Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Bubba Stands and Delivers

Bill Clinton

Former President Bill Clinton speaks at the Democratic National Convention Wednesday night. Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images

DENVER -- Give former President Bill Clinton this: he has a sense of the moment.

To our eye, Clinton spun out a masterwork in the 20 or so minutes he spoke last night at the Democratic National Convention -- vouching for Barack Obama's readiness to be president, honoring the campaign of his wife, and broadly dismissing the idea of a John McCain presidency.

Among the highlights of Clinton's virtuoso performance:

• "Hillary told us in no uncertain terms that she'll do everything she can to elect Barack Obama. That makes two of us. Actually that makes 18 million of us -- because, like Hillary, I want all of you who supported her to vote for Barack Obama in November."

• "Barack Obama is ready to lead America and restore American leadership in the world. Ready to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. Barack Obama is ready to be President of the United States."

• "People the world over have always been more impressed by the power of our example than by the example of our power."

To our mind, Clinton's speech was equal parts passion and policy and sent a strong and unmistakable signal to those who supported his wife's candidacy that now was the time to fall in line.

Agree? Disagree? The comments section is open for business -- all night long.

By Chris Cillizza  |  August 28, 2008; 12:22 AM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2008  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Twittering the Convention
Next: Convention Cheat Sheet: Unity!

Comments

President Clinton is one of the best speakers I have ever seen.
YET, HE STILL COULDN'T GIVE AMERICANS EXAMPLES OF SEN. BO EXPERIENCE, ABILITIES, AND HONESTY. INSTEAD, HE OFFERED AMERICANS EXCUSES THAT EXPERIENCE, ABILITIES AND HONESTY ARE UNNECESSARY:

1) He implicitly said that Sen. Biden will cover for Sen. BO inexperience, inability and dishonesty.

2) He said that he lacked experience, yet he was a great president; therefore, Sen. BO would also be a good president without experience, abilities, and honesty.( I believed that Pres. C was a great economic president, but he massed up on foreign dealings. For example: A) Killing of Amer. Soldiers in Africa, B) Terrorism C) Kosovo war [ Sen. McCain had to advise Pres. C before Pres. C was able to resolve this war] D) Etc., Etc.).

Obviously, without experience, abilities, and honesty, Sen. BO promises to Americans is useless.

Posted by: Mr. Mango | August 28, 2008 8:47 PM | Report abuse

DDAWD you left out chaos45i. Don't tell us it was an oversight on your part DDAWD. I've seen posts where he makes you look stupid for defending Obama's racism against hispanics. It has nothing to do with him being clever he is just on the right side of the argument. Google Chaos45i and Obama being racist against hispanics in Illinois.

Posted by: Amy Evan | August 28, 2008 4:55 PM | Report abuse

Bill said what he had to say.
Choice is clear.Do you want a real patriot with abundant experience or an empty suite with questionable loyalty to this great country?
Do we really care who among these two is democrat?

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 3:58 PM | Report abuse

"In regard to the thread about racism,it seems there is media consensus that Obama be referred to as "African American". Little ink is used on the idea that Obama is a "Bi-racial American". Is this laziness?"

Perhaps convenience? I am certain that most people that have been paying attention to the election are at least a little familiar with Obama's background. He doesn't exactly make a secret of his Kenyan father, white mother, and white maternal grandparents.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 28, 2008 3:24 PM | Report abuse

The whole point of pursuing the fulfillment, however imperfect, of Dr. King's dream is that we should see Obama, McCain, Clinton, Bush, and all the reat of our people as Americans, unqualified and unmodified by racial distinctions.

Barack Obama is an American.

The Clintons are Americans.

McCain and Bush are, whatever their failings, Americans.

Let's get past that non-issue, and get down to examining the content of their character, shall we?

Posted by: Ken in Dallas | August 28, 2008 2:44 PM | Report abuse

In regard to the thread about racism,it seems there is media consensus that Obama be referred to as "African American". Little ink is used on the idea that Obama is a "Bi-racial American". Is this laziness? Is it the fact that many "see" Obama as black, and black only? If you must give a person a cultural label I feel it is important that it be accurate. Somehow I feel compelled to admit that I come from a family of people who are sometimes called African Americans, Bi-racial Americans,Multi-racial Americans, Arab Americans, and White Americans, and other names. But I really shouldn't have to mention my own background. It strikes me as overly political when the media, and Obama campaign, repeatedly disavow a significant part of Barack's heritage by referring to him as an "African American". There was a Newsweek article on Obama's heritage that was odd in this way. It featured enormous photos of his African father and African grandmother along with a microscopic photo of Obama's mother's parents. His European American grandparents were a young couple who raised him in Hawaii from ages 10-18 and put him through Punaho private school. Our local newspaper, the San Francisco Chronicle always calls him black, or the "First African American Presidential Nominee", as if his mother, and her family, did not exist.I believe that if you must reference someone's race, ethnicity or history, it ought to be presented factually and not spun. To me what is historic is that Barack Obama comes from a family that is both international and multi-ethnic.

Posted by: anydemwilldo | August 28, 2008 2:36 PM | Report abuse

Online forums are taken over and dominated by DailyKos and other netroots whose aim is to attack contrarian posters and disrupt them.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 2:00 PM | Report abuse

>>DDAWD wrote: "Well, as far as racist posts go, the Shaniqua posts are so very over the top that it comes across as a joke. Quite different from the racist rantings of 37+o or aspergirl that are more representative of actual insidious racism that does more harm than any Shaniqua post."

DDAWD, my posts only seem racist to you because you have a paranoid, simplistic, black liberation theology world view. That and a very low I.Q.

The various names with which you have attacked me today on this board aren't very creative, either. All you have accomplished is created an ugly and stupid board.

Clinton is right. The Obama camp has the flavor of Chicago street thugs. Perhaps you are unaware of how your own behavior, including accusations of racism against those who express issue opinions, reflects a black on white racism that is a kind of ghetto mentality.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 1:57 PM | Report abuse

Kucinich did a better job at listing the failings of the Bush/McCain approach, albeit a little more uh...animated.

Why no coverage AT ALL in any MSM of his fiery speech?

Posted by: Dave | August 28, 2008 1:55 PM | Report abuse

"They should delete posts that have "shaniqua" in it. The Post should set that up for their filter."

Well, as far as racist posts go, the Shaniqua posts are so very over the top that it comes across as a joke. Quite different from the racist