Over the next two weeks, I am going to try to keep a running diary of each evening's convention happenings for both the Democratic Party this week in Denver and the Republican Party next week in Minneapolis. One of the difficulties I will face is our antiquated technology in our household. We do not have Tivo or cable, so I am reliant on real time and PBS. The major networks are only showing an hour each night including commercials, so I am thankful for PBS' full coverage, which makes me wonder: who's older, Dick Clark of Jim Lehrer? Anyway, I digress.
Due to spending time with the kids and helping get them to bed, I didn't begin watching the convention this evening until about 8:30pm - right in the middle of the tribute to Ted Kennedy. Say what you want about his politics or personal life, Ted Kennedy is an historical figure, the Lion of the Senate, one of a kind. There is not a figure in either party currently that matches the political clout of Ted Kennedy - not Obama, not Biden, not Clinton, nor John McCain. None of those Senators will ever have the title of "Lion of the Senate." That being said, after his health crisis a few weeks ago, it was good to see him at the convention. His endorsement of Barack Obama proved to be critical to Obama's nomination. Without Kennedy leading the charge for Obama, many of the party faithful may never have shifted from Clinton. Obama owes Kennedy big time.
9:00pm - major networks come in - I miss Tim Russert, badly. He was the best. NBC is lacking gravitas, ABC was showing Kennedy's speech again, and I don't bother with CBS, so it's back to PBS to stay.
After a few very forgettable speeches, a video of Michelle Obama is played. This video picks up where the Olympic videos on the athletes left off - telling the background story and obstacles faced by Michelle Obama. The campaign is trying to figure out how to re-introduce Michelle to the country. She has been somewhat controversial thus far in the campaign, I think rather unfairly. I know a politician's spouse is critical to understanding the politician, but the spouse should not be held to the same verbal scrutiny as the one running. Fair or not, the Obama campaign is in damage control, and the video accomplishes part of that goal. Her brother introduces her in a very personal and touching way, especially when he told how they shared a room as little kids and would often talk after they were supposed to be asleep. He remembered her always talking about the kids that were picked on at school. Kids form their personalities so early. (Reminds me of G and C and how much I love their relationship.) Then in comes Michelle Obama.
One of the things I admire about the Obamas is their seemingly sincere love for each other. I don't doubt her love for him or his love for her. It's great to see in politics today (especially compared to the Clintons and Edwards). It would be a shame if it ever came out otherwise.
Michelle gave a solid, but forgettable speech. She was not as personal speaking about Barack as her brother or mother had been speaking about her. She felt the need to say "Hillary Clinton" in what I thought was a rather forced interjection, and she had to say how much she loved America, to make up for an earlier gaffe. Overall, a good speech, but really didn't let us in on who she or Barack are. So I was a little disappointed in that. After the speech, her daughters came on stage - again seems very authentic. Perhaps the most authentic moment came when the youngest daughter took control of the microphone while on a very awkward telephone call from Obama in Kansas City. As Barack is telling everyone where he is, the youngest daughter is having fun talking to him in the microphone. It seemed to me that Michelle was in the quandary that many parents find themselves in - should I take the microphone from her and risk the reaction, or let her keep talking? Michelle chose what I would have chosen and let the daughter keep the microphone. I'm not sure who the family was that Barack was with in Kansas City, but it really didn't matter anyway.
Night one - no fireworks, safe, begins the convention on a feel good note. Not that many people are watching, but it was a good test run for the Obama campaign on how they will approach the fall. So there's night one - "One Nation." Now the next couple of nights will be intriguing, as the Clintons take over the convention. The art of "publicly-supporting-Obama-but-secretly-hoping-he-loses-so-I-can-run-in-2012" will be the task Hillary Clinton embarks on tomorrow. I don't think that's the theme, but it is definitely her plan.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I disagree when you say the spouse shouldn't face scrutiny, at least when they're actively involved in the race making decisions, and being touted by the candidate as a primary source of input.
Throughtout the primary, Michelle continually played the victim and race cards. She described America today as "mean" and that she hadn't benn proud of America.
The charade on TV was an attempt to try to remake the image of Michelle, to paint a kinder, gentler, more positive American. They said all those things, but I'm not convinced.
One Democrat mouthpiece was speaking on a weekend show. I couldn't believe what he said, so with TIVO I played it back. He claimed we shouldn't spend that much time analyzing the candidate and that it was more important to listen to what they said. How stupid! Actions speak louder than words. Obama's and Michelle's actions are what I will look at.
As the Rev. Wright said, "Obama (politicians) says what he has to say. I say what I have to say." Orm inother words, "Politicians lie. Politicians say what they think the audience wants to hear. No wonder Obama has had 3 or 4 positions on a single issue but always calims, "I've been perfectly clear all along on my position in this matter."
Yeah, sure. i want to barf!
Post a Comment