Democrat Convention Night Two: Your Reactions…
Post your reactions to tonight’s Democrat Convention coverage here, while I wait on hold for Verizon to address my flaky internet. Yup…I replaced the router but that isn’t the only thing wrong. I got DSL line noise…in fact I got voice line noise. My internet was down until just a few minutes ago in fact…
September 5, 2012 at 6:53 pm
I had to actually work hard today and didn’t have a single moment to check the news. Once freed…. Wow – what a colossal cluster-fluke this convention appears to have become.
September 5, 2012 at 6:57 pm
My cable internet modem was down once last year for almost 20 minutes straight.
September 5, 2012 at 6:57 pm
Idn’t it great?
September 5, 2012 at 7:00 pm
Message from day 2 of the Democratic convention:
We hate God & Israel but love abortions. If the media wasn’t so in the tank for Democrats they would point out how extreme it is to boo God & Israel while applauding Planned Parenthood.
September 5, 2012 at 7:00 pm
Is Fluke going to speak, or have the Dems had enough of their left-wing screech fest?
September 5, 2012 at 7:01 pm
Next up: Fauxchahontas, the Pretendian.
September 5, 2012 at 7:03 pm
Good God, they put her in prime-time. That’s a classic.
September 5, 2012 at 7:06 pm
Here’s a hint: The kind of people who would vote for Obama are the kind of people who like Ms. Fluke. I realize this is hard for conservatives to understand.
September 5, 2012 at 7:06 pm
@kirstenpowers10
Is Sandra Fluke talking about Saudi Arabia or the United States? Women are “silenced”? Please.
September 5, 2012 at 7:08 pm
Thank God, she’s finally been “silenced”. I’m sure that’ll draw them tens of votes.
September 5, 2012 at 7:10 pm
Kirsten Powers is on fire on Twitter,. I realize she isn’t a legitimate liberal, because she actually stands up for women and stuff.
September 5, 2012 at 7:18 pm
You have to be a left-wing nut to believe having Sandra Fluke speak would be a good thing for encouraging others to your side. Eh, it’s there convention.
September 5, 2012 at 7:22 pm
I think you’re wrong, Joe. I think the kind of people who would BLINDLY vote for Obama are the kind of people who like Sandra Fluke. It’d be like having Ted Nugent speak at the Republican convention.
September 5, 2012 at 7:22 pm
I’d have to be a left-wing nut to be the only liberal discussing the Democratic National Convention with a bunch of conservatives on a cable news blog. Peace out.
September 5, 2012 at 7:36 pm
There’s a place for the Ted Nugents and Sandra Flukes to speak at the national political conventions if any of the party faithful care to hear them. Prolly not during prime time, though.
September 5, 2012 at 7:42 pm
Back in his day with the turn of the century so close, “Don’t Stop Thinking About Tomorrow” was a chorus hard not to join in. Today with Obama, though, the song chorus is more “Yesterday’s Gone, Yesterday’s Gone, Don’t You Look Back.”
September 5, 2012 at 7:44 pm
Clinton’s two big examples of Democrats and Republicans working together is … Los Angeles and Chicago?!? There’s probably more Republicans on this board than in those two cities.
September 5, 2012 at 7:55 pm
“Noone could have repaired the damage done in 4 years”.
Reagan did.
September 5, 2012 at 8:00 pm
“Obama cut your gas bill by half” — If Politifact doesn’t go to town on that, they should be forced to return the Pulitzer.
September 5, 2012 at 8:05 pm
“And in conclusion…” sometime before midnight I hope.
September 5, 2012 at 8:11 pm
“I don’t know what those families are going to do”
Get a job?
September 5, 2012 at 8:16 pm
I can’t blame Clinton for stumbling over the “Obama is the world’s biggest debt cutter” section: it’s hard to swallow for us too.
September 5, 2012 at 8:59 pm
So, you guys think Bill Clinton is nailing Sandra Fluke right now? Or did he get some before the evening session?
September 5, 2012 at 8:59 pm
Savefarris, don’t you agree that Clinton should be sympathetic to people with swallowing problems? After all, if Monica L. could’ve swallowed, he wouldn’t have been impeached.
September 5, 2012 at 9:57 pm
Spud should ban your useless a$$.
September 5, 2012 at 10:10 pm
“Obama had seen the language prior to the convention, a campaign source said, but did not seek to change it until after Republicans jumped on the omissions of God and Jerusalem late Wednesday. And even then, it had to be forced through a convention hall full of delegates who nearly shouted down the change.”
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0912/80801.html?hp=f1
September 5, 2012 at 10:20 pm
“Seen it” could simply mean that he was shown a copy and tossed it aside with barely a glance. On the other hand, there should be people tasked to properly monitor this stuff and eliminate the dumb stuff. If a presidential candidate can’t organise the level of help necessary to run a convention then we should expect that person would fall short at running this country.
September 5, 2012 at 11:08 pm
If anyone is intimately acquainted with useless, it’s Joey!
