george w bush- D. if you cant even come off as genuine in a pre-recorded message, theres no way to redeem yourself. if bush had given the greatest speech of his life, it still wouldnt have mattered. no one likes bush. i find myself defending him against other republicans, but thats all beside the point. bush praised mccain, saying its he (not obama) who can best help win the war on terror. honestly. no one was listening. i skipped the speech and my youtube is down, so i just read a transcript for this.
laura bush- D+. shes a nice lady. she got a bigger speaking role because bush couldnt make it there personally, a gesture of good faith from the mccain campaign. she didnt hurt anything. she didnt fail, but again: nobody listened.
cindy mccain- A-. i thought cindy did an excellent job. she has a great story to tell, and she didnt harp oon her husbands military experience for too long. any first lady who jumps into her first real public speech with a call to serve a greater good makes an excellent woman in my book. she strayed from real substantive issues, but let us know that she would continue one of bushs major successes- the fight against tb and hiv/aids in africa.
joe lieberman- B-. aside from the fact that hes a fucking rat, joe lieberman was pretty effective in his address, praising mccain in an effort to put country before party. he landed some really hard hits on obama, and he focused where he needed to focus- mccains narrative and military experience.
mitt romney- C-. mitt proved why hes not vice president. he talked real substantive issues, but he wasnt into the speech. im sure hes already forming a 2012 exploratory committee for president. this guy has never seemed genuinely enthusiastic about mccain, but how could he be. romney is an economic conservative who happens to think the war on terror is important. mccain is a foreign policy liberal (neo-conservative) who happens to like free markets. they wouldve balanced each other out, but they would not have been very exciting.
mike huckabee- A. mike huckabee can deliver a speech. he told a great story and added some witty cuts at the democrats to boot. i thought hed owned the night.
rudy giuliani- A+. hate him though i may, rudy had the most effective speech of either convention. he went negative- really negative, taking shots at barack obamas work as a community organizer and his present votes in the illinois legislature (even though its widely know among the political junkies that a present vote is very common in state lesislatures if you support a bill, but have a problem with the wording of one of its articles). giuliani placed a lot of doubt in everyones mind about the presumptive democratic nominee and praised mccain as the only man who can take on these tough times.
sarah palin- A. palin also took the gloves off. she proved herself a really gritty hardcore conservative. honestly, i thought the move was a disaster when i heard her first speech, but this one nearly won me over. shes tough and defends her inexperience with the quality of the little bit she does have, kicking out the entire alaska establishment. im not sure id feel comfortable with her in such a high position, but im confident she has an agenda, which is nice to know, alleviates any feeling that she was just a gimic.
tim pawlenty- C. this man is boring. one of the most forgettable speeches ive heard. there were plenty of charges that only republicans understand the real plight of the acerage american and that barack obama would raise taxes no matter what he says. pointed arguments from a dull man.
john mccain- A+. he managed to be completely civil. in an entire hour speech, im not sure i heard the name obama three times. john mccain succeeded in delivering a better speech than barack obama despite his reputation as being a not so hot orator. he spelled out his plans and his policies, called america to serve, and delivered a ouching account of his own life experiences. i used to hate him because of loose ties to corrupt dealings in washington and his seeminly gut shot reaction to any crisis. i completely disagree with him on a lot of issues, but as a person, he won me over in that acceptance speech.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
so many A's and A+'s... your politics is really hard to follow. i guess conventions are great way to manipulate people. and people willingly get manipulated...that's what brings out what the parties can promise and have done... we all know that shit. i am just "waiting for the outcome". as a person of the smaller world i am crude about "whatever america" did(with lesser knowledge and interest i can decline from that debate)... but whatever america did can be overlooked if they do something for the world as a whole that is to say they have completely destroyed iraq from lesser destructive position... same with afghanistan, but than again, afghanistan was already fucked... did you hear people are threatening to have taliban regime back to repel the americans, ironic? who give a fuck about afghanistan anymore, it's bad memory...faint memory... it's gone. it's like a fight between different dog breeds... anyway i am going nowhere with this. all i am saying whenever america decided to "do" to other countries... she screwed them and took what she needed, to be it economic or something to do with revenge. i hope she is in good hands this time.
yeah. i tried not to grade on philosophy, but rather on delivery, integrity, and effectiveness. in truth i almost completely disagree with the republican partys social and foreign policy agenda. and im very skeptical of their domestic and economic ones.
Post a Comment