What!? You're 4? How can this be?
It seems like only yesterday, you were turning 3?
These years, they're flying by too fast.
If I'm not careful, your whole childhood will be in the past.
So I ask if you will skip your birthday and stay 3-
You smile and laugh at me and think I'm being silly-
You say, "I want to grow up, daddy, and turn 4."
I'll just have to cherish each day more and more,
So let's read, let's ride bikes, let's paint everything pink
I'll even let you play all you want with your toothbrush in the sink.
I want you to know no matter what I'll always be there,
Because I love you so much my beautiful Claire Bear!
Happy Birthday
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Monday, October 20, 2008
Was Palin the Right Choice?
In the pre-post-mortem that many are participating in concerning McCain/Palin, I thought I would reflect over what the pundits are saying contributed to McCain's demise. (Although, while it appears Obama is headed to victory, the polls are closing quickly. Over the past week the average poll has gone from Obama up 7.5% to now Obama up 5%. So, yet again, Obama is failing to close.) The first issue is the selection of Sarah Palin as VP. Before I discuss that, it should be noted what the true possible demise of the McCain campaign is. It has nothing to do with Palin, the negative ads, McCain's age, etc. What will be McCain's downfall is a shattered economy, the Bush presidency, and the Iraq War, of which McCain is not directly responsible for any of it, but receives the blame because of the R next to his name. But on to Palin…
The general argument against Palin is as follows (which by the way is what I predicted here): no experience, not intellectually capable, too conservative, no one has ever heard of her before. While I could refute each of these claims, the simple fact of the matter is: Palin was and still is the best choice that McCain could make for VP, and if given the chance, she would make a great VP. Why is she the best choice? Because campaigns are all about turnout. And McCain was having a turnout issue. The selection of Palin: highly enthused the conservative base, a strong turnout of which is essential for McCain to have any shot at all; brought increased attention/money to McCain that he otherwise wouldn't have had; resonates with many in the heartland of America as someone not tainted by Washington; fought her own corrupt party and won. Many voters went from voting against Obama to voting for McCain because of Palin. Turnout is always better when someone is excited to be voting for someone rather than against another. There was no other available selection that McCain could have made that would have done more for his campaign than Palin has. Let's review:
Mitt Romney - no independents would be voting for Romney, he does not resonate with middle class America , and the conservative base would not be energized by a Romney selection. While he is a favorite of talk radio hosts, he had been rejected by Republicans in the primary.
Tim Pawlenty - please. He seems like a nice guy, but I don’t think anyone at all would have been enthused by his selection. He would have received about 5 minutes worth of coverage and then would have disappeared. Turn out would not have been increased by Pawlenty at all.
Charlie Crist - He may have helped deliver Florida , but I am not sure he would have brought anything more to the ticket.
Kay Bailey Hutchison - My second choice, but while she may have appealed to the Hillary voter, I think many in the Republican base would have been put off by her, fair or not, and she wouldn’t have reinforced McCain's reform message.
Joe Lieberman - This is the pick many pundits say McCain should have made. It would have been a disaster. McCain would be out of money, the crowds would have been sparse, and Democrats would still have voted for Obama. I'm not sure Lieberman did anything for Gore in 2000, I don’t see how he would have done anything for McCain except fracture the Republican Party (more than it already is). That being said, I think McCain should have said that he would be his Secretary of State. I think McCain could have named many of the people he would like in his cabinet to help with his bipartisan approach.
Mike Huckabee - Maybe the only other viable candidate that could have helped McCain almost as much as Palin. But his draw is southern, and for all the Obama gains, McCain still has the south in is corner. Palin and Huckabee both have a Populist bent. Huckabee is a better articulator of it, but probably still draws less enthusiasm than Palin does.
Bobby Jindal - Apparently wasn't interested. And he's 37. If McCain loses, then I think Jindal could very well be the nominee in 2012. He would bring the enthusiasm of Palin, but he would also bring better communication skills with the media than Palin has.
Running through that list just re-confirms that Palin was and is the best available pick for McCain. McCain would have been down 10 points in September if he hadn't picked Palin. Picking her gave him a temporary lead. What has crushed McCain's campaign is not Palin. It's the economy and Bush. The media and liberal talking heads like to point to Palin because she is a threat to their ideals. She's a strong, pro-life, conservative woman who has risen the ranks without having to cater to the NOW group or Planned Parenthood to get there. Her values disqualify her as a woman in their eyes, and so they must destroy her so she will not succeed. Blaming McCain's failures on her is one way to do that. What's hurt Palin more than anything is the way the McCain campaign handled her early on. They re-emphasized the suspicion of the media by keeping her sequestered and trying to get her to speak like an insider. It's not who she is and it showed. Unfortunately that image has been seared in the public's mind, so even though she has campaigned strongly and been much smoother in her dealings with the press lately, she is trying to overcome the first impression. I am still in support of Palin as VP, and think she would be great in Washington . If John McCain loses, it will not be because of her.
The general argument against Palin is as follows (which by the way is what I predicted here): no experience, not intellectually capable, too conservative, no one has ever heard of her before. While I could refute each of these claims, the simple fact of the matter is: Palin was and still is the best choice that McCain could make for VP, and if given the chance, she would make a great VP. Why is she the best choice? Because campaigns are all about turnout. And McCain was having a turnout issue. The selection of Palin: highly enthused the conservative base, a strong turnout of which is essential for McCain to have any shot at all; brought increased attention/money to McCain that he otherwise wouldn't have had; resonates with many in the heartland of America as someone not tainted by Washington; fought her own corrupt party and won. Many voters went from voting against Obama to voting for McCain because of Palin. Turnout is always better when someone is excited to be voting for someone rather than against another. There was no other available selection that McCain could have made that would have done more for his campaign than Palin has. Let's review:
Mitt Romney - no independents would be voting for Romney, he does not resonate with middle class America , and the conservative base would not be energized by a Romney selection. While he is a favorite of talk radio hosts, he had been rejected by Republicans in the primary.
Tim Pawlenty - please. He seems like a nice guy, but I don’t think anyone at all would have been enthused by his selection. He would have received about 5 minutes worth of coverage and then would have disappeared. Turn out would not have been increased by Pawlenty at all.
Charlie Crist - He may have helped deliver Florida , but I am not sure he would have brought anything more to the ticket.
Kay Bailey Hutchison - My second choice, but while she may have appealed to the Hillary voter, I think many in the Republican base would have been put off by her, fair or not, and she wouldn’t have reinforced McCain's reform message.
Joe Lieberman - This is the pick many pundits say McCain should have made. It would have been a disaster. McCain would be out of money, the crowds would have been sparse, and Democrats would still have voted for Obama. I'm not sure Lieberman did anything for Gore in 2000, I don’t see how he would have done anything for McCain except fracture the Republican Party (more than it already is). That being said, I think McCain should have said that he would be his Secretary of State. I think McCain could have named many of the people he would like in his cabinet to help with his bipartisan approach.
Mike Huckabee - Maybe the only other viable candidate that could have helped McCain almost as much as Palin. But his draw is southern, and for all the Obama gains, McCain still has the south in is corner. Palin and Huckabee both have a Populist bent. Huckabee is a better articulator of it, but probably still draws less enthusiasm than Palin does.
Bobby Jindal - Apparently wasn't interested. And he's 37. If McCain loses, then I think Jindal could very well be the nominee in 2012. He would bring the enthusiasm of Palin, but he would also bring better communication skills with the media than Palin has.
Running through that list just re-confirms that Palin was and is the best available pick for McCain. McCain would have been down 10 points in September if he hadn't picked Palin. Picking her gave him a temporary lead. What has crushed McCain's campaign is not Palin. It's the economy and Bush. The media and liberal talking heads like to point to Palin because she is a threat to their ideals. She's a strong, pro-life, conservative woman who has risen the ranks without having to cater to the NOW group or Planned Parenthood to get there. Her values disqualify her as a woman in their eyes, and so they must destroy her so she will not succeed. Blaming McCain's failures on her is one way to do that. What's hurt Palin more than anything is the way the McCain campaign handled her early on. They re-emphasized the suspicion of the media by keeping her sequestered and trying to get her to speak like an insider. It's not who she is and it showed. Unfortunately that image has been seared in the public's mind, so even though she has campaigned strongly and been much smoother in her dealings with the press lately, she is trying to overcome the first impression. I am still in support of Palin as VP, and think she would be great in Washington . If John McCain loses, it will not be because of her.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
Tuesday, October 07, 2008
Second Presidential Debate: Feel the Breeze
This was a debate of missed opportunities for both candidates, but especially for McCain. In a post this morning, I laid out what I thought each candidate should do tonight. So how did they do?
Obama: 1. Focus on last eight years and tie McCain to it. I don’t think Obama was as effective tonight on this as he was in the first debate. He tried to make the case against the Bush administration, but failed to connect. Some of this is due to McCain’s attack of the Democrats for Freddie and Fannie and McCain’s plan to renegotiate mortgages. Obama did not answer the accusation or counter McCain’s proposal, thus failing to effectively tie McCain to Bush. In fact, Obama seemed unprepared to answer the Freddie/Fannie link at all.
2. Avoid Senatorial talk. Obama did an excellent job of communicating his message tonight. Even though he consistently talked beyond the time limit, he had moments in almost every answer that could be reduced to a sound bite, which is important in the way we evaluate candidates today. However, when discussing foreign policy, Obama sounded very unsure of himself. He came closest to his rambling style in this part of the debate. On genocide, he only said that we would probably “consider” action, when I think the better response would have been that we would take action. He was also shakier on Iran than he was in the first debate and continues to ignore the success of the surge.
3. Don’t wander off script. He remained on message tonight, ignoring for the most part any attack by McCain. While remaining on script is good, I think he missed an opportunity to answer McCain’s critiques. And his discussion on limiting people’s energy use opens the door for people to view him as too heavy handed on government regulation. While people want to conserve to save money, I don’t think most Americans want to be told the government will limit their usage of energy. A misstep by Obama, but nobody probably caught it.
McCain: 1. Drill, Baby, Drill on economy. I thought he was going to get there, but I think he fell short of adequately selling his policy. He didn’t answer Obama’s shifting position on energy, although the debate format didn’t really allow for too much back and forth like this. But when asked which was most important to address: entitlements, energy, or health care, McCain swung and missed badly. I felt the breeze in my living room. He should have hammered home the need for energy reform here. How lower energy costs would make everything else more affordable. How our economy began to tank when gas prices went up. His answer of doing all three took away from an effective advantage I believe he has over Obama on energy. That was a missed opportunity for McCain at a time he cannot afford missed opportunities.
