Thursday, September 4, 2008

John McCain: The "Speech": The "Discussion"

I caught the tale end of McCain's acceptance speech. Now, I didn't see the whole thing. But I can tell you one thing: I don't know if speechmaking is his forte. I mean, here it was, the biggest speech of his entire political career, and it was like a book report. It was like a book report from that kid who hates giving book reports so he just strung it together the night before and read it dutifully in front of the class the next day without any passion or fire. I couldn't believe this was actually McCain's nomination speech. I turned to my roommate and said, "So this is a clip from an earlier speech, right?" He said, "No, this is it." He didn't even spend that much time attacking Obama. Apparently, from what I read afterward, it was all about "We've got to take a good, hard look at ourselves as a party, and turn things around." I don't know if soul-searching becomes Republicans well, but hey, at least they're giving it a shot. Seriously, I've seen funerals that were more exciting. The applause nearly tripled when Palin walked out there. They should just switch the ticket. That's what they should do. She's a firecracker. McCain is like that Fourth of July fireworks display where the town really doesn't have a lot of money and the organizers don't really know what they're doing and you're expecting this big finale at the end, and there's a small burst of about three or four fireworks and you're liking it but you're thinking, "OK, that was cool, now here comes the finale!" But after a minute or so you realize that's really the end.

Of course, a presidential election isn't about who gives the best speeches and who doesn't. Which, for McCain, is a good thing I'd say.

7 comments:

Peter Matthew Reed said...

I think McCain might be nervous that Palin will drop him from the ticket. More once I watch the whole speech. (See [http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/213806.php] for a possible theory on the 'green screen' duplicate behind McCain).

Herr Zrbo said...

Wow, that's pretty good about that picture that was behind him, looks like someone probably just googled 'Walter Reed' and grabbed whatever pics popped up.

I didn't really see most of the speech. You see, I was in a bar, and they had the speech on TV, but the audio was off by a few seconds, so his lips weren't moving with what he was saying, and when people clapped, it would appear as if they were clapping while he was still talking. But it did *look* pretty boring, definitely not nearly as exciting as the Palin speech.

I'm betting Hillary is going to do everything in her power now to help get Obama elected. When it comes to Palin she's gotta be thinking "Hell no, there's no way some no-name woman is gonna get into the oval office before I do!"

Little Earl said...

Regardless of the fact that I don't quite support him, looking at it objectively I have to say that McCain has an awkward task at hand. I walked by a newspaper on Friday and the headline for the McCain speech was "Change Is Coming!" Uh...did anyone tell him that was already taken? It's like the opposite of 2004. Kerry's message was too nuanced for most people ("Defend America, but not like this"), whereas all Bush had to say was "Defend America" and that was that. This time McCain is the one who has to say, "Change, but not too much change" while Obama can just keep it simple with "Change." McCain is probably hoping that certain swing voters will come to the conclusion that he's a genuine guy who means well and isn't flashy about it (like Obama - hint, hint). He's like, "I know I'm not as exciting as that other guy, but TRUST ME! JUST THIS ONCE! PRETTY PLEEEEASE?" I don't know if it's going to be compelling enough (nor do I necessarily think that his criticism of Obama as flashy and shallow is accurate either).

Example from MSN news story:

On Saturday, Obama made his first direct criticism of Palin, saying she pretends to oppose spending earmarks when she actually has embraced them.

Speaking to 800 people at the Wabash Valley Fairgrounds in Terre Haute, Ind., the Democratic presidential nominee ridiculed John McCain and his running mate, the Alaska governor, for describing themselves as agents of change at this week's GOP convention.

"Don't be fooled," Obama told the crowd surrounding him in a large barn. "John McCain's party, with the help of John McCain, has been in charge" for nearly eight years.

"I know the governor of Alaska has been saying she's change, and that's great," Obama said. "She's a skillful politician. But, you know, when you've been taking all these earmarks when it's convenient, and then suddenly you're the champion anti-earmark person, that's not change. Come on! I mean, words mean something, you can't just make stuff up."

ninquelote said...

I heard a bunch of McCain's speech, and while he doesn't have the energy that Barry has (the man's ancient for crying out loud) I think he was just as sincere in his speech as Barry was.

Now I don't agree with all of his policies nor do I agree with a bunch of Obama's (and interestingly they agree on a few, themselves), but you have to admit that whether it's McCain or Obama that gets in the White House, it will be a huge change.

Herr Zrbo said...

The Daily Show has been terrific as of late, as it usually is during an election year.

Check out the following clip, comparing McCain's acceptance speech with Bush's from 2000. Jump to 5:00 for the actual comparison (though I recommend watching the whole thing):
daily show

Little Earl said...

Ninquelote (this goes back a bit but what the hell):

"I look at things that the President can actually affect like economic policy (staying out of the economy), foreign policy (making alliances instead of enemies), health care (stop trying to run everything!!), education, defense, etc."

Sounds like you're a...Libertarian. Have you thought about voting for Bob Barr? I mean, if you're not that excited about McCain (I'm pretty sure you've ruled Obama out), then you should consider it. Libertarians have my respect and I have even voted for a few in the past. Here is the Libertarian Party website headline: "Smaller Government - Lower Taxes - More Freedom." Sounds like a certain Northern Central Valley resident to me. You are not a religious nut so I've never thought the Republican Party was really the best fit for you since it seems like that's basically what they've become the party of.

ninquelote said...

I agree, LE. I have been looking more and more into the Libertarian side. I have actually become increasingly frustrated with the so called "Independents" because I believe it is too hard for anyone to be truly "independent". You either lean liberally or you lean conservatively most of the time, but the problem with that is that you only have two choices. Liberal or Conservative. So you always end up voting for the same party because there is nothing else. (Not unless you want to vote for someone who doesn't have shot in hell).

Maybe I will expound on this a little more when it's not 3am.