Listened on way home from work to the 'warm up' speakers, finally turned it off half-way into Laura, couldn't stand it, and realized I didn't have to.

I agree with the comments on quietness of the crowd. There seemed to be many moments when a speaker paused for applause (perhaps built in on the teleprompter?) but then, hearing none, moved on. Also the rampant militarism of the themes was sobering.

Having waited an hour from when I last ate (like swimming so that I can keep my dinner down and not have cramps), I did watch parts of this.

Frankly, Thompson was so boring I actually nodded off. If he said a good line, I missed it because he'd already put me to sleep (literally!).

There were several points where Lieberman forgot where he was. Praising their nominee for taking on their party as an example of independence seemed to leave the delegates spinning in their seats.

But most of all, I came away thinking that they either had a lot of empty seats on the levels above the floor, or that their floor was much, much smaller than that of the Democrats. There just seemed to be way less people there.

There were certainly a lot less energy.

~~ But the funny part after the speech, was watching Newt Gingrich in the Georgia delegation telling the reporter that the Republicans were the "governing" party because their party had more diversity of opinion in it than the Democrats. My, my how Newt remembers to always take the opponents strength, call it your own, and attack with it.

Someone recently told me John McCain was a POW. If it's true, I'm sure the old man from Law and Order would have mentioned it in his speech tonight.

totally militaristic. Republicans seem to get high off chanting U-S-A. Nevermind the lies behind this unjustified war in Iraq and all the Iraqi civilian deaths and unnecessary American deaths these yahoos have caused with their blustery belligerence.

Lieberman is an ass. I don't remember if it was him or Fred Thompson who basically blamed the Democratic Congress for 'doing nothing' even though it was the Republicans' strategy to stonewall everything since 2006. And Lieberman's attacks on Obama and appeal to back the Republicans (even though they oppose many things he purportedly supports) were basically the ravings of a self centered Narcissist who has lost his moral compass and is slumming for a Cabinet appointment in McCain admin. At least he sounded like he was doped up (I heard his speech on NPR).

Bush and Cheney are so unpopular they have to trot out Laura instead. And the crowd is so damn white!

Didn't watch much of the speeches. What I saw looked painfully sad. Channel surfed through post speech punditry........Brooks, the CNN conservatives and the entire Faux team looked and sounded like they were in mourning.

They know it's the end. This could be the first political convention in history that give the hosting candidate a negative bounce in the polls.

So none of you watched it but you are all experts on what took place? How perfectly you.

Actually Steve, listened to part of it on NPR, watching some of it now. What's up with the Republican fascination with Hollywood celebrities like Fred Thompson, Charlton Heston and Ronald Reagan? Do they need actors to deliver their pablum? I guess the reality of how they've f'd up the country is too much to take, so its kind of reassuring to hear rehearsed one-liners from actors.

But seriously, Fred Thompson's the big hit of the night, and the crowd seems practically catatonic compared with the Dem. convention.

OK this is a total failure. Did anyone see their crowd? It was a crowd of old white men and women with makeup they put on with a paint gun. I've traveled...that's not America. Apparently Wonkette didn't find anyone in the stands either cause here is a picture of the upper bowl.

NBC sound feed missing audience reaction to GW

Did anyone happen to see the Bush speech on NBC!?!? They were missing the sound feed from the audience so it was GW talking to a camera and taking long pauses with no sound feed from the crowd. Was the eeriest thing I have ever seen!

NBC apologized afterward but if you can track down the video on YouTube you are in for a treat!

Wish I'd seen Huckabee, but had other things to do and when I turned on the TV I didn't see him.

"There were several points where Lieberman forgot where he was. Praising their nominee for taking on their party as an example of independence seemed to leave the delegates spinning in their seats."

Sorry, I can't stand to listen to Lieberman's voice anymore. Maybe it is because he seems to think everyone should see the world through his eyes and not ask questions.

It would be interesting, though, to ask him why he voted for the recent GI Bill and McCain didn't vote.

David Brooks has an interesting column on Palin,

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/02/opinion/02brooks.html?hp

Jack, you are one of many people who make me glad we don't have cable. I watch ABC, CBS, NBC, and get much of my convention news (both conventions) on Public Broadcasting, radio and TV. To think Newt wanted to get rid of it because cable was good enough for everyone.

More unfiltered coverage on public broadcasting than anywhere except maybe CSPAN.

Jack said: "Between Fox News and MSNBC, it sometimes seems real journalism is dying in America. Thank God we still have a few Tom Brokaw's around."

Interesting observation, Jack. My opinion is somewhat harsher: Real journalism (of the type I think you're referring to) in America is already dead with perhaps one exception: Bill Moyers. And having even one Tom Brokow is more than we need. Of course, I guess you go to the news with the newcasters you have ...