2. Explain why lower taxes are good. I think McCain did a good job explaining this, whether it connected with the voter is another matter. Also, on connecting with the voter, McCain seemed completely oblivious to the question of what sacrifices need to be made during these economic times. He focused solely on earmarks and government spending, when I thought he had the perfect, I mean fastball down the middle, to re-state an effective part of his convention speech – serving something greater than your own self interest. Where was the answer for personal responsibility, for shared sacrifice that he spoke of before? Huge mistake here as Obama basically used it in response, taking away a good point McCain has made in the past.
3. Attack Obama’s worldview. This was another missed opportunity. I don’t think he effectively called into question Obama’s philosophy. He began very well, attacking Obama and the Democrats for their support of Freddie and Fannie and subprime mortgages. I thought he would continue in this way throughout the debate, but really didn’t too much more. Maybe he was gun shy, but I think he should have done more here. While not directly addressing Obama’s worldview, McCain’s answer to the final question was one of his best. The question: “What don’t you know and how will you learn it?” McCain said while he doesn’t know what will happen when he’s president, he does know from his experience how to handle the unknowable situations when they arise. For people questioning Obama’s readiness to be president, McCain presented himself as the one most ready to lead.
Overall, I thought of the three debates so far, including the VP one, this was the worst. Nothing imaginative about the questions, nothing new from the candidates, except McCain’s government buy out of mortgages. Nothing to change the trajectory of the race. While this is to Obama’s favor, I don’t think he shined tonight either. Midway through the debate, I kind of thought to myself, “These are the two best candidates we could come up with?” Thinking back over the primaries, the answer is sadly, “Yes.” But it seemed that neither candidate wanted to step out and lead tonight. Obama is in prevent, running out the clock; McCain is either unwilling to go after Obama in person, or is hoping for an unforced turnover, because he didn’t do much to change the game tonight either.
Tom Brokaw did a fine job as moderator, although instead of wasting time talking about how the candidates were wasting time, he should have cut them off once, then they might have gotten the picture. But I thought his follow ups were the best questions of the night, while the “undecided voter” questions could have been submitted by Lehrer or Ifill from the first two debates. I don’t see this debate changing the lead Obama currently enjoys. With only one debate left, if the polls still show Obama with an eight point lead next Wednesday, look for a brutal debate in the final showdown between the two candidates.
Obama: 1. Focus on last eight years and tie McCain to it. I don’t think Obama was as effective tonight on this as he was in the first debate. He tried to make the case against the Bush administration, but failed to connect. Some of this is due to McCain’s attack of the Democrats for Freddie and Fannie and McCain’s plan to renegotiate mortgages. Obama did not answer the accusation or counter McCain’s proposal, thus failing to effectively tie McCain to Bush. In fact, Obama seemed unprepared to answer the Freddie/Fannie link at all.
2. Avoid Senatorial talk. Obama did an excellent job of communicating his message tonight. Even though he consistently talked beyond the time limit, he had moments in almost every answer that could be reduced to a sound bite, which is important in the way we evaluate candidates today. However, when discussing foreign policy, Obama sounded very unsure of himself. He came closest to his rambling style in this part of the debate. On genocide, he only said that we would probably “consider” action, when I think the better response would have been that we would take action. He was also shakier on Iran than he was in the first debate and continues to ignore the success of the surge.
3. Don’t wander off script. He remained on message tonight, ignoring for the most part any attack by McCain. While remaining on script is good, I think he missed an opportunity to answer McCain’s critiques. And his discussion on limiting people’s energy use opens the door for people to view him as too heavy handed on government regulation. While people want to conserve to save money, I don’t think most Americans want to be told the government will limit their usage of energy. A misstep by Obama, but nobody probably caught it.
McCain: 1. Drill, Baby, Drill on economy. I thought he was going to get there, but I think he fell short of adequately selling his policy. He didn’t answer Obama’s shifting position on energy, although the debate format didn’t really allow for too much back and forth like this. But when asked which was most important to address: entitlements, energy, or health care, McCain swung and missed badly. I felt the breeze in my living room. He should have hammered home the need for energy reform here. How lower energy costs would make everything else more affordable. How our economy began to tank when gas prices went up. His answer of doing all three took away from an effective advantage I believe he has over Obama on energy. That was a missed opportunity for McCain at a time he cannot afford missed opportunities.
2. Explain why lower taxes are good. I think McCain did a good job explaining this, whether it connected with the voter is another matter. Also, on connecting with the voter, McCain seemed completely oblivious to the question of what sacrifices need to be made during these economic times. He focused solely on earmarks and government spending, when I thought he had the perfect, I mean fastball down the middle, to re-state an effective part of his convention speech – serving something greater than your own self interest. Where was the answer for personal responsibility, for shared sacrifice that he spoke of before? Huge mistake here as Obama basically used it in response, taking away a good point McCain has made in the past.
3. Attack Obama’s worldview. This was another missed opportunity. I don’t think he effectively called into question Obama’s philosophy. He began very well, attacking Obama and the Democrats for their support of Freddie and Fannie and subprime mortgages. I thought he would continue in this way throughout the debate, but really didn’t too much more. Maybe he was gun shy, but I think he should have done more here. While not directly addressing Obama’s worldview, McCain’s answer to the final question was one of his best. The question: “What don’t you know and how will you learn it?” McCain said while he doesn’t know what will happen when he’s president, he does know from his experience how to handle the unknowable situations when they arise. For people questioning Obama’s readiness to be president, McCain presented himself as the one most ready to lead.
Overall, I thought of the three debates so far, including the VP one, this was the worst. Nothing imaginative about the questions, nothing new from the candidates, except McCain’s government buy out of mortgages. Nothing to change the trajectory of the race. While this is to Obama’s favor, I don’t think he shined tonight either. Midway through the debate, I kind of thought to myself, “These are the two best candidates we could come up with?” Thinking back over the primaries, the answer is sadly, “Yes.” But it seemed that neither candidate wanted to step out and lead tonight. Obama is in prevent, running out the clock; McCain is either unwilling to go after Obama in person, or is hoping for an unforced turnover, because he didn’t do much to change the game tonight either.
Tom Brokaw did a fine job as moderator, although instead of wasting time talking about how the candidates were wasting time, he should have cut them off once, then they might have gotten the picture. But I thought his follow ups were the best questions of the night, while the “undecided voter” questions could have been submitted by Lehrer or Ifill from the first two debates. I don’t see this debate changing the lead Obama currently enjoys. With only one debate left, if the polls still show Obama with an eight point lead next Wednesday, look for a brutal debate in the final showdown between the two candidates.
Pre-Debate Thoughts
So what should each candidate do tonight during the town hall debate? With Obama holding a significant lead, with only 28 days left until Election Day, what strategy should each candidate have tonight?
First, the town hall debate format. Tonight's questions are supposedly coming from undecided voters and the questions from "MySpace" users. That's debatable. While the town hall format is McCain's favorite, I expect the audience and questions to be leaning Democrat, as is usually the case in these types of debates. In 1992, the town hall debate sealed the deal for Clinton. While Bush looked at his watch and looked totally bored and confused, Clinton mastered the art of "feeling your pain." Whatever one's thoughts on Clinton, this question and answer basically ushered in the Clinton Presidency.
So how should the candidates approach the debate tonight? If I were running Obama's campaign, here would be my advice: Continue to talk about Bush and tie McCain to him. Don't sound defensive in any attacks on you, just dismiss them as old news from a "campaign out of ideas." Don't wander off the script. Try to work in "new direction," "restoring our image in the world," and "American values" into your answers. Don't get bogged down in Senatorial talk, don't sound arrogant, but be humble and talk about the "privilege to serve this great country." Stay above the personal attacks on McCain, instead commend his character, disagree with his ideas.
For McCain: Make sure you articulate an economic plan beyond earmarks. Drill, baby, drill, on how gas prices affect not only filling up your car, but grocery prices, electric bills, etc. Drill away at how your plan utilizes the country's resources, working to develop alternatives, creating more jobs at home, lowering prices for everyone, and taking us off our dependence on foreign oil. And how this can be done environmentally friendly. Explain why lower taxes are good and how you can balance the budget. Remind the viewers how inept government is in solving our problems, and how foolish it would be to let the government take more control of health care. But along with what you will do, you must attack Obama's plans, worldview, and influential people in his past and present, about his own statements as well, without being too blatant about it. Address your attack directly to Obama, making him answer. Look at the camera when talking about your ideas. Don't worry about how the people in the audience respond, but what the viewer at home hears. Gamble on the idea that most voters have not heard these attacks before, or had forgotten about them. And call these facts and not attacks.
McCain has the more formidable challenge tonight. Whereas Obama is only running against Bush, McCain is running against Obama and Bush, attempting to attract independents without ticking off some in the Republican base in the process. McCain needs to make the campaign about Obama again, that's the only shot he has. We'll see what unfolds tonight.
First, the town hall debate format. Tonight's questions are supposedly coming from undecided voters and the questions from "MySpace" users. That's debatable. While the town hall format is McCain's favorite, I expect the audience and questions to be leaning Democrat, as is usually the case in these types of debates. In 1992, the town hall debate sealed the deal for Clinton. While Bush looked at his watch and looked totally bored and confused, Clinton mastered the art of "feeling your pain." Whatever one's thoughts on Clinton, this question and answer basically ushered in the Clinton Presidency.
So how should the candidates approach the debate tonight? If I were running Obama's campaign, here would be my advice: Continue to talk about Bush and tie McCain to him. Don't sound defensive in any attacks on you, just dismiss them as old news from a "campaign out of ideas." Don't wander off the script. Try to work in "new direction," "restoring our image in the world," and "American values" into your answers. Don't get bogged down in Senatorial talk, don't sound arrogant, but be humble and talk about the "privilege to serve this great country." Stay above the personal attacks on McCain, instead commend his character, disagree with his ideas.
For McCain: Make sure you articulate an economic plan beyond earmarks. Drill, baby, drill, on how gas prices affect not only filling up your car, but grocery prices, electric bills, etc. Drill away at how your plan utilizes the country's resources, working to develop alternatives, creating more jobs at home, lowering prices for everyone, and taking us off our dependence on foreign oil. And how this can be done environmentally friendly. Explain why lower taxes are good and how you can balance the budget. Remind the viewers how inept government is in solving our problems, and how foolish it would be to let the government take more control of health care. But along with what you will do, you must attack Obama's plans, worldview, and influential people in his past and present, about his own statements as well, without being too blatant about it. Address your attack directly to Obama, making him answer. Look at the camera when talking about your ideas. Don't worry about how the people in the audience respond, but what the viewer at home hears. Gamble on the idea that most voters have not heard these attacks before, or had forgotten about them. And call these facts and not attacks.
McCain has the more formidable challenge tonight. Whereas Obama is only running against Bush, McCain is running against Obama and Bush, attempting to attract independents without ticking off some in the Republican base in the process. McCain needs to make the campaign about Obama again, that's the only shot he has. We'll see what unfolds tonight.
