Not bad, but I didn't think it was great (and my partner fell asleep) but I want to ask those of you who have been following this if there was anything new?

Jeff: great photo, and amazing rhetorical snapshot too. I would resonate gloriously if I did not continue to hear this question pestering in my spirit: will he deliver?

And if not, then.... ? THRILLED to have great speechwriting and enjoyable oratory.

But it does not take away my fear for my future. It only complicates my guilty enjoyment of the hits of emotion that pass through.

OI: are we really only interested in the "game" of it? I do NOT want McCain. But neither do I want offshore drilling, more NAFTA, a slow bleedout in Iraq, increased non-soveriegn ownership of our real estate due to collapsing bank/mortgage/home ownership.... and the patter of juicy speechwriting all the while!

That speech was electrifying. It hit every point that I have wanted to hear about. He vigorously defended liberalism and skewered conservatism with deep cutting blows.

There has not been a more powerful speech made at a political party convention. Period.

For goodness sakes he had PAT BUCHANAN gushing about how good the speech was.

Now we just need to get him elected and make sure he has a strong democratic majority to pass all of the reforms he talked about.

Frankly, I have been waiting for most of my adult life to see a candidate hit some of the notes that Obama sounded tonight. It was a brilliant speech, but although the occasion was historic, the content was purely of the political "game on" variety. To the extent that it will be remembered, it will be remembered for setting the tone of this campaign.

I don't think it will resonate enough to counter the eight-point bump that was reported tonight. I don't think it's enough to draw people out to support McCain tomorrow when he announces his VP nod - reportedly not Huckabee. After tonight, I don't think anything McCain can say is enough because he's got far too much history speaking for him..

Now, Jeff Merkley has a hell of a chance. Obama's speech was so good that he really ought to bring some pretty large coattails to the Senate race in Oregon.

The brilliance of the speech is being discussed by the mainstream media. And why not? Thank God Barack showed the guts to hit McCain head-on for (a) pandering too much to the hard right, (b) running a sleazy campaign so far this summer, and (c) being too angry to have his finger on the red button. Barack landed one KO punch after another. That's the part of the speech I enjoyed the most.

It was an historic occasion. When I was young I saw the pictures of Civil Right protesters being water-hosed, beaten and arrested. To have a Black Man be able accept the Nomination for President of the United States in my lifetime left me filled with pride.

I thought he hit every issue he needed to and I loved the American Flags, the words addressing patriotism and love of country. He has taken what the repubs used to do so well to bash Democrats with and has taken it to a whole new level.

This convention will be an impossible act to follow.

Clinton delegate Hallie Travis says she's "disgusted" and refuses to attend what she calls the "coronation" which the rest of us call an fantastic unifying speech. This is a Democratic delegate?

From Obama's speech last night

"the fundamental belief that I am my brothers keeper; I am my sisters keeper."

If this is true, then why does Obamas step brother, George Hussein Onyango Obama, live in a slum in Nairobi on less than a $1 a month?

Surely he could send him an occasional $20 or something?

"Barack landed one KO punch after another. That's the part of the speech I enjoyed the most."

I liked the punch about Osama Bin Laden's cave. Can't get better than that :)

From the speech...

"But what I will not do is suggest that the senator takes his positions for political purposes. Because one of the things that we have to change in our politics is the idea that people cannot disagree without challenging each other's character and patriotism. The times are too serious, the stakes are too high for this same partisan playbook. So let us agree that patriotism has no party. I love this country, and so do you, and so does John McCain. The men and women who serve in our battlefields may be Democrats and Republicans and independents, but they have fought together and bled together and some died together under the same proud flag. They have not served a Red America or a Blue America -- they have served the United States of America."

My late Mother had been saying the same simular thing for years. We are not Blue, Red, or anything else - just Americans.

I have always considered my parents as Children of Camelot - especially my Mom. She feverishly supported JFK in 1960. She even met him as he toured Newport during the 1960 campaign. Her and Dad were devistated by his assasination and have waited for someone to come close to, and maybe surpass, JFK and his empathetic compassion or others.

Mom would have loved to hear the speech last night. So I guess I am voting for two in November.

I thought the speech was brilliant and beautiful. I agreed with just about everything he said (can't wait to hear some of the specifics of how to accomplish his goals in the debates), and was moved by his vision (as always).

I think what we really need in a President is someone who can inspire and unify the country behind a common vision. Obama is that man.