Moyers is one of the worst attack advocacy partisan "journalists" in the industry. This is NOT journalism:

"Moyers who charged that Bush and Cheney and Co. were "feeding on the corpse of war." It was Moyers who compared people who wear flag pins to those who adored the Little Red Book of the communist mass-murderer Mao Zedong. It was Moyers who suggested the Republicans retaking the Senate in 2002 would unite Washington behind "eviscerating" the environment.

There's nothing stranger than Bill Moyers denouncing people for feeding at the public trough in secret deals. Moyers has specialized in "non-profiteering" off PBS Home Video and other Moyers-merchandising projects. It all started with "The Power of Myth," his series with new-age guru Joseph Campbell. As Larry Jarvik recounts in “PBS: Behind the Screen” almost no one knew, including PBS or the press, that Moyers had entered into a secret kickback deal granting Moyers a cut of the book proceeds to Campbell's related book. It was only one of many lucrative deals Moyers has made to profit from the nonprofit television world. "

Then again neither are the lies propagated by the NYT and DailyKoss regarding Palin.

Tom Brokaw admits his political leanings but provides the most fair looks for all perspectives. I think a close second is Chris Wallace, even though he works for a organization that is built on political punditry.

Brokaw's smack-down Olbermann last night was needed but only because Brokaw admits the McCain campaign's got a point NBC is venturing into advocacy "journalism" in their DNC and RNC coverage.

Let's see the only factual information regarding Palin came from Palin on Monday (Hubby's 22 yr old DUI, Hubby caught an illegal Salmon, Prego daughter). Everything else written is a lie or extreme speculation (is there a difference when it come to journalism?). Now it's McCain's decision making process and vetting. First the Obama campaign misrepresented Palin wasn't vetted properly (FBI, etc.) and since that was easily debunked today (on NPR this morning) the Obama campaign is saying McCain should have interviewed more Alaska establishment Republicans. Never mind these are her enemies who paid ethics fines because of her actions and who she soundly beat in state-wide elections. SNL couldn't write something more funny.

If this is Obama's judgment skills, we are in a world of hurt if he get elected. I need some help, do you think that Obama understands the difference between a mayor and a governor or do you think nobody has told him the difference yet? Also, someone should tell $11.2B > Obama's Campaign Fund.

Obama on Anderson Cooper Sunday Night:

"In an interview of Barack Obama last night, CNN's Anderson Cooper mentioned Sarah Palin's experience as a small-town mayor and as governor of Alaska. Obama, hewing to his campaign's talking points, ignored the governor part:

COOPER: And, Senator Obama, my final question — your — some of your Republican critics have said you don't have the experience to handle a situation like this. They in fact have said that Governor Palin has more executive experience, as mayor of a small town and as governor of a big state of Alaska.  What's your response?

OBAMA: Well, you know, my understanding is, is that Governor Palin's town of Wasilla has, I think, 50 employees. We have got 2,500 in this campaign. I think their budget is maybe $12 million a year. You know, we have a budget of about three times that just for the month.

So, I think that our ability to manage large systems and to execute, I think, has been made clear over the last couple of years. And, certainly, in terms of the legislation that I passed just dealing with this issue post-Katrina of how we handle emergency management, the fact that many of my recommendations were adopted and are being put in place as we speak, I think, indicates the degree to which we can provide the kinds of support and good service that the American people expect.

Just for the record, Alaska's FY2008 operating budget is $11.2 billion, and the state employs approximately 15,000 people. Those certainly aren't huge numbers in federal terms, but they're a good bit bigger than the Obama campaign."

Moyers is one of the worst attack advocacy partisan "journalists" in the industry. This is NOT journalism:

"Moyers who charged that Bush and Cheney and Co. were "feeding on the corpse of war." It was Moyers who compared people who wear flag pins to those who adored the Little Red Book of the communist mass-murderer Mao Zedong. It was Moyers who suggested the Republicans retaking the Senate in 2002 would unite Washington behind "eviscerating" the environment.

There's nothing stranger than Bill Moyers denouncing people for feeding at the public trough in secret deals. Moyers has specialized in "non-profiteering" off PBS Home Video and other Moyers-merchandising projects. It all started with "The Power of Myth," his series with new-age guru Joseph Campbell. As Larry Jarvik recounts in “PBS: Behind the Screen” almost no one knew, including PBS or the press, that Moyers had entered into a secret kickback deal granting Moyers a cut of the book proceeds to Campbell's related book. It was only one of many lucrative deals Moyers has made to profit from the nonprofit television world. "

Then again neither are the lies propagated by the NYT and DailyKoss regarding Palin.