Sunday, October 05, 2008
Theology With Claire
This morning on the way to church, Claire asked me if God made everything. I said, “Yes.” She said, “Even the dinosaurs?” I said, “Yes, Claire, and He made you too. He put you together in mommy’s tummy.” To that she responded, “I don’t remember that.”
Thursday, October 02, 2008
The Highly Anticipated Vice Presidential Debate
We made it safely down the tracks. Both Sen. Biden and Gov. Palin kept themselves from derailment – no train wreck, no “moose in the headlights” for Palin, no “gaffe machine” for Biden. I must admit, coming into tonight, I was very nervous for Gov. Palin. After a very rough couple of weeks where the national interviews hadn’t gone so well, I wasn’t sure how she would do tonight. I knew Biden would be a good debater. He was good in the Democratic Primary, often dismantling Clinton, Obama, Richardson, and others in a single phrase. One of the major reasons Obama picked him as his running mate is because of his ability to debate and go after his opponents. Biden definitely did that tonight. He went after McCain (much of which was not true, but he did go after him). He was the classic VP candidate attack dog. Biden epitomizes Washington politics; his entire adult life has been spent in DC. So it is expected that he will do well. But as well as he did all year in debates, he only garnered 1% of the vote. So does his personality relate to people? Is it helpful for him to refer to himself in the third person? Is it really believable that Joe Biden often walks down the aisles of Home Depot looking for screws or nails? Is it even possible for the 3rd most liberal member of the Senate to enact change and bipartisanship (especially when his running mate is #1)? Overall, Biden was tough and did well in the debate.
At the opening of the debate, Palin seemed a little nervous. But she heated up as the debate went on. Palin is obviously not as polished as Biden. She doesn’t know how to spin a question as smoothly as Biden. And here’s the quandary with her. People criticize her for not being Washington savvy. But where has Washington savvy gotten us? She has been criticized for not being competent. But tonight, she seemed quite capable of handling economic and international issues. Her most forceful response dealt with Iraq and Iran. Her true expertise shined on energy. She spoke well of how tax increases would hurt the already struggling economy, tax increases that Biden refers to as “patriotic.” She rightfully called out Biden and Obama on their flip flops, although not as forcefully as Biden. She stayed away from meandering answers – there may have been one or two, but if she is criticized for that, then Biden needs to be scrutinized for talking in favor of gay marriage before he came back a few seconds later and opposed it. (Also, Palin fell into the trap of agreeing with Cheney on the VP role.) What showed tonight, though, is that Palin is best when she speaks as the common man, as the populist, and as a concerned citizen. While she’s no Theodore Roosevelt at this point, she is the closest thing we have to him in the race.
Palin more than held her own tonight. I am sure the polls will say that Biden won the debate, but most importantly, Palin reasserted herself as the best choice McCain could make for his VP. The polls may not move much after this debate, but Palin has stopped the spiral. And now, if the McCain campaign can, they will begin to get back on message. That will be up to McCain to do.
As for Gwen Ifill, I like her – I always feel a special kinship with PBS anchors. She of course, has a financial stake in seeing Obama win, since her book on Obama comes out Inauguration Day, so her impartiality was questioned going into tonight. But as for her objectivity tonight, I thought she did fine. She really didn’t control the subject, Palin and Biden spoke about whatever they wanted, but she didn’t do the annoying Lehrer thing either, although her questions may have been worse than his.
Next up, the second Presidential debate on Tuesday.
At the opening of the debate, Palin seemed a little nervous. But she heated up as the debate went on. Palin is obviously not as polished as Biden. She doesn’t know how to spin a question as smoothly as Biden. And here’s the quandary with her. People criticize her for not being Washington savvy. But where has Washington savvy gotten us? She has been criticized for not being competent. But tonight, she seemed quite capable of handling economic and international issues. Her most forceful response dealt with Iraq and Iran. Her true expertise shined on energy. She spoke well of how tax increases would hurt the already struggling economy, tax increases that Biden refers to as “patriotic.” She rightfully called out Biden and Obama on their flip flops, although not as forcefully as Biden. She stayed away from meandering answers – there may have been one or two, but if she is criticized for that, then Biden needs to be scrutinized for talking in favor of gay marriage before he came back a few seconds later and opposed it. (Also, Palin fell into the trap of agreeing with Cheney on the VP role.) What showed tonight, though, is that Palin is best when she speaks as the common man, as the populist, and as a concerned citizen. While she’s no Theodore Roosevelt at this point, she is the closest thing we have to him in the race.
Palin more than held her own tonight. I am sure the polls will say that Biden won the debate, but most importantly, Palin reasserted herself as the best choice McCain could make for his VP. The polls may not move much after this debate, but Palin has stopped the spiral. And now, if the McCain campaign can, they will begin to get back on message. That will be up to McCain to do.
As for Gwen Ifill, I like her – I always feel a special kinship with PBS anchors. She of course, has a financial stake in seeing Obama win, since her book on Obama comes out Inauguration Day, so her impartiality was questioned going into tonight. But as for her objectivity tonight, I thought she did fine. She really didn’t control the subject, Palin and Biden spoke about whatever they wanted, but she didn’t do the annoying Lehrer thing either, although her questions may have been worse than his.
Next up, the second Presidential debate on Tuesday.
Wednesday, October 01, 2008
October Baseball
It's October, which means - MLB Playoff time! This is shaping up to be almost the perfect postseason, and it's just started. Why? The Yankees are not in the playoffs and the Tampa Bay Rays are! Since living in Tampa, I have been a Rays fan, following their futile seasons and up and coming players from time to time. They've always had a lot of young talent, and finally, it is paying off. So I am really happy for the Rays.
But I'm also highly frustrated by this post-season. The White Sox made it to the playoffs, which doesn't bother me at all. But what drives me crazy is how they got here. They won 1-0 against the Twins yesterday. And who was pitching for the White Sox? John Danks. John Danks! He was a Ranger two years ago, we gave up on him and now he just pitched the White Sox into the postseason. And the Rangers starting rotation? Umm… The Rangers have so mismanaged their organizational pitching. Hopefully Nolan Ryan will straighten it all out - maybe he'll make a comeback.
And as happy as I am for the Rays and hope they win it all, it is truly depressing to know that if the Rays win just two games, they will have surpassed the Rangers' entire postseason win total. (The Rangers are 1-9 all time in the postseason and are currently riding a nine game losing streak.)
But even with the frustration, bring on October baseball - where every pitch, every base runner, every fielded ground ball potentially makes the difference between going home and being crowned World Series Champs. Go Rays!
But I'm also highly frustrated by this post-season. The White Sox made it to the playoffs, which doesn't bother me at all. But what drives me crazy is how they got here. They won 1-0 against the Twins yesterday. And who was pitching for the White Sox? John Danks. John Danks! He was a Ranger two years ago, we gave up on him and now he just pitched the White Sox into the postseason. And the Rangers starting rotation? Umm… The Rangers have so mismanaged their organizational pitching. Hopefully Nolan Ryan will straighten it all out - maybe he'll make a comeback.
And as happy as I am for the Rays and hope they win it all, it is truly depressing to know that if the Rays win just two games, they will have surpassed the Rangers' entire postseason win total. (The Rangers are 1-9 all time in the postseason and are currently riding a nine game losing streak.)
But even with the frustration, bring on October baseball - where every pitch, every base runner, every fielded ground ball potentially makes the difference between going home and being crowned World Series Champs. Go Rays!
Monday, September 22, 2008
The Gravel Road
Sis, my great aunt, passed away early Sunday morning at the age of 90. Jesus said, "I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full." Sis is a testimony to that verse. She lived a full life, influenced so many people, and remained committed to Christ throughout her life. She taught me how to play the piano. Although I was no Mozart, I took lessons from the age of five until I was twelve. I remember my mom driving me to her house for a lesson. (Grant, we drove down Arkansas back when Arkansas was just a one-lane road on each side.) I remember eating goldfish after each lesson - she always treated us to some in her pantry. And I still remember how to play a couple of hymns, including "Victory in Jesus." But Sis was also a godly role model for us all, and has been the matriarch of the family these past few years, as well as a pillar in the church, where she served as the first female deacon. I have been amazed at the number of people who have stopped me this week to tell me what she meant to them - role model, teacher, encourager, friend. And she did it all so humbly.
I remember Pappaw telling me a story about them as kids. Back in the day, they mostly traveled over bumpy, dirt roads. Jostling back and forth in the back seat, Pappaw, Sis, and Uncle Charles couldn't wait to get to the gravel roads, which were a bit smoother. When Sis, as a little girl, would become distressed at all bumps, Pappaw, her older brother, would say to her, "Don't worry Sitter, we'll be on the gravel road soon." This became one of their encouraging mottos throughout life, and one that still comforts me. No matter what they faced in life, they had faith that soon there would be a gravel road - they could make it - and they encouraged others to do the same.
So I can only imagine on Sunday morning, as Sis slipped on to heaven, that she was greeted by her family on the ultimate of gravel roads - those "streets of gold beyond the crystal sea."
I remember Pappaw telling me a story about them as kids. Back in the day, they mostly traveled over bumpy, dirt roads. Jostling back and forth in the back seat, Pappaw, Sis, and Uncle Charles couldn't wait to get to the gravel roads, which were a bit smoother. When Sis, as a little girl, would become distressed at all bumps, Pappaw, her older brother, would say to her, "Don't worry Sitter, we'll be on the gravel road soon." This became one of their encouraging mottos throughout life, and one that still comforts me. No matter what they faced in life, they had faith that soon there would be a gravel road - they could make it - and they encouraged others to do the same.
So I can only imagine on Sunday morning, as Sis slipped on to heaven, that she was greeted by her family on the ultimate of gravel roads - those "streets of gold beyond the crystal sea."
Friday, September 05, 2008
RNC - Day 4 - John McCain
The final night of the RNC wrapped up a challenging, but mainly successful week. With Hurricane Gustav canceling night one, squeezing everything into three nights, and even more vital, condensing the schedule down to three one-hour programs for the major networks to cover appeared vexing. So again, I am thankful for PBS, although Jim Lehrer at times is Captain Obvious (“Those fireworks on the large screen in the hall are not real, they’re recorded”).