If I were McCain, I would be ashamed after Obama's rebuttal about questioning patriotism. He did an excellent job of addressing the attacks mCCain has been throwing at him this whole season, and drawing the similarities between he and Bush. The gloves are off on both sides, now.

Wondering how we're going to pay for the tax cuts being proposed by Obama?

As a lifelong Democrat, I was disappointed in the speech. Don't get me wrong, I think Obama is a historic choice. I am proud that our Party has nominated a historic candidate who will be a change agent despite himself and not because of his decided history as a defender of the status quo. (Be careful, defining the "status quo" as less than the entire co-dependent collaboration between Republicans and Democrats to the harm of working people and benefit of the privileged is dishonest.)

This was really just a speech that played to the style of personality politics in this era of hyper-mediated reality, of which BO is a prime example. That's the job he had to do and he did it well because leadership is about being so attuned to one's culture that one can motivate people.

Where he lost me on the substance, though, was right in the part that Jeff breathlessly quoted:

Well, it's time for them to own their failure. It's time for us to change America.

Obama deserve full credit for intellectually understanding what is wrong in America, and for having real experience that I believe shaped his soul so he can speak about it to people in a genuine and appropriately empathetic way. Unfortunately, we are where we are because Democrats and Republicans alike, including Obama as his FISA vote most recently and many significant, calculated, missed votes before that in the Senate demonstrates, failed America together. He never actually led or lent substantive support to any filibuster to stop Republicans in the Senate in 2004-2006 when it mattered.

It's his and some in our Party's failure to actually take ownership for their key role in that failure right as Obama himself intones that suggests he will be much less of an intentional change agent than most here have an almost disturbed need to believe. He's our only choice, but that doesn't mean we should close our eyes to the fact that it's not up to us to cheerlead for him, but instead to tell him he starts out lacking and has to demonstrate he's worthy of our support beyond his rhetoric.

This commentary by Naomi Klein as already been noted elsewhere on this blog, but it is even more important today that we ignore all those who are understandably intoxicated by their groupish experience, and instead keep in touch with reality.

Obviously "2004-2006 when it mattered" meant "2005-2007 when it mattered", implying the 109th Congress before Democrats took control. His record is not really different for the 110th Congress, during virtually all of which he has been campaigning for President.

I liked the speech too. Finally he is running with Clinton, since this is the kind of speech she has been giving (without the hype and the preacher's style). I saw a bit of that in Portland. He changed his tone, added some substance (lets see if he has any follow thru unlike FISA) and is great at stating the negative in the Bush years. I know that huge crowd emotions can be very effective as motivators in politics, and I love a show too. But from what I can tell, the convention was a lot of shows and there were honest real bad problems that are being suppressed and hidden from public view. I suppose that is to be expected, but too much continued suppression will create a further backlash, and great speeches, like falling into infatuation, can wear thin, like falling out of infatuation.

Think Merkely will get a boost from this? The crowd and the emotions certainly played to the base (the new base) of the dem party - that was good.

This commentary by Naomi Klein as already been noted elsewhere on this blog,

I finally watched this interview, and wasn't impressed one bit. Klein wants Obama to take hard left positions, and she's angry that groups like Move On haven't been pushing him to do so. Klein also bashes Jason Furman, Obama's top economics advisor who has engaged in a long-running feud with the anti-trade contingent of the Democratic party. Since Obama has never been where Klein is politically, they're asking him to change his views to match theirs, which is pure folly.

Klein is strategically making a power play right now, which is smart -- for her. It may not be smart for the country. As with all voters, she needs to look at Obama and McCain and decide if one of them is closest enough to her views that she can vote for him. That's the game we're currently playing.

Since there isn't a blog set up about the McCain VP pick I'll chat here.
It looks like the McSame campaign is going to try to make Palin seem ready for leadership because she is the commander of the Alaska National Guard. So we need to know her record there. Did she fight to get body armor and other decent equipment for the troops who had to go overseas? Did she find money in her budget (overflowing with oil $) to pay for it? Did she fight to keep the National Guard home in Alaska to protect it in case of natural disaster? Or did she willingly let the young men and women of Alaska go to Iraq to fight a war that we should never have started?? If they want to use that 'experience' to make her look good then we have to uncover her record (I couldn't find anything in a quick net search). And btw - do they really think that they found a substitute for Hillary who will appeal to Hillary supporters? Opposed to choice, no apparent record advocating for the critical health care needs of Americans, no experience on the national stage, much less international. She doesn't begin to measure up. The pick of a VP candidate is the first presidential act. I think McCain just lost the election.

