voted with bush 90% of the time"

al gore- B-. gore has made a pretty good name for himself. he wields a pretty heavy hand in the democratic party. he didnt bring his a game. if anyone wasnt afforded the luxury of being funny, it was the man we all wanted to kill our buzz, al gore. he wasnt substantive enough, granted his speaking time wasnt the best and he was there on celebration day. i was just hoping for a more sober address.

barack obama- A-. we reach the end. obama addressed the clinton supporters, courted independents, showed his personal story, and made his case in specifics. i thought it was a job wel done. the only deductions i could give him were for the excessiveness of the crowd. he opened himself up to a little scrutiny there. also, his choice of the thursday speakers was suspect.


so glad i knocked that one out. lets pray the republican convention is able to to do something exciting in the wake of gustav.

about russian invasion of georgia

i tried to hold my tongue, but honestly this is complete bullshit. everyone over here is all up in arms. we have no responsibility in the matter as it stands right now. we cant go fighting people just because they do shit we dont like, and we cant try to leverage ourselves in issues that our allies wont speak out against. if germany or france or the uk want to step out and say something, if the eu wants to take some action, if the un security council makes a big fuss about this, then and only then does america need to think about intervening.

in defense of russia, the areas of georgia they are occupying dont even agree with the way georgia is being run. far be it for us to condemn a major world power for occupying lands in hopes of furthering their own agenda *cough*iraq-kuwait-kosovo-panama-cuba-vietnam-korea-hawaii-japan-mexico-the seminoles, cherokees, iroquois, creek, navajo, chickisaw, and various other native american nations- french and spanish territories*cough*

i love the usa. dont get me wrong. but if all of this hype keeps building up, im going to be sooooo disappointed.