Tom Brokaw admits his political leanings but provides the most fair looks for all perspectives. I think a close second is Chris Wallace, even though he works for a organization that is built on political punditry.

Brokaw's smack-down Olbermann last night was needed but only because Brokaw admits the McCain campaign's got a point NBC is venturing into advocacy "journalism" in their DNC and RNC coverage.

Let's see the only factual information regarding Palin came from Palin on Monday (Hubby's 22 yr old DUI, Hubby caught an illegal Salmon, Prego daughter). Everything else written is a lie or extreme speculation (is there a difference when it come to journalism?). Now it's McCain's decision making process and vetting. First the Obama campaign misrepresented Palin wasn't vetted properly (FBI, etc.) and since that was easily debunked today (on NPR this morning) the Obama campaign is saying McCain should have interviewed more Alaska establishment Republicans. Never mind these are her enemies who paid ethics fines because of her actions and who she soundly beat in state-wide elections. SNL couldn't write something more funny.

If this is Obama's judgment skills, we are in a world of hurt if he get elected. I need some help, do you think that Obama understands the difference between a mayor and a governor or do you think nobody has told him the difference yet? Also, someone should tell $11.2B > Obama's Campaign Fund.

Obama on Anderson Cooper Sunday Night:

"In an interview of Barack Obama last night, CNN's Anderson Cooper mentioned Sarah Palin's experience as a small-town mayor and as governor of Alaska. Obama, hewing to his campaign's talking points, ignored the governor part:

COOPER: And, Senator Obama, my final question — your — some of your Republican critics have said you don't have the experience to handle a situation like this. They in fact have said that Governor Palin has more executive experience, as mayor of a small town and as governor of a big state of Alaska.  What's your response?

OBAMA: Well, you know, my understanding is, is that Governor Palin's town of Wasilla has, I think, 50 employees. We have got 2,500 in this campaign. I think their budget is maybe $12 million a year. You know, we have a budget of about three times that just for the month.

So, I think that our ability to manage large systems and to execute, I think, has been made clear over the last couple of years. And, certainly, in terms of the legislation that I passed just dealing with this issue post-Katrina of how we handle emergency management, the fact that many of my recommendations were adopted and are being put in place as we speak, I think, indicates the degree to which we can provide the kinds of support and good service that the American people expect.

Just for the record, Alaska's FY2008 operating budget is $11.2 billion, and the state employs approximately 15,000 people. Those certainly aren't huge numbers in federal terms, but they're a good bit bigger than the Obama campaign."

"I see everything twice." Yossarian Catch 22

"I'm here tonight because John McCain is the best choice to bring our country together and lead our country forward. I'm here because John McCain's whole life testifies to a great truth: being a Democrat or a Republican is important. But it is not more important than being an American," Lieberman said.

You know, after seeing the democrats attack Palin and her daughter - it's obvious democrats are not about bringing the country together. It's about Hate and Party before country. Lieberman got it right.

The Dems definitely win the “pageant & spectacle” contest. More enthusiastic crowd, better props and sets.

Thompson gave a good speech, related JMac’s war experiences in a moving way, which were more terrible than most people probably knew. Lieberman was a great catch for the Repubs, an honored Dem senator saying he’d vote for the Repubs candidate instead of BHO.

Now we’ll see how Palin does on the hotseat tonight.

Sorry BOHICA, too much Stumptown Coffee...?

Agreed Jack.

Spot on Larry. Obama's new ad throws the evangelical outreach right out the window with the unity theme. Obama's campaign has degenerated into a McGovern, Carter, Big Government old style nasty/typical politics. Is this old style politics due to the Chicago connections running the campaign or the real Obama.

Bill Clinton won two terms wasn't because he ran to the Left. He actually shunned some old Democrat Orthodoxy, tried to reinvent government (only to have BushII expand it beyond any Progressives wildest dreams).

Having a bunch of McCain supporters talk about the slanted press and how partisan the Democrats on a progressive board is surreal. Thanks for the laugh johnnie and Larry...

wank wank wank

An old Doonesbury cartoon once read about a Rightie trying to tell a Leftie how they managed to obtain so much power. It was basically their self-assuredness, said the Rightie. When the Leftie stated, "I see your point." The Rightie replied, "See! You've lost already."

The Brown Shirts hitting this Blue blog are really annoying. They have never seen any of the points being made here. They merely spit up talking points that lack any individual thought that might enable us to see any point. And just having a point is insufficient if it has no basis in fact.