It was the best speech this century and not because there were 70K Dems screaming and crying. It was because Obama went right after McCain. This convention was critical as well because it showed Obama is not alone in his quest, which he had seemed to be these past few weeks. The Party has come together.

But let's keep in mind that we are not trading Obama for Bush and a monarchic presidency that will be blindly supported by partisan disciples. The Democratic Party has never been that way. Obama may have rock star appeal, but that's not going to be how things work in Washington if he gets the Oval Office.

McCain made an excellent short term choice with Palin, but if they thought going after Obama for inexperience was a good idea, there's not enough lipstick in the world for Palin to look presidential. It stole some thunder from the convention, sure, but their convention is coming and it is doubtful it can make the impressions that were made in Denver.

The Republicans have no rivals to the Clintons? If Guilliani even mentions 9/11, everyone will be reminded he's an empty suit with a big mouth. Cheney no doubt will come out with more lies further pushing Independents from their cause. When Bush takes the stage, it will be further reinforcement as to why we need change in Washington. Palin is going to be the last great moment for the Reich for a long time.

Here is the future, however, if the past is any indication. We'll be in Ossetia and Iran before Bush leaves office. That was how his father left office, you may recall. He sent troops into three different arenas on his way out the door. I believe Obama will win, but we will have a whole lot of global issues to resolve before we can get to takign care of things here at home, where everything has been so badly neglected. Case in point, the bridge in Minneapolis. How fitting they should have to have their convention there.

And how nice of God to whip up a hurricane coordinated with their convention to remind us all of the abyssmal, grossly inhumane tragedy of Katrina. Guess he's not as keen on Dobson as Dobson would have us believe.

Susan, I didn't hear it but have heard that Palin made a direct appeal in a speech this morning to Hillary voters. And she might get them - some. You list some nice issues, but there are other issues that will appeal. For one thing it was a bit of an insult for Obama to place anti-choice Kaine to speak on the night celebrating women's right to vote !! And her experience is fine, if Obama's is fine, especially since she is second on the ticket and will gain more experience in office. But it is that she will be seen to be given a chance, and after Obama team's bullying tactics with Hillary, policies that Obama seems to mouth, but who knows how he will act, may not seem so important. I think this election will be very close and tiny numbers will determine the outcome. Also the parties are shifting and their former ideologies and demographics are in flux -much more so than usual. A small group of crossover votes might be very important. Frankly, I was afraid McCain might do this - it was a rather brilliant move.

Chris, you say so many things about Obama that worry me. The lack of substance is that he can say whatever he wants, but if you look at his actions they say a very different picture - for example he voted FOR Cheney's energy bill (even McCain voted against it) and then criticized McCain for the bill. Huh? Guess no one is paying attention. Same with the Yucca mountain vote. Obama even put out an ad lying about his vote. Huh? So where's the substance in that? All I hear are words, and see a great convention/party and intense crowd emotions. I also see a team that is extremely over sensitive/reactive and bullying and is in the habit of suppressing disagreement and real debate. Also they are overconfident. Remember the electability issue? McCain is going to be a real challenge and the dems have positioned themselves terribly! I blame Howard Dean/Brazile/Pelosi/Reid - the DNC crowd. I hope they lose their headlock on the party.

I think we have to be cheered by a lot of what we saw and heard last night. The crowd was much younger than on comparable occasions for Al Gore and John Kerry. Obama certainly seems to "get it" that he is going to have to lance the boil that is the disappointment of some of the most diehard Hillary supporters, even though that is not really fair by past standards. His political sense sure seems to be spot on - I think that the speech was pitched right where it should be to win. It was not the best speech he's ever made in terms of rhetoric, but it did what needed to be done in terms of this phase of the campaign.

But all this aside . . . and I say this as someone who has been and is profoundly skeptical of the continuing weakness of the Democratic Party . . .

Damn! I was registering voters in Mississippi in my late teens, and I was just wishing that Schwerner and Goodman and Chaney and a whole host of others whose names we don't know could have seen this . . . I wish Martin and Malcolm and even Huey and Dr. DuBois and hell, let's invite Booker T. Washington to that party too and argue about it afterward. And I'd like to see Marcus Garvey's face against the fireworks. Shirley Chisholm would have something to say. And I'd give everything I had to be there and hold Barbara Jordan's hand.

