I suppose desperate times call for desperate measures… These conventions were both unconventional.
The press, as usual, is too blind to see. They have their talking points, a rubric previously made out, and they just fill in where the candidate scores on that piece of paper.
Both these conventions were different, as in unconventional… . The challenger, did not propose a plan… It was… “we’re going to do better, because (tax cut) we are”… In other words they were pandering for a vote. “Hey, if you vote for me for hall monitor, I’ll give you my (tax cut) Snicker’s bar…. Plan? (tax cut) We’re supposed to have a plan?” The entire theme of the Tampa convention appeared to be to make sure Romney didn’t mess up. (I think Clint Eastwood and Congressman Ryan took care of that for him…..)
The final speech of Obama has been ranked as a dud by many pundits who were highly intoxicated at that hour. I believe they were predicting another Obama 2004.. They got Obama 2012.
When it comes to speeches, members of the press don’t get it… I’m deducing it is not the fault of the people; it comes with the profession… Perhaps that lack of understanding, comes out of their self dream, that chimera where they write glowingly of one event, that will immortalize them forever….
For you see, in history, there was another speech. It too followed a long winded orator. But instead of 50 minutes, I believe reports said the set up speaker talked for 2 hours… Then the main guest got up, pulled out some words he’d just jotted down on the train ride up there, and began…….
“Four score, and 7 years ago, our father’s brought forth on this continent…..”
Then came the reviews…..
“I was close to the President and heard all of the Address, but it seemed short. Then there was an impressive silence like our …Friends Meeting. There was no applause when he stopped speaking.” — Sarah Cooke Myers
“The cheek of every American must tingle with shame as he reads the silly, flat and dishwatery utterances of the man who has to be pointed out to intelligent foreigners as the President of the United States.”– Chicago Times
(Ha, ha: politics will never change, will it?) They were wrong.
Great speeches are not about flair, finesse, wordiness. They communicate from one heart… to another.
Time will tell, but this unconventional speech by Obama, tells us, we got someone watching our back. I prefer that to being strapped to the roof of a car..
I think, over time, this speech will be one of those who’s pieces get memorized by school children through both this century and the next. Because it was direct. (I keep thinking of Churchill talking to the British People, holding them together when there was no hope, … except him….)
Obama’s opponent’s tack, was not to do anything, but … appear normal…..
America deserves something a whole lot better than… normal. Remember… Cheerleaders don’t win football games….
Today’s reporters were looking for cheerleaders.. America, is looking for a leader….
kavips 
2 comments
Comments feed for this article
September 8, 2012 at 1:03 pm
anonymous
Comment – Part 1 of 2
Well, at least Biden and Obama didn’t mock the planet and all life. I think they let people know, they know that ‘they’ need to address the problem, unlike Rmoney, et al.
And as far as Rmoney’s promise ‘to help you and your family’ goes, ha, sure he will.
Rmoney’s saying let the fossil fuel industries drill, frack and shale, baby, without restriction, without regulation, with environmental laws, without acknowledgement, without competition, without accountability, with financial responsibility. Republicans will help ‘you people,’ how?
http://www.wtsp.com/video/1709880106001/1/RAW-VIDEO-Exxon-Mobil-CEO-Defends-Fossil-Fuels
Here’s Exxon CEO, decades into the acknowledgement that CO2 causes the global warming, still clinging to an alternative form of denial – denying the validity of decades of peer reviewed studies by climate scientists – because the CEO claims, he doesn’t know the ‘extent of effects.’ Instead he talks about ‘adaptation’ (adapting to dire conditions,) of those effects, without mentioning the likely extent of damages calculated by legitimate climate scientists, the cost of lives, or costs of damages. The fossil fuel industries know the cause and they are aware of the effects. Exxon CEO calls a changing planet, an ”engineering problem’ that people ‘can’ adapt to. Just because he can’t and won’t define the extent of the ‘problem’ – doesn’t mean people should give up their properties, infrastructure, drinking water, farms, lives, etc.
Is an anthopogenically CO2 changed planet – an ‘engineering problem? No. The ‘engineering problem’ is within the coal plant, within the fossil fuel industries, etc. Coal plants are chemical plants that release their by-product CO2 into the atmosphere. There is no known engineering solution – to burning fossil fuels without the release of CO2. The coal plant is the ‘engineering problem,’ because it changes the planet. The lying Exxon CEO calls the resulting changing planet – the problem. The Earth – is not the problem. Everyone knows, fossil fuel burning and releasing – is the ‘engineering problem.’
Are there restrictions on nuclear plants releasing the products of their chemical reactions? Of course there are. The free, unregulated burning and releasing of fossil fuels, is no less dire. Left unchecked – it is said to be catastrophic.
People need to recognize fossil fuel lies and greed.
(continued..)
September 8, 2012 at 1:07 pm
anonymous
Comment – Part 2 of 2
Nature engineered the compatibility of earth and life. Exxon’s CEO is perfectly content to make every last dollar while destroying that compatibility, using the new excuse, (denial of knowledge of the damages,) – saying the extent is unknown, when legitimate climate scientists agree and events now prove, the link between anthropogenic CO2 and known damages are real and are scientifically documented. The glove fits.
This also fits. Burning coal = energy $ + damages. Life is being altered, taken, from a life sustaining planet. Mr. fossil fuel CEO is saying, I’m not sliding my hand into that bloody glove, even though it would fit.
The money will be made. The extent of the effects will grow so large, those largely responsible will say, we didn’t know and now.. we can’t afford to fix it.
The fossil fuel industry wants our life sustaining planet to remain, un regulated.
Someone ask the republicans, how THEY will see that people keep – their coastal properties, their farms, their drinking water, their glacier mountain tops, their weather patterns, their normal temperatures, their normal jobs and lives, their normal rising sea levels, their polar ice caps, the millions of acres of permafrost – frozen.
How will Rmoney, et al refreeze the polar caps; put the resulting released methane gas, back into an unfrozen polar landscape?
Too big to fail
Rmoney/Ryan, et al can strut the stage as’ normal,’ but they appear to be two fossil fuel crazed puppets. The ‘normal’ that voters should be interested in is – their normal planet.
Too big to fail
The republicans’ fossil fuel CO2 ‘engineering problem,’ will be changing the lives of billions of people around the world, many with little or no history of over releasing CO2, many with no carbon footprint as they use so little energy. Exactly how could Rmoney – ‘help billions of people around the world, let alone millions of Americans?
Too big to fail.
The fossil fuel industries should pay for ‘adaptation,’ especially since legitimate climate scientists ‘do’ know what many (but not all) of the results are/will be and do know, unstoppable feedback systems are already kicking in.
The real ‘engineering problem’ – the burning of fossil fuels and the free releasing of CO2 – must be dealt with.
Climate change is the most critical but ignored problem facing America and the world.
Too big to fail.
The fossil fuel CEO refers to the results of climate change, as ‘engineering problems.’ How can he pretend they can solve ‘engineering problems’ being caused around the world, when they claim – effects can’t proven? How will the Exxon CEO ‘engineer’ climate deaths?
Someone needs to remind the fossil fuel industries, they can’t even burn coal or oil, without creating CO2.
The most republicans plan to do – is hold the whole world hostage to anthropogenic CO2 – the fossil fuel weapon of mass destruction.
Is that what a ‘normal’ politician should do?