September 5, 2012 at 11:27 pm
While a party platform may generally convey its members’ consensus on a few chosen topics, no one seriously tries to follow or even pay any attention to it after the election. Might be smarter to abandon them in the future.
September 6, 2012 at 7:43 am
Liberal tolerance.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/daily-show-proves-democrats-are-more-tolerant-i-would-never-call-a-redneck-a-name/
I guess you can say anything on television, now.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/on-gma-elizabeth-vargas-asks-guests-to-explain-what-teabagging-is/
September 6, 2012 at 7:59 am
Stolen from Iowahawk:
“Government” is just a word for things we do together.
“Corporation” is just a word for things we do together voluntarily.
September 6, 2012 at 8:20 am
Uhh..that phrase was initially used by the Tea Party movement before they discovered its “street” meaning. You’d think a journalist might be vaguely aware of this, and have done a little Googling already.
September 6, 2012 at 9:59 am
As Al correctly points out (yes, it’s correct because I agree with it), party platforms are debated for a week, written, then put on a shelf where they collect dust for the next four years.
However, they are a window into what the party faithful think and where they’re coming from ideologically. That’s not unimportant.
After all, we don’t just elect a President; we elect a President and folks like those that make the platform since many of them will be holding positions in the Administration.
Let’s face it; both parties have some good people with some very hardline views that aren’t mainstream. E.g., abortion, religion in the public square, Israel….
And we’re “electing” some of them even if the guy at the top of the ticket may disagree with their views.
September 6, 2012 at 10:20 am
Platforms are stupid. They’re documents voted on by hardline partisans, then immediately ignored by everyone after the convention. The only significance they’ve provided this year is to make both presidential candidates look like idiots.
In other news:
Roger Ebert@ebertchicago
Startling article from The American Conservative magazine about the Elite Rich seceding from America. http://dld.bz/bKV8e
September 6, 2012 at 11:16 am
The platforms, or more accurately planks in them, aren’t important – candidates can ignore them. But the people who write the platforms are important – candidates can’t ignore them.
Especially in a 50/50 election/country.
September 6, 2012 at 11:22 am
The DNC is just a smooth-oiled machine this week: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/09/steelworker-featured-at-dnc-didnt-work-for-bain/
September 6, 2012 at 1:22 pm
I love how the partisan tweets shift so smoothly from “Obama can’t fill the stadium” to “Them Dems is gettin’ wet, ain’t they?”
September 6, 2012 at 3:02 pm
Charles K.:
Worst speech:
Sandra Fluke. Angry, humorless and entitled. Not a good combination. Her cause? Free contraception. Translation: A Georgetown law school grad like her (average private-sector starting salary: $160,000) demands that her birth control be paid for by everyone else (median household income: $51,000).
Otherwise, women are denied access to contraception, as if gendarmes are to be posted at every pharmacy in America to turn women away. This, I gathered, is the new civil rights issue of our time.
September 6, 2012 at 3:29 pm
This is so perfect.
photo/1
September 6, 2012 at 3:42 pm
I understand Fluke’s anger, and she’s right that Romney whiffed on pushing back when Rush was being a psycho for a week, but it was a terrible speech. The martyr thing wore old quickly, and overshadowed her message. She wasn’t ready for primetime. Fortunately, none of the networks carried it.
September 6, 2012 at 3:56 pm
She and Claire McCaskill should be sending Rush Limbaugh Christmas cards. The difference is, McCaskill has enough sense to know it and laugh about it. Standing in front of the DNC and screeching about being “silenced” is not a good look.
September 6, 2012 at 4:07 pm
Technically, it was “trying to be silenced”, but it didn’t make any sense. It was the Republicans on the health care committee who resisted having a liberal woman testify. Rush is a media figure spouting obscenities, which he – as long as he doesn’t cross FCC guidelines – has a right to do. And if he was trying to silence her, he did it wrong..
September 6, 2012 at 4:09 pm
And it seems that the FCC no longer has any guidelines, as the previous tea-related discussion would indicate.
September 6, 2012 at 4:16 pm
I have no clue what the FCC does anymore. As far as I can tell..nothing.
September 6, 2012 at 4:33 pm
Joe, speaking of Sandra Fluke, a guest on NOW’s panel this morning (Mark Leibovitch? Never heard of him.) actually said that Fluke’s speech was a plus for the Dems because she appealed to Catholic women because she goes to Georgetown U. What??? First of all, Fluke is not Catholic. And I don’t think most Catholic women expect Catholic colleges and universities to pay for students’ birth control. Fluke should have attended a secular institution.
P.S. Love your name, Joe.
September 6, 2012 at 4:38 pm
^Well, they ARE a part of the Executive Branch…
September 6, 2012 at 5:07 pm
P.S. Love your name, Joe.
(gulp) Thanks!
September 6, 2012 at 5:44 pm
Good grief!
I wrote a stellar (IMO) observation about Erick Erickson’s very factual observations, and it was too vulgar to get past moderation. Anyway, Erick was right; the libs wrong, as usual:
http://blog.sfgate.com/nov05election/2012/09/06/thousands-sign-petition-calling-on-cnn-to-fire-contributor-over-tweet/