It’s remarkable how much politics changes in a year. A year ago, John McCain’s candidacy was dead. He was out of money and seemingly had lost his mojo. His problem? He was running as a mainstream Republican, which is not true to who he is. He shook up his staff, carried his own luggage, and began being John McCain again. And it worked. About this time last year he began showing signs of life. Once he got rolling, he went right back to the top and won the nomination. So here he is, in the most unlikely place, accepting the nomination of the Republican Party. In this election year, with Bush unpopular, the economy dragging, and an unpopular war, McCain should be down 20 points in the polls, and yet, somehow he has managed to keep it close. With his pick of Sarah Palin, he made a bold move, securing the conservative base, while also strengthening his desire for reform in Washington. Now, he can be John McCain without having to worry about the base. McCain is not a great speech giver. In fact, he is probably the fourth best among the two tickets this year. So I wasn’t expecting much from his speech tonight in the way of delivery. However, I was expecting him to reach out to independents and Reagan Democrats by being John McCain. Unfortunately, for tonight anyway, I feel like the maverick was corralled for the most part and the mainstream Republican John McCain was on stage. Not that the entire speech was bad, in fact, at times it was stirring, but I am a little disappointed.
First, the highlights: John McCain’s personal story is so moving, no matter how many times I hear it. I cannot imagine losing six years of my life as a POW, enduring the harsh, brutal conditions he endured while maintaining integrity, hope, and strength. That is the kind of character heroes are made of, and that is the kind of character I would want to lead this country. I also appreciated that he mentioned support for those affected by autism. Coupled with Palin’s advocacy of children with special needs, it is nice to have a ticket placing these issues at the forefront of their plans. This isn’t a new issue for McCain, he has discussed this boldly before as well. He also highlighted the responsibility to select competent judges. The next president will replace at least two Justices on the Supreme Court, greatly affecting the direction of the divided court for years to come.
While discussing national security, McCain made a point that many who oppose him often miss: “I hate war.” As a man who has served and suffered, he knows war. Since many view the war in Iraq as a mistake, I think it is important for McCain to emphasize his desire to only send troops when absolutely necessary, but to send in enough to do the job when he must. This led to is strongest portion of the speech, where he echoed JFK by encouraging us all to serve a cause greater than ourselves, such as: joining the military, becoming a teacher, serving in office, tutoring a student, etc. Finally, he swore to fight for what is best for all Americans, regardless of which party has the best idea.
His strongest and riskiest move though was when he called out fellow Republicans in Congress as part of the problem. Lamenting the fact that the Republicans in Congress had become what they had set out to change, McCain promised to fight for what is best for all Americans, regardless of which party has the best ideas. McCain has a clear record of bipartisanship – his promise here is credible. And it demonstrated his maverick streak, since he was calling out some of the lawmakers in the room.
Unfortunately, that real John McCain was too rare in his speech tonight. McCain cares deeply about the environment and global warming – yet he didn’t mention it at all. McCain has a reasonable approach to immigration – yet he didn’t mention it at all. McCain has the ability to speak about the economy in a way that can relate to the middle class, but he failed to do so. I know he cares about these issues, yet I feel he was muzzled by his advisors not to rock the delegates too much. I think that’s a mistake. He played it too safe when he should have just been himself. Independents will not be attracted to mainstream Republicanism this year; however, they would be and have been attracted to the true John McCain. His campaign faltered last year when he tried to run against his true identity. Now is not the time to slip back into that again. In a speech that should have rejected the accusation that he is “more of the same,” I’m afraid he failed to do so. Perhaps he’s banking on the American public to eventually see through the thin facade of the Obama campaign. Nevertheless, tonight McCain could have sealed the deal, but he didn’t.
Overall, the Republican Party is more united now than it was a week ago, and Palin is a star. In a year when the Republican Party should lose badly, McCain/Palin just might win. The fight for Independents to vote for McCain/Palin this November is still ongoing. John McCain needs to be unleashed and set free to be who he is. Otherwise, he’ll end up the second coming of Bob Dole.
It’s remarkable how much politics changes in a year. A year ago, John McCain’s candidacy was dead. He was out of money and seemingly had lost his mojo. His problem? He was running as a mainstream Republican, which is not true to who he is. He shook up his staff, carried his own luggage, and began being John McCain again. And it worked. About this time last year he began showing signs of life. Once he got rolling, he went right back to the top and won the nomination. So here he is, in the most unlikely place, accepting the nomination of the Republican Party. In this election year, with Bush unpopular, the economy dragging, and an unpopular war, McCain should be down 20 points in the polls, and yet, somehow he has managed to keep it close. With his pick of Sarah Palin, he made a bold move, securing the conservative base, while also strengthening his desire for reform in Washington. Now, he can be John McCain without having to worry about the base. McCain is not a great speech giver. In fact, he is probably the fourth best among the two tickets this year. So I wasn’t expecting much from his speech tonight in the way of delivery. However, I was expecting him to reach out to independents and Reagan Democrats by being John McCain. Unfortunately, for tonight anyway, I feel like the maverick was corralled for the most part and the mainstream Republican John McCain was on stage. Not that the entire speech was bad, in fact, at times it was stirring, but I am a little disappointed.
First, the highlights: John McCain’s personal story is so moving, no matter how many times I hear it. I cannot imagine losing six years of my life as a POW, enduring the harsh, brutal conditions he endured while maintaining integrity, hope, and strength. That is the kind of character heroes are made of, and that is the kind of character I would want to lead this country. I also appreciated that he mentioned support for those affected by autism. Coupled with Palin’s advocacy of children with special needs, it is nice to have a ticket placing these issues at the forefront of their plans. This isn’t a new issue for McCain, he has discussed this boldly before as well. He also highlighted the responsibility to select competent judges. The next president will replace at least two Justices on the Supreme Court, greatly affecting the direction of the divided court for years to come.
While discussing national security, McCain made a point that many who oppose him often miss: “I hate war.” As a man who has served and suffered, he knows war. Since many view the war in Iraq as a mistake, I think it is important for McCain to emphasize his desire to only send troops when absolutely necessary, but to send in enough to do the job when he must. This led to is strongest portion of the speech, where he echoed JFK by encouraging us all to serve a cause greater than ourselves, such as: joining the military, becoming a teacher, serving in office, tutoring a student, etc. Finally, he swore to fight for what is best for all Americans, regardless of which party has the best idea.
His strongest and riskiest move though was when he called out fellow Republicans in Congress as part of the problem. Lamenting the fact that the Republicans in Congress had become what they had set out to change, McCain promised to fight for what is best for all Americans, regardless of which party has the best ideas. McCain has a clear record of bipartisanship – his promise here is credible. And it demonstrated his maverick streak, since he was calling out some of the lawmakers in the room.
Unfortunately, that real John McCain was too rare in his speech tonight. McCain cares deeply about the environment and global warming – yet he didn’t mention it at all. McCain has a reasonable approach to immigration – yet he didn’t mention it at all. McCain has the ability to speak about the economy in a way that can relate to the middle class, but he failed to do so. I know he cares about these issues, yet I feel he was muzzled by his advisors not to rock the delegates too much. I think that’s a mistake. He played it too safe when he should have just been himself. Independents will not be attracted to mainstream Republicanism this year; however, they would be and have been attracted to the true John McCain. His campaign faltered last year when he tried to run against his true identity. Now is not the time to slip back into that again. In a speech that should have rejected the accusation that he is “more of the same,” I’m afraid he failed to do so. Perhaps he’s banking on the American public to eventually see through the thin facade of the Obama campaign. Nevertheless, tonight McCain could have sealed the deal, but he didn’t.
Overall, the Republican Party is more united now than it was a week ago, and Palin is a star. In a year when the Republican Party should lose badly, McCain/Palin just might win. The fight for Independents to vote for McCain/Palin this November is still ongoing. John McCain needs to be unleashed and set free to be who he is. Otherwise, he’ll end up the second coming of Bob Dole.
Wednesday, September 03, 2008
RNC - Day 3 - Gov. Sarah Palin
I thought she was great. She was strong, confident, poised, humorous, warm, and tough all rolled into one. She exceeded expectations plus some, and she showed the viewers what kind of character she has. Of course, I’m talking about Gov. Sarah Palin. McCain should be thankful that the nomination vote has already been taken, or there might be some on the floor this evening trying to flip the order and make it a Palin/McCain ticket. But before I go too in depth on Palin, let me review the other speeches of the evening.
Mitt Romney – Simply a speech to position himself for 2012 should McCain lose. I know many pundits focused on whether or not Hillary would endorse Obama. But what they failed to look at is what Mitt did tonight – offer an endorsement of McCain, but secretly hope he loses so that Mitt can run in 2012. His endorsement of McCain was less enthusiastic than Hillary’s was on Obama. Maybe Hillary is just better at it, or maybe Mitt is mad he didn’t get the VP slot too. Whatever the case, Romney seems to have everything a successful politician needs – strong image, money, successful career, conservative positions (although these are all new positions and are getting more conservative by the sentence). But he lacks authenticity. He seems robotic. And he won’t ever be the nominee of the Republican Party. Forgettable speech.
Mike Huckabee – What a great storyteller and communicator. He is the anti-Romney. Huckabee exudes authenticity. He gave a great speech. Some of the highlights:
- “I’m not a Republican because I grew up rich. I’m a Republican because I didn’t want to remain poor, waiting for the government to rescue me.” The Republican Party needs more of Huckabee’s connection with middle class voters that he so naturally possesses. This is where Palin will be helpful.
-“Palin received more votes in Wasilla than Biden did for President.”
- On the media feeding frenzy on Palin’s family: “The elite media is tackier than a costume change at a Madonna concert.”
Huckabee delivered a good speech. I hope his message can continue to permeate the Republican Party.
Gov. Linda Lingle of Hawaii – I have never heard of her, but she did a nice job talking about Palin’s success as Alaska’s Governor. Some of her best points included how Alaska and Delaware (Biden’s home state) have the same number of electoral votes; however, 250 Delawares would fit inside Alaska.
Rudy Giuliani – One of the goals of the campaign tonight was to attack the media. Rudy was the third speaker I heard begin his speech in this way. He quickly moved into his attack on Obama, using Biden’s and Hillary’s words concerning Obama’s inexperience as his support. Much of the speech centered on national security. He even went after Obama on the Iraq war, which is gutsy, since the war still remains unpopular. But the success of the surge is a defining moment for the McCain candidacy. I just wonder if people listen anymore when a sentence includes “Iraq.” The point Giuliani drove home was that McCain’s plan led to victory, Obama’s would have produced defeat. He took it to Obama in his own Rudy type way. I’m curious how it played out among Undecideds.
Gov. Sarah Palin – I decided not to take any notes during her speech, because I wanted to concentrate on each moment. She was brilliant tonight. I think she handled her family issues with grace, she supported John McCain’s candidacy, and she showed her mettle on energy issues, while defending her record as a mayor and governor. Forcefully going after Obama, Palin did so in a congenial way, not mean-spirited. She never yelled, she just coolly and calmly, but deliberately and firmly, laid out why people should vote for McCain/Palin.