Now I can hear the response or mumbling about Leftie elitism here. Is this frustration because the Left IS more educated? When did education and elitism become synonymous? Truth is, education matters. Yes, if someone says something intelligent, people want to hear it and think about it. But the mindless repetition of talking points is truly pathetic, especially here because we are too smart to simply swallow the swill. This country is tired of being propagandized and you all may as well start calling Obama Mr. President because Palin does nothing for the Republican ticket.

The crowd at the RNC were typical Zom-Bushes. I watched all of Thompson and Lieberman, some of Dubya and Laura.

The crowd's responses were incredibly awkward during Lieberman because no one knew whether they should clap or not, and yes, they ended up clapping for Bill Clinton. This caused them to become very irritated with themselves. If they were intelligent, they could see the point that WJC accomplished a great many things that benefitted everyone during his Administration, even if he was from the other pary. But it really went against their programming.

Thompson brought some energy but he always was a second rate actor. He's no Ronald Reagan. Which brings up the video memorial. The crowd just gushed when Reagan was shown in an officers cap as though he was some sort of WWII pilot. Reagan was NOT a veteran. That was from a movie. He was acting. But in elephant world, fiction is reality once the propaganda sinks in.

PS - That last sentence was taken roughly from a quote of Gearge W. Bush, epxlaining why the Party and his Administration repeat thing so often. Tuen in to Air America for a few weeks, they play it quite often but not nearly enough. Historically, propaganda was for Soviets and Fascists ... oh wait.

Or, to see what Bush actually said about repeating things, you can just go to the transcript (search the page for "propaganda"--seriously).

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/05/20050524-3.html

Jack, I admire much of what you say here. However,

"Ironically, in a free society, all of this stuff is within our collective control. Candidates only use these strategies because they work. "

What do you mean by they work? Everyone who runs ads of a certain kind wins? Just as there are certain commercial ads I won't watch (mute button or channel changer) there are certain political commercials which get the same treatment.

I was one of those who found the Novick beer ad brainless (my next door neighbor wondered what it had to do with the US Senate). Denny Smith's Congressional career ended when he used the "voice of Hitler" commercial. And I still think Les AuCoin should apologize for his 1992 primary commercials.

And then there are the conversations I suspect are more common than many would like to believe.

One person says "Did you see that political commercial for ---- last night?".

Other person, "I've been too busy that I haven't watched TV for a week!".

It is a conceit of activists and consultants that such commercials "work". My experience is that "word of mouth is the oldest form of advertising and the most effective" is truer than many want to admit.

Caught bits and pieces of Tuesday's RNC agenda. The whole affair seemed a snoozer; then again, there were no fresh faces speaking. Guess that comes tonight with Gov. Palin?

It all seemed old to me. At the end of the day, it was all National Security, fear, and little else. Predictable. What's so maverick about that?

So what's the over/under on how long it'll take Gov. Palin to say Hillary's name? First 10 minutes?

countryfirst? said, "And Lieberman's attacks on Obama and appeal to back the Republicans (even though they oppose many things he purportedly supports) were basically the ravings of a self centered Narcissist who has lost his moral compass and is slumming for a Cabinet appointment in McCain admin."

A newsflash from the memory hole: Lieberman, like McCain, was considered a great choice for running mate by your Democrat "liberals". (No doubt, it was Nader who was to blame.) Nothing demonstrates the essential overlap between the parties than that.

<hr/>

Jack Roberts said, "I'm not going to argue which side gets the advantage in this (although I'd say the right dominates talk radio while the mainstream liberals generally prevail on the tv networks, with Fox News and MSNC outliers on either side), but I am NOT prepared to sacrifice free speech to achieve an official government dictated brand of balance."

The "side" that gets the advantage is the corporatist, elitist, hegemonist "side". The MSM overwhelmingly has taken the side of the war mongers and the investing class, because they are owned by them. If we were to ask who has final approval over political expression at the local McDonald's, we would be idiots to think that it's the workers, no matter how "liberal" they might be. The owners and the managers (who are hired and fired by the owners) are the ones who ultimately make the decisions. Read Manufacturing Consent. Read something to the left of Joe Lieberman.

And the claim that our present electoral system is a bastion of "free speech" is idiotic. Those with power and wealth are the ones whose speech is effective, i.e., they are the ones who can reach the hundreds of millions of "consumers" of their bilge. So you might be sacrificing your "free speech" to a publically owned system, but the rest of us would not be.

It's not as sexy a convention as the Dems'. No one throws a better party than the Dems. Old people dance badly. Let's see who votes.

<h2>Thank God the the tubes of the internets!!! Here the corporatists and MSM have no control, anyone can write what they think ... even me ... for as long as it lasts ... and I will.</h2>