Maybe in the end Barack Obama won't fulfill this moment. I don't see how he can, given his ties with institutional capitalism. Still, I'm giving myself a day or two to think about a near lifetime's labor from so many people that I love and respect, and the cool rasp in John Lewis' voice, the powerful cadence of Jesse Jackson's good intentions, the clear-eyed stubborn goodness of the uncountable many who must be so justifiably proud today.

Sometimes the magic works. Today is for dancing.

My favorite one-liner from a non-politico last night came from Barney Smith from Marion, Indiana, a Republican who lost his job due to a plant closure isn his town.

"We need a President who puts Barney Smith before Smith Barney."

I fell out of my chair laughing!

The sad thing about Barney Smith and other workers who have lost their jobs to offshoring is that BOTH the big parties support the free trade policies that have so badly failed American workers.

Obama, Biden, Wyden, Blumenauer have all voted for these free trade deals at one time or another.

There is some legslation that would attempt to repair some of the damage of these policies. Check out the Trade Act, and encourage more Democrats to sign on. Here in Oregon, De Fazio has signed on, as well as Senate candidate Jeff Merkley.

Chris Lowe, Disappointed, and inbf speak for me, except for Chris's, "McCain would be much worse." (He would be worse, but not much worse.)

The flag-waving, worshipful hysteria reminded me of a Hitler Youth convention.

Support a progressive or get out of the way.

"The flag-waving, worshipful hysteria reminded me of a Hitler Youth convention."

What a warped view! I think you are just jealous that it isn't your candidate. Most people want to be enthused and inspired.

And remember the old internet debate adage. As soon as you mention Hitler as an example, you lose.

The other thing on Barney Smith: someone should tell him that Smith Barney and Co. are actually giving more money to Obama than to McCain.

From opensecrets.org: Citigroup, the corporation that now owns the investment firm Smith singled out, is a top contributor to Barack Obama. Citigroup employees and their families have contributed at least $408,299 to Obama's campaign, and about $63,000 of that has come from individuals working for Smith Barney and their families. Citigroup ranks fourth on the Democratic nominee's list of top contributors.

(McCain only got $268,501 from the same folks).

How much from Citigroup itself? Employee contributions don't count. Another twist of the facts.

Obama does have some major support from Wall Street firms directly, but is it influence peddling or not? (Considering all ther millions Obama has raised)

why so misanthropic?

RichW-- Nattering nabob? Perhaps... Purity troll? More like hypocrisy troll... But misanthrope? I just don't see how, but whatever...

Some of that Citigroup money is from PACs, but I can't figure out how much. Go take a look yourself here. I'm glad that you admit that Obama gets support from Wall Street. Are you really arguing that it does not buy any influence?

If I was such a misanthrope, I would not be fighting against the trade policies that benefit the few over the many. Why don't you comment on the point I made about how Barney lost his job becuase of policies supported by Republicans and Democrats? I assume I don't need to remind anyone who was president when NAFTA passed.

Harry, did you not hear the crowd when Palin was announced. Now THAT sounded like Hitler youth. They were chanting between practically every sentence, whether it was exceptional or not. However, the crowd became noticeably muffled on a couple of occassions. Palin gave Hillary credit for her performance in the primary and half the crowd fell out of the chanting. Palin also bragged about chalenging the good ole boy network, and again, the chant was half-hearted and confused. The Zom-Bushes knew they were supposed to cheer everything, but something was not Right about her remarks.

She's not going to last.

Chris L: I love "Don't let the acceptable be the enemy of the bad but not utterly execrable"? almost as much as "Obama: not as insane as McCain". This is really where we're at in this country, and the duopoly's complete abrogation of responsibility is taking us down that slippery slope and into the gehenna.

"People say politics is the art of the possible, but they are wrong. Politics is the art of creating the possible. And what is possible is about what people believe is possible." (I don't know who said this.)

<hr/>

Gregor: I didn't watch the Palin speech, but I'll take your word for it that the crowd was also akin to a Hitler youth rally. My point has never been that Democrats are more fascistic than Republicans, merely that the lesser of fascists or the lesser of insanes is not worthy of support. Having said that, I should add that I think that the DP may be worse in this election because it is, as Peter Camejo said, "the instrument that controls, channels and co-opts the forces that otherwise could challenge the rule of concentrated money."

And RichW: Your rules for internet debate do not impress me. The duopoly is making us all losers. Hitler, Hitler, Hitler, Hitler.

<hr/>