She has authenticity. One gets the sense that who she is on the stage is who she is off it. When she describes herself as a Hockey Mom, she’s believable. (“What’s the difference between a Hockey Mom and a pit bull? Lipstick.”) As long as she stays true to who she is, I think she will connect very well with voters, especially the blue collar, small town voter (you know, those “bitter” people who “cling to their guns and religion,” according to Obama.) One can see why the Democrats have spent the last four days trying to bring her down. She’s competent, more experienced than Obama on making tough decisions, engaging to listen to, knowledgeable and reasonable on energy independence, a true reformer, even of her own party, and a great example of what women and men in politics can be. I’m sure she will face even more scrutiny now, as her opponents will really seek to bring her down. However, if the trooper issue remains a non-issue, I think Palin is where the Republican Party is headed.
That being said, she now needs to be interacting with the media and public. She needs to frame the debate on who she is. The McCain campaign has been slow in defending Palin against the recent attacks. With this successful speech at the convention, I look forward to hearing more from her on the campaign trail and in interviews with the media.
This is a tough year to be a Republican in politics. However, this was a good night for the McCain campaign. Palin’s speech will be the highlight of the convention – I don’t think what McCain says tomorrow will make much of a difference among voters. Not that McCain’s speech is not important, but Palin’s speech tonight was the most anticipated, and it will be the most discussed post convention.
Mitt Romney – Simply a speech to position himself for 2012 should McCain lose. I know many pundits focused on whether or not Hillary would endorse Obama. But what they failed to look at is what Mitt did tonight – offer an endorsement of McCain, but secretly hope he loses so that Mitt can run in 2012. His endorsement of McCain was less enthusiastic than Hillary’s was on Obama. Maybe Hillary is just better at it, or maybe Mitt is mad he didn’t get the VP slot too. Whatever the case, Romney seems to have everything a successful politician needs – strong image, money, successful career, conservative positions (although these are all new positions and are getting more conservative by the sentence). But he lacks authenticity. He seems robotic. And he won’t ever be the nominee of the Republican Party. Forgettable speech.
Mike Huckabee – What a great storyteller and communicator. He is the anti-Romney. Huckabee exudes authenticity. He gave a great speech. Some of the highlights:
- “I’m not a Republican because I grew up rich. I’m a Republican because I didn’t want to remain poor, waiting for the government to rescue me.” The Republican Party needs more of Huckabee’s connection with middle class voters that he so naturally possesses. This is where Palin will be helpful.
-“Palin received more votes in Wasilla than Biden did for President.”
- On the media feeding frenzy on Palin’s family: “The elite media is tackier than a costume change at a Madonna concert.”
Huckabee delivered a good speech. I hope his message can continue to permeate the Republican Party.
Gov. Linda Lingle of Hawaii – I have never heard of her, but she did a nice job talking about Palin’s success as Alaska’s Governor. Some of her best points included how Alaska and Delaware (Biden’s home state) have the same number of electoral votes; however, 250 Delawares would fit inside Alaska.
Rudy Giuliani – One of the goals of the campaign tonight was to attack the media. Rudy was the third speaker I heard begin his speech in this way. He quickly moved into his attack on Obama, using Biden’s and Hillary’s words concerning Obama’s inexperience as his support. Much of the speech centered on national security. He even went after Obama on the Iraq war, which is gutsy, since the war still remains unpopular. But the success of the surge is a defining moment for the McCain candidacy. I just wonder if people listen anymore when a sentence includes “Iraq.” The point Giuliani drove home was that McCain’s plan led to victory, Obama’s would have produced defeat. He took it to Obama in his own Rudy type way. I’m curious how it played out among Undecideds.
Gov. Sarah Palin – I decided not to take any notes during her speech, because I wanted to concentrate on each moment. She was brilliant tonight. I think she handled her family issues with grace, she supported John McCain’s candidacy, and she showed her mettle on energy issues, while defending her record as a mayor and governor. Forcefully going after Obama, Palin did so in a congenial way, not mean-spirited. She never yelled, she just coolly and calmly, but deliberately and firmly, laid out why people should vote for McCain/Palin.
She has authenticity. One gets the sense that who she is on the stage is who she is off it. When she describes herself as a Hockey Mom, she’s believable. (“What’s the difference between a Hockey Mom and a pit bull? Lipstick.”) As long as she stays true to who she is, I think she will connect very well with voters, especially the blue collar, small town voter (you know, those “bitter” people who “cling to their guns and religion,” according to Obama.) One can see why the Democrats have spent the last four days trying to bring her down. She’s competent, more experienced than Obama on making tough decisions, engaging to listen to, knowledgeable and reasonable on energy independence, a true reformer, even of her own party, and a great example of what women and men in politics can be. I’m sure she will face even more scrutiny now, as her opponents will really seek to bring her down. However, if the trooper issue remains a non-issue, I think Palin is where the Republican Party is headed.
That being said, she now needs to be interacting with the media and public. She needs to frame the debate on who she is. The McCain campaign has been slow in defending Palin against the recent attacks. With this successful speech at the convention, I look forward to hearing more from her on the campaign trail and in interviews with the media.
This is a tough year to be a Republican in politics. However, this was a good night for the McCain campaign. Palin’s speech will be the highlight of the convention – I don’t think what McCain says tomorrow will make much of a difference among voters. Not that McCain’s speech is not important, but Palin’s speech tonight was the most anticipated, and it will be the most discussed post convention.
Tuesday, September 02, 2008
RNC - Day 2* (Thanks to Gustav)
Although this is technically Day 2 of the Republican National Convention, it’s really Day 1, thanks to Hurricane Gustav. After a hectic weekend of hurricanes and introducing Palin, only to have her family maligned by the media, I am sure the Republicans in St. Paul are happy to be back on track, hopefully regaining the attention and framing the message for the fall campaign.
Missing Monday is not a bad thing entirely. It kept Cheney from attending, and Bush only spoke via a taped message from the White House; so for a campaign trying to distance itself from a highly unpopular president, it could turn out to be a plus. Even so, the shortened convention makes every moment from here to Thursday crucial for the McCain campaign. I began watching tonight as Laura Bush, in St. Paul, was introducing W’s speech from Washington. I didn’t envy her position. How do you bring out the positives in a president hovering at 30 percent approval without seeming desperate? Laura mentioned education reform (mild applause), Justices Alito and Roberts (wild applause), and Faith Based Initiatives (very mild applause – another post entirely). She also mentioned the massive increase in funding for caring for those with HIV, freedom in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the fact that the US has been kept safe since 9/11. Bush, to his credit, gave a humble speech, realizing that this was not the place for bravado. He praised McCain while also mentioning how many times McCain has gone against him – another humble moment. This maverick theme is extremely important for the McCain campaign to convey to the public, but it also creates the most confusion in the hall of Republican delegates. The fact is, McCain has gone against the Republican Party plenty of times. It is pretty ludicrous for the Obama campaign to claim that McCain will carry on the Bush presidency. But, to have to prove that at a Republican Convention creates some awkward scenes.
After Bush, Fred Thompson spoke. Is there something wrong with him? Is he healthy? (I can’t believe a year ago he was going to be the Republican Party savior. As I’ve mentioned before, he was a quite disappointing candidate.) Anyway, he looked older than McCain. The content of the speech was good, delivery a little shaky. He spent the first third of his speech defending and praising Palin, then turned his attention to the character of John McCain. Thompson recounted McCain’s time as a POW – McCain is an amazing man. I don’t know how he withstood all he did. But as Fred Thompson said, being a POW doesn’t qualify you to be president, but it does reveal the type of leader you will be. Thompson also spoke of McCain’s maverick tendencies. Again, a bit of awkwardness because it’s obvious that Thompson thinks McCain worked across the aisle too much, but a necessary point he has to make for McCain. David Brooks, a PBS pundit, mentioned that there was no re-definition of the Republican Party, and I agree, but I don’t think this is the election to do that. McCain is running as McCain – he’s basically having to run against his party in many ways. He’s not going to reshape the party in three days, but over four years. If he wins, then 2012 will be the year to do any necessary reshaping or renewing of the party. There is not time to do that fully now. Thompson also went after Obama, but not by name. In any respects, it was a good speech for the convention hall, but nothing transformative.
Then, in comes Joe Lieberman. You know, the 2000 Democratic VP nominee, still a Democrat, but supporting John McCain. If people tuned in to Lieberman’s speech, I think they will see how bipartisan, or post-partisan, McCain really is. What a moment too. Joe Lieberman decries senseless partisanship, declaring that he is supporting John McCain because “country matters more than party,” describing McCain as the only one who has actually worked across party lines to bring the country together. I highly respect Lieberman. I have since he stood up in 1998 to Clinton and I liked him in 2000 as well. Always seems congenial and humble. He was again tonight. He has placed his political career on the line for McCain. The Democratic leadership could strip him of his committee power, etc. Even so, Lieberman is willing to risk it to support McCain.
Some of his highlights:
- On the Maverick McCain: “God only made John McCain, and he is his own man.”
- On Obama’s thin resume: “Eloquence is no substitute for a record.”
- He said if McCain is more of the same, then he, Lieberman, is Michael Moore’s favorite Democrat.
- He appealed to Bill Clinton Democrats, mentioning how Clinton had worked with a Republican congress to balance the budget and reform welfare. He contrasted this with how extreme Obama is on the issues and how he has not ever worked across the party lines or challenged the Democratic leadership in the Senate.
- Lieberman called for national unity, not party unity.
- He then led Democrats and Independents in an invitation to support McCain. I swear he was about to ask people to come down to the altar.
Anyway, a very tense speech in the hall. Republican delegates weren’t sure how to clap for Clinton’s accomplishments, or McCain’s bipartisan record on immigration, environmentalism, and corruption. But I believe that independents and Democrats who aren’t sure about Obama could be swayed by Lieberman’s appeal. It was authentic and heartfelt. He even praised the choice of Palin, saying the two mavericks would bring needed change and a proven record to Washington. A good night for the McCain campaign – Bush graciously took a low profile, and Lieberman made the case for the post-partisan McCain. I’m not sure if anyone was watching, but if they were, I think the McCain campaign can be pleased by the events on night one, or two.
Tomorrow, Palin’s coming out party. Her speech tomorrow and her debate with Biden will ultimately decide her political fate. All the personal family drama will matter little when compared to how she fares in these two big moments.
Thursday, August 28, 2008
DNC - Day 4 - Obama
So here we are, the final night of the DNC, outdoors at Mile High. While the first night of the convention was a little shaky, since Hillary gave her speech easing the tension, the convention has been focused. Definite theme of "McCain = More of the Same; Obama = Change We Need." However, the success of the convention rests on how Obama’s speech relates to the public. But first, we suffer through a litany of speakers with the same speech writer, rehashing ever less uniquely the week’s theme. To quickly get to Obama’s speech, I’ll sum up in a sentence or two the preceding speakers.
Gov. Tim Kaine: Evidently, his assignment was this: use every biblical cliché you can think of, speak Spanish for a few seconds, get off the stage.
Al Gore: young people are smart because they support Obama, old people are dumb. And Barack Obama is a reincarnation of Abraham Lincoln. And if Gore had been president, the climate crisis would be solved and 9/11 would have never happened.
Obama video: Very well done. Of course, it was sappy and over-the-top, but the images, narration, life story it told would connect with viewers. Additionally, Obama’s appeal to young voters is recognized by the music selections for the second half of the video. Obama won the primary by attracting many new and young voters. Traditionally, young voters do not vote. If these voters follow historical trends, Obama loses. If they remain energized, Obama wins. The electorate is still heavily polarized. If the new voters vote, then Obama will be able to squeak by where Kerry and Gore couldn’t – on the electoral map. Getting young voters, 18-30 year olds, to the polls in November is critical for the Obama campaign.
The Speech Setting: Obama is a phenomenal orator. Obviously, that’s why he’s where he is today, thanks to his keynote address four years ago. And his campaign has staging and visuals down. They may be too good at it, hence Obama’s celebrity status. But the atmosphere was great – packed stadium, striking backdrop (many said it looked like the Greek ruins, I think it looked like the White House). Obama enters to U2’s “City of Blinding Lights,” which is the song he has used throughout his campaign as entry music. There was even a shot of a crying girl in the audience. Obama is a rock star celebrity whether he wants to admit it or not. And this setting amplified that fact. So much so, that I nearly fell of the couch laughing when Obama said with “great humility” he accepts the nomination to be president. 80,000-in-a-football-stadium-with-all-this-hype-kind-of-humility.
The Theme: Obama was attempting to straddle the fence and be liberal and moderate at the same time. He definitely gave a speech aimed at independents rather than party faithful, while attacking McCain to give the faithful red meat. His theme seemed to come down to allowing government to do what people can’t do on their own, while restoring status of America around the world. He also spent time delineating the differences, as he sees them, between John McCain and himself. He has to prove that he is tough enough to withstand the next few weeks. He has to prove that he can be an effective Commander-in-Chief.
Obama listed his plan: tax cuts for 95%, end dependence on oil in 10 years, “world class education,” Healthcare for everyone, protect Social Security, be better people.
Pros: No one delivers a speech better. I liked his line about the need for both individual responsibility and mutual responsibility. He re-iterated many of the points he made four years ago when he discussed getting beyond red states and blue states. He certainly attempted to convey that he would be capable of defending the country as Commander-in-Chief. He addressed a desire for post-partisanship
Cons: No presidential candidate should have the need to assure voters that they are patriotic. First Michelle said she loves America, now Obama says he is patriotic. This cannot be a good thing that the campaign felt the need to address this. On his specifics, how will he pay for all these programs? How will he pay for healthcare, for college education for everyone? How will he end oil dependency, protect Social Security? Higher taxes? On whom? While he distorted McCain’s joke about $5 million being rich, Obama believes rich is $40,000. If we’re talking about raising taxes on the rich, I like McCain’s joking reference better.
Obama mentions that he will go through the budget and strike everything he doesn’t want. That’s great, except that the president does not have the power of a line-item veto. So unless he is planning on pulling a Putin and taking control of the legislature too, he’s going to have to rely on Congress. On global problems, he criticized Bush’s “go it alone” strategy, but then seemed to convey that he can single-handedly change world leaders’ minds and make them act nice. And on parenting, how will he make people be better parents?
One of the things that Obama has mastered is the art of double-speak. On abortion, he “reached out” to pro-lifers by saying he wanted to end unwanted pregnancies. How is that helpful, since abortion is a way to end an unwanted pregnancy? Why didn’t he say he wanted to work to make abortion rare, so rare that eventually no one would choose to kill their baby? Why didn’t he at least agree with the partial-birth ban or the born-alive protection act? On gun control – who favors criminals having AK-47s? On alternative energy – is he now in favor of coal and nuclear power? He seemed to say so tonight. Also, the speech ran about 45 minutes. Did people watch it and stay tuned in?
The Effect: So how effective is this speech. I give him an A. But how many people will vote for him now that wouldn’t before? How influential is the whole convention process? He seems to be receiving a slight bounce. As a result of this speech, I would guess he’ll be up by 10-12 points by Sunday. But the American people have short memories. Come November 4, will anyone remember either convention?
The Obama campaign should be happy with tonight. While the celebrity label was reinforced, the delivery was good. For people who don’t know much about Obama, they’ll think he’s a moderate. It places Obama back on offense for the first time in a couple of weeks. We’ll see if he can sustain it after next week as the Republicans gather in Minneapolis.
Gov. Tim Kaine: Evidently, his assignment was this: use every biblical cliché you can think of, speak Spanish for a few seconds, get off the stage.
Al Gore: young people are smart because they support Obama, old people are dumb. And Barack Obama is a reincarnation of Abraham Lincoln. And if Gore had been president, the climate crisis would be solved and 9/11 would have never happened.
Obama video: Very well done. Of course, it was sappy and over-the-top, but the images, narration, life story it told would connect with viewers. Additionally, Obama’s appeal to young voters is recognized by the music selections for the second half of the video. Obama won the primary by attracting many new and young voters. Traditionally, young voters do not vote. If these voters follow historical trends, Obama loses. If they remain energized, Obama wins. The electorate is still heavily polarized. If the new voters vote, then Obama will be able to squeak by where Kerry and Gore couldn’t – on the electoral map. Getting young voters, 18-30 year olds, to the polls in November is critical for the Obama campaign.
The Speech Setting: Obama is a phenomenal orator. Obviously, that’s why he’s where he is today, thanks to his keynote address four years ago. And his campaign has staging and visuals down. They may be too good at it, hence Obama’s celebrity status. But the atmosphere was great – packed stadium, striking backdrop (many said it looked like the Greek ruins, I think it looked like the White House). Obama enters to U2’s “City of Blinding Lights,” which is the song he has used throughout his campaign as entry music. There was even a shot of a crying girl in the audience. Obama is a rock star celebrity whether he wants to admit it or not. And this setting amplified that fact. So much so, that I nearly fell of the couch laughing when Obama said with “great humility” he accepts the nomination to be president. 80,000-in-a-football-stadium-with-all-this-hype-kind-of-humility.
The Theme: Obama was attempting to straddle the fence and be liberal and moderate at the same time. He definitely gave a speech aimed at independents rather than party faithful, while attacking McCain to give the faithful red meat. His theme seemed to come down to allowing government to do what people can’t do on their own, while restoring status of America around the world. He also spent time delineating the differences, as he sees them, between John McCain and himself. He has to prove that he is tough enough to withstand the next few weeks. He has to prove that he can be an effective Commander-in-Chief.
Obama listed his plan: tax cuts for 95%, end dependence on oil in 10 years, “world class education,” Healthcare for everyone, protect Social Security, be better people.
Pros: No one delivers a speech better. I liked his line about the need for both individual responsibility and mutual responsibility. He re-iterated many of the points he made four years ago when he discussed getting beyond red states and blue states. He certainly attempted to convey that he would be capable of defending the country as Commander-in-Chief. He addressed a desire for post-partisanship
Cons: No presidential candidate should have the need to assure voters that they are patriotic. First Michelle said she loves America, now Obama says he is patriotic. This cannot be a good thing that the campaign felt the need to address this. On his specifics, how will he pay for all these programs? How will he pay for healthcare, for college education for everyone? How will he end oil dependency, protect Social Security? Higher taxes? On whom? While he distorted McCain’s joke about $5 million being rich, Obama believes rich is $40,000. If we’re talking about raising taxes on the rich, I like McCain’s joking reference better.
Obama mentions that he will go through the budget and strike everything he doesn’t want. That’s great, except that the president does not have the power of a line-item veto. So unless he is planning on pulling a Putin and taking control of the legislature too, he’s going to have to rely on Congress. On global problems, he criticized Bush’s “go it alone” strategy, but then seemed to convey that he can single-handedly change world leaders’ minds and make them act nice. And on parenting, how will he make people be better parents?
One of the things that Obama has mastered is the art of double-speak. On abortion, he “reached out” to pro-lifers by saying he wanted to end unwanted pregnancies. How is that helpful, since abortion is a way to end an unwanted pregnancy? Why didn’t he say he wanted to work to make abortion rare, so rare that eventually no one would choose to kill their baby? Why didn’t he at least agree with the partial-birth ban or the born-alive protection act? On gun control – who favors criminals having AK-47s? On alternative energy – is he now in favor of coal and nuclear power? He seemed to say so tonight. Also, the speech ran about 45 minutes. Did people watch it and stay tuned in?
The Effect: So how effective is this speech. I give him an A. But how many people will vote for him now that wouldn’t before? How influential is the whole convention process? He seems to be receiving a slight bounce. As a result of this speech, I would guess he’ll be up by 10-12 points by Sunday. But the American people have short memories. Come November 4, will anyone remember either convention?
The Obama campaign should be happy with tonight. While the celebrity label was reinforced, the delivery was good. For people who don’t know much about Obama, they’ll think he’s a moderate. It places Obama back on offense for the first time in a couple of weeks. We’ll see if he can sustain it after next week as the Republicans gather in Minneapolis.
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
DNC - Day 2 - Hillary
On Monday night, the Democratic Party sought unity by focusing on Ted Kennedy and reminding the Obamamaniacs and Clintonites that before either of their groups claimed the party, the Kennedys were the uniting figures. Bill Clinton must not have watched last night, because he again vaguely questioned the nomination of Obama today. (Apparently, he wasn't alone in not watching. Practically as many people tuned in for "Deal or No Deal" as watched the convention on ABC, NBC, and CBS combined.) If Hillary's speech doesn't bring unity tonight, the Democrats may be rousing the spirits of Eleanor Roosevelt and Andrew Jackson. It should be high theatre.
I began watching about 8:05. Gov. Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas was speaking. I can't believe she was one of the names mentioned as VP for Obama. She had nothing. No one was listening, she said nothing inspiring, I think she just woke up from a nap - she must have been on a very long short list. Next up Bob Casey, a rarity of all rarities - a pro-life Democrat! He had to rush through that detail in his speech out of fear a riot would ensue if the delegates found out. Then came the keynote address.
Rewind a mere four years ago when an unknown figure gave the keynote address. An Illinois state congressman running for Senate. His speech was electric. That single speech launched Obama into the stratosphere. How about tonight for Mark Warner? Not so much.
During the break, the camera kept showing Biden and Michelle Obama. Every time the camera would cut to the two of them, Biden's mouth was moving non-stop, I mean non-stop, and Michelle's head was nodding. This went on for a few minutes. I bet she wishes Barack had tapped Calvin Coolidge instead. She had that look of "Please stop talking to me" on her face.
Time for the main event - video tribute to Hillary with a comment or two by "Hillary's Husband," as Bill was titled in the video - I found that quite humorous. One comment in her video that struck me: "We weren't able to do it this time." Hmm, I wonder what she means by "this time."
Out comes Hillary, and it was more painful/sad than I even thought it would be. Not only did the media flash pre-convention photos of multiple pantsuits being matched with the backdrop, but here was Hillary - the inevitable candidate. This was supposed to be her party, and she had to come out and make a speech for Obama - The Mark Warner of '04. She's got to be kicking herself everyday that she underestimated him. Anyway, Hillary gave a good, solid speech. I have always thought she would be the most formidable candidate against John McCain. She showed that again tonight. I think the few weeks out of the spotlight did her some good too. She didn't channel Eleanor Roosevelt, but she did practically all she could to swallow her pride and support Obama. The highlights:
I began watching about 8:05. Gov. Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas was speaking. I can't believe she was one of the names mentioned as VP for Obama. She had nothing. No one was listening, she said nothing inspiring, I think she just woke up from a nap - she must have been on a very long short list. Next up Bob Casey, a rarity of all rarities - a pro-life Democrat! He had to rush through that detail in his speech out of fear a riot would ensue if the delegates found out. Then came the keynote address.
Rewind a mere four years ago when an unknown figure gave the keynote address. An Illinois state congressman running for Senate. His speech was electric. That single speech launched Obama into the stratosphere. How about tonight for Mark Warner? Not so much.
During the break, the camera kept showing Biden and Michelle Obama. Every time the camera would cut to the two of them, Biden's mouth was moving non-stop, I mean non-stop, and Michelle's head was nodding. This went on for a few minutes. I bet she wishes Barack had tapped Calvin Coolidge instead. She had that look of "Please stop talking to me" on her face.
Time for the main event - video tribute to Hillary with a comment or two by "Hillary's Husband," as Bill was titled in the video - I found that quite humorous. One comment in her video that struck me: "We weren't able to do it this time." Hmm, I wonder what she means by "this time."
Out comes Hillary, and it was more painful/sad than I even thought it would be. Not only did the media flash pre-convention photos of multiple pantsuits being matched with the backdrop, but here was Hillary - the inevitable candidate. This was supposed to be her party, and she had to come out and make a speech for Obama - The Mark Warner of '04. She's got to be kicking herself everyday that she underestimated him. Anyway, Hillary gave a good, solid speech. I have always thought she would be the most formidable candidate against John McCain. She showed that again tonight. I think the few weeks out of the spotlight did her some good too. She didn't channel Eleanor Roosevelt, but she did practically all she could to swallow her pride and support Obama. The highlights:
- By my count she mentioned supporting Obama 9.5 times
- She mentioned Biden 2 times
- Michelle Obama 1 time
- Bill Clinton's presidency 1 time
- McCain as her friend 1 time
- Anti-Bush 3 times
- anti-McCain 2.5 times with another 4 soft jabs
Those were my counts. Spending a substantial amount of time on her run for the presidency, Clinton made a couple of errors, in my estimation. First, she mentioned her "35 years of experience" in politics. Immediately, I thought of the very little political experience of Obama. Not a good comparison to make for the Obama campaign. Second, she said nothing of Obama's ability to maintain security or face the threat of terror. Why is this a glaring omission? Because the McCain campaign is using a quote of Clinton's where she compares the vast experience and readiness of John McCain to Obama's lone speech in 2002. By not addressing that issue, she left the door open for the McCain campaign to continue to attack Obama using her own words.
Regardless of the omissions, Clinton did all that could be expected of someone who lost such a close race. The tension in the hall seemed to be relieved. It's up to the Obama campaign now to capture the Clinton hold-outs. Of course, tomorrow evening Bill Clinton speaks. So everyone will be holding their breath once again.
Monday, August 25, 2008
Democratic National Convention Diary - Monday
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.
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.
Saturday, August 23, 2008
It Took This Long for Obama to Choose Biden? Really?
So what took so long? Obama finally sent out the "highly anticipated" text message early Saturday morning declaring his VP to be… Joe Biden. I am sure it was easy for people to go back to sleep after hearing that. Ok, so Biden has a lot of experience in the Senate as well as some foreign policy cred, which helps Obama on paper. But Biden is arrogant, tends to stick his foot in his mouth, and garnered 1 percent of the vote when he ran for the nomination last year. Biden will be an attack dog for Obama, but I don't think he was Obama's first choice. Let me explain.
Most of the media pinpointed Biden as the selection last week. Why then, did Obama not send the text message until 3am Saturday? He missed Friday's news cycle, probably ticked off many on the text message waiting list by receiving a wake-up text at 3am, and it's Saturday - who is paying attention? If Biden was his selection all along, why the delay? I think Obama wanted someone else. And that someone else turned him down on Friday, sending Obama into panic mode and panic pick. (Perhaps like in fantasy baseball drafts when the guy you wanted gets picked just before you, sending you into chaos as you search for a new pick before time runs out.) Obama is campaigning on change, so he picks Biden? Obama is trying to offset his liberal policies so he picks Biden? Obama is trying to alter the electoral map, so he picks Biden? Makes no sense at all. (For the record, I still think Bayh would have been a much better pick for all the above reasons. Perhaps Bayh turned him down? A close friend of the Clintons, was he pressured to turn it down?)
Some may say Biden is to Obama what Cheney was to Bush in 2000 - gravitas. But, I think the better comparison is Dukakis-Bentsen. Bentsen was an accomplished Senator, throttled Dan Quayle in the debate - "You are no Jack Kennedy" - and was a well-respected leader, but Bentsen overshadowed Dukakis and didn't help Dukakis on the electoral map. Biden is more apt to overshadow Obama because he likes to hear himself speak.
So the pick makes little sense to me. I think Obama panicked. I hope one day the full story comes out. If this wasn't a panic pick, then Obama's campaign completely mismanaged the release of this news. Additionally, it was released that Clinton was never considered. (Even a bigger mistake to let that get out - and it makes Clinton's speech at the convention even more intriguing). The McCain Campaign must be thrilled this morning.
Most of the media pinpointed Biden as the selection last week. Why then, did Obama not send the text message until 3am Saturday? He missed Friday's news cycle, probably ticked off many on the text message waiting list by receiving a wake-up text at 3am, and it's Saturday - who is paying attention? If Biden was his selection all along, why the delay? I think Obama wanted someone else. And that someone else turned him down on Friday, sending Obama into panic mode and panic pick. (Perhaps like in fantasy baseball drafts when the guy you wanted gets picked just before you, sending you into chaos as you search for a new pick before time runs out.) Obama is campaigning on change, so he picks Biden? Obama is trying to offset his liberal policies so he picks Biden? Obama is trying to alter the electoral map, so he picks Biden? Makes no sense at all. (For the record, I still think Bayh would have been a much better pick for all the above reasons. Perhaps Bayh turned him down? A close friend of the Clintons, was he pressured to turn it down?)
Some may say Biden is to Obama what Cheney was to Bush in 2000 - gravitas. But, I think the better comparison is Dukakis-Bentsen. Bentsen was an accomplished Senator, throttled Dan Quayle in the debate - "You are no Jack Kennedy" - and was a well-respected leader, but Bentsen overshadowed Dukakis and didn't help Dukakis on the electoral map. Biden is more apt to overshadow Obama because he likes to hear himself speak.
So the pick makes little sense to me. I think Obama panicked. I hope one day the full story comes out. If this wasn't a panic pick, then Obama's campaign completely mismanaged the release of this news. Additionally, it was released that Clinton was never considered. (Even a bigger mistake to let that get out - and it makes Clinton's speech at the convention even more intriguing). The McCain Campaign must be thrilled this morning.
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Dinosaurs
Why did God create dinosaurs? I've been pondering this question lately as our house has become obsessed with the giant lizards (which may or may not be a good description I've learned - perhaps they are closer to being giant pre-birds). Dinosaurs don't fit neatly into the story of creation for a lot of people. For those who claim the earth is only 6,000 years old, they really have a difficult time with dinosaurs, especially since the last dinosaur was around close to 70 million years ago. The young earth crowd believes the earth was created in six 24-hour time periods. This literal read completely disregards science. My question to the "young earthers" would be how exactly day one through three worked since the Sun, which we track our rotation by, wasn't created until day four? But anyway…
I believe the Bible. I believe our earth is billions of years old. And I believe God created it all. How did God create? I don't know, and it doesn't much matter. Whether God created each individual species independently of others or whether He used evolution, the fact still remains that God created. Should we hold Moses accountable for not scientifically relating to the Israelites all about DNA, the universe, cell development, the periodic table, etc.? Should we be dismayed that the Bible doesn't tell us whether or not to consider Pluto(id) a planet? Of course not. It doesn't take away from the authority of Scripture. It makes us explore and question and grow our minds - these minds that God created in us.
As Grant teaches me more and more about dinosaurs, I am even more amazed at God's creativity, humor, and majesty. From the Protocerotops to the Archaeopteryx to Diplodocus to the Pachycephalasaurus, what unique, awesome creatures God made. And how cool that God has given us minds to be able to reconstruct the dino world. As I ponder why God created dinosaurs, I'm reminded of why he created me. And I'm thankful. And I'm thankful I wasn't around when the dinosaurs were - I'm not sure I would be able to outrun a Spinosaurus.
I believe the Bible. I believe our earth is billions of years old. And I believe God created it all. How did God create? I don't know, and it doesn't much matter. Whether God created each individual species independently of others or whether He used evolution, the fact still remains that God created. Should we hold Moses accountable for not scientifically relating to the Israelites all about DNA, the universe, cell development, the periodic table, etc.? Should we be dismayed that the Bible doesn't tell us whether or not to consider Pluto(id) a planet? Of course not. It doesn't take away from the authority of Scripture. It makes us explore and question and grow our minds - these minds that God created in us.
As Grant teaches me more and more about dinosaurs, I am even more amazed at God's creativity, humor, and majesty. From the Protocerotops to the Archaeopteryx to Diplodocus to the Pachycephalasaurus, what unique, awesome creatures God made. And how cool that God has given us minds to be able to reconstruct the dino world. As I ponder why God created dinosaurs, I'm reminded of why he created me. And I'm thankful. And I'm thankful I wasn't around when the dinosaurs were - I'm not sure I would be able to outrun a Spinosaurus.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
VP: Safe or Gutsy
We are approaching the VP selection time. A few weeks ago, I listed potential VPs and their pros and cons. Now that we are nearing the selections, here are my "safe" picks and "gutsy" picks. "Safe" means the selection won't be a detriment to the campaign. It would maintain the status quo of the election, bringing little risk. The "gutsy" pick, if it worked, would ensure victory, but if it didn't, it would adversely affect the campaign in such a way that could cause a huge defeat.
For Obama:
Safe Pick: Sen. Evan Bayh, Indiana. He is my top choice for Obama. Bayh was a Clinton supporter, he's well-liked in Indiana , he has some foreign policy experience as well as governing experience, he's a moderate on many issues. I really think Bayh would be the best choice. In fact, I think he would have been the best choice for the presidential nomination among Democrats, however, Iraq hurt him. He was pro-Iraq war and is more conservative than Obama on most issues; however, as frequently as Obama seems to be amending his positions, it may not be long before he agrees with Bayh on most issues - at least for a while anyway. Bayh's support of the Iraq war may cost him the nomination.
Gutsy Pick: Gov. Tim Kaine, Virginia. Kaine has little experience, is not well known outside of Virginia, and doesn't have near the charisma that Obama has, but if he were selected, he would strengthen the "outside of Washington" aspect of the ticket as well as help bring in Catholic voters (Kaine is Catholic) and Hispanic voters (he speaks fluent Spanish). If Kaine could also deliver Virginia to the Democratic column, Obama would be the next president. However, if experience and foreign policy become major issues, Obama/Kaine would have little to offer and may lose big.
My pick: Bayh.
For McCain
Safe Pick: Gov. Tim Pawlenty, Minnesota. I find this an incredibly boring, but safe pick. Pawlenty re-affirms McCain's desire to reach independents and broaden the Republican party without flash or pizazz that could get the candidate in trouble (except for some of his jokes.) Pawlenty may not be able to deliver Minnesota to the Republicans, but he would shore up other Midwest states, I believe, and give McCain a decent shot at winning. Incredibly safe pick.
Gutsy Pick: Gov. Sarah Palin, Alaska. Strong Pro-Life, Strong Family Values, Anti-Corruption, Reformer, Outsider. If Palin were McCain's VP, she could help bring in upset Clinton supporters while also exciting the conservative base. McCain could win in a landslide if Palin is embraced by the public. The risk - she's governor of Alaska and little known as to how she would perform on the national stage. She runs the risk of being Quayled. Also, with McCain's age, would she be seen by the public as ready to be president? A "safer-gutsy" pick would be Kay Bailey Hutchison. While she could appeal to the Clinton supporter, I'm not sure she would excite the conservative base as much as Palin. And she's not the most exciting person to listen to either.
My Pick: Palin
For Obama:
Safe Pick: Sen. Evan Bayh, Indiana. He is my top choice for Obama. Bayh was a Clinton supporter, he's well-liked in Indiana , he has some foreign policy experience as well as governing experience, he's a moderate on many issues. I really think Bayh would be the best choice. In fact, I think he would have been the best choice for the presidential nomination among Democrats, however, Iraq hurt him. He was pro-Iraq war and is more conservative than Obama on most issues; however, as frequently as Obama seems to be amending his positions, it may not be long before he agrees with Bayh on most issues - at least for a while anyway. Bayh's support of the Iraq war may cost him the nomination.
Gutsy Pick: Gov. Tim Kaine, Virginia. Kaine has little experience, is not well known outside of Virginia, and doesn't have near the charisma that Obama has, but if he were selected, he would strengthen the "outside of Washington" aspect of the ticket as well as help bring in Catholic voters (Kaine is Catholic) and Hispanic voters (he speaks fluent Spanish). If Kaine could also deliver Virginia to the Democratic column, Obama would be the next president. However, if experience and foreign policy become major issues, Obama/Kaine would have little to offer and may lose big.
My pick: Bayh.
For McCain
Safe Pick: Gov. Tim Pawlenty, Minnesota. I find this an incredibly boring, but safe pick. Pawlenty re-affirms McCain's desire to reach independents and broaden the Republican party without flash or pizazz that could get the candidate in trouble (except for some of his jokes.) Pawlenty may not be able to deliver Minnesota to the Republicans, but he would shore up other Midwest states, I believe, and give McCain a decent shot at winning. Incredibly safe pick.
Gutsy Pick: Gov. Sarah Palin, Alaska. Strong Pro-Life, Strong Family Values, Anti-Corruption, Reformer, Outsider. If Palin were McCain's VP, she could help bring in upset Clinton supporters while also exciting the conservative base. McCain could win in a landslide if Palin is embraced by the public. The risk - she's governor of Alaska and little known as to how she would perform on the national stage. She runs the risk of being Quayled. Also, with McCain's age, would she be seen by the public as ready to be president? A "safer-gutsy" pick would be Kay Bailey Hutchison. While she could appeal to the Clinton supporter, I'm not sure she would excite the conservative base as much as Palin. And she's not the most exciting person to listen to either.
My Pick: Palin
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Good Advice
This is a random assortment of advice given to me over the years. While most of this advice was given to me as a minister, I think it fits well with whatever profession one is involved. Here are a few sayings that have stuck with me (I am giving credit to the one who gave me the advice):
"To be on time is to be late; to be early is to be on time." - John Hume
"When I'm talking and you're talking - nobody's listening!" - Randy Hall
On Revelation: "I'm not on the planning committee; I'm on the preparation committee." - Dr. Dominy
On tough theological issues that no one really knows the answer to: "I reserve my right to change my mind when I get to heaven." - Dr. Dominy
On hospital visits: "Be brief, be bright, be gone." - Pappaw
"Don't be so heavenly bound that you're no earthly good." - Dr. Wade
"Babylonians 4:12 - No one can please anyone all the time." - Dr. Winfred Moore
"Don't hug anyone over 7 or under 70." - Dr. Winfred Moore
And my favorite:
"Keep your hands of the women and off the money - and tell the truth." - Dr. Wade
"To be on time is to be late; to be early is to be on time." - John Hume
"When I'm talking and you're talking - nobody's listening!" - Randy Hall
On Revelation: "I'm not on the planning committee; I'm on the preparation committee." - Dr. Dominy
On tough theological issues that no one really knows the answer to: "I reserve my right to change my mind when I get to heaven." - Dr. Dominy
On hospital visits: "Be brief, be bright, be gone." - Pappaw
"Don't be so heavenly bound that you're no earthly good." - Dr. Wade
"Babylonians 4:12 - No one can please anyone all the time." - Dr. Winfred Moore
"Don't hug anyone over 7 or under 70." - Dr. Winfred Moore
And my favorite:
"Keep your hands of the women and off the money - and tell the truth." - Dr. Wade
Monday, July 07, 2008
Fatherhood Success
I oftentimes wonder how effective a father I am to my children. Am I raising them up in the way they should go? Are they learning how to act, how to treat others, etc? Am I a godly example for them? I don't know the answers to these questions, and I guess I won't until much later in life, long after I can do anything to correct my mistakes. But I am encouraged by one influence I have made with Grant - he loves baseball!
On Saturday afternoons, FOX has its MLB game of the week. Since we don't have cable, and since only 40 Ranger games are on regular TV, and most of those are at night, Saturday afternoon has become a good time for us to watch baseball. But let me back up a second. We are able from time to time to go to a Ranger game. Last year, whenever Grant and I would go, he would be more excited about the jumbo-tron and gimmicks than the game itself. He loved how the "H" in "Southwest" would light up whenever anyone got a hit, and of course, he loved the occasional fireworks after a homerun. But as far as the game itself, he really didn't care all that much. Toward the end of last season, he began to catch on a little more, perhaps from playing T-ball and watching more games with me. But this summer, baseball has captured Grant's attention. Like I said, we watch the FOX game of the week. Usually, this involves the Yankees, Red Sox, or Cubs. So we choose a team to root for and go from there. Grant has quickly learned the rules: always cheer for the Rangers, always cheer against the Yankees. Last week, the Red Sox were playing the Yankees. He kept me up to date on the game. As we were watching, he would say "Oh man! The Yankees got a hit. I wish they would have gotten out!" and "Yes, he struck him out!" We discussed why Giambi is a cheater and why we don't like the Yankees. Anyway, the last two weeks, the Yankees have won, much to our displeasure. In fact, the week before we also watched the Cubs play the White Sox. We pulled for the Cubs and they lost as well. We are not having much luck, unless, as Grant reminded me, we go to the Ranger game - the Rangers have won both times we have gone this year. So he thinks we should go again.
Over the weekend, we watched Wimbledon as well (uncle Ben would be happy). I haven't kept up with tennis since Sampras and Agassi, so we decided to pull for Federer. He lost, but it was still fun to see Grant get excited about tennis as well. (Tennis by the way is much more difficult to explain scoring wise to a 5 year old.) But when the epic match was over, we flipped over to the Ranger game, which was actually on regular TV. It was in the 8th inning. Grant said, "I wish it was just the 2nd so we could watch the whole game." I am smiling. I don’t know how good a job I am doing as a father, but I am so happy that Grant loves baseball. And I am even happier that he loves to watch it with me.
On Saturday afternoons, FOX has its MLB game of the week. Since we don't have cable, and since only 40 Ranger games are on regular TV, and most of those are at night, Saturday afternoon has become a good time for us to watch baseball. But let me back up a second. We are able from time to time to go to a Ranger game. Last year, whenever Grant and I would go, he would be more excited about the jumbo-tron and gimmicks than the game itself. He loved how the "H" in "Southwest" would light up whenever anyone got a hit, and of course, he loved the occasional fireworks after a homerun. But as far as the game itself, he really didn't care all that much. Toward the end of last season, he began to catch on a little more, perhaps from playing T-ball and watching more games with me. But this summer, baseball has captured Grant's attention. Like I said, we watch the FOX game of the week. Usually, this involves the Yankees, Red Sox, or Cubs. So we choose a team to root for and go from there. Grant has quickly learned the rules: always cheer for the Rangers, always cheer against the Yankees. Last week, the Red Sox were playing the Yankees. He kept me up to date on the game. As we were watching, he would say "Oh man! The Yankees got a hit. I wish they would have gotten out!" and "Yes, he struck him out!" We discussed why Giambi is a cheater and why we don't like the Yankees. Anyway, the last two weeks, the Yankees have won, much to our displeasure. In fact, the week before we also watched the Cubs play the White Sox. We pulled for the Cubs and they lost as well. We are not having much luck, unless, as Grant reminded me, we go to the Ranger game - the Rangers have won both times we have gone this year. So he thinks we should go again.
Over the weekend, we watched Wimbledon as well (uncle Ben would be happy). I haven't kept up with tennis since Sampras and Agassi, so we decided to pull for Federer. He lost, but it was still fun to see Grant get excited about tennis as well. (Tennis by the way is much more difficult to explain scoring wise to a 5 year old.) But when the epic match was over, we flipped over to the Ranger game, which was actually on regular TV. It was in the 8th inning. Grant said, "I wish it was just the 2nd so we could watch the whole game." I am smiling. I don’t know how good a job I am doing as a father, but I am so happy that Grant loves baseball. And I am even happier that he loves to watch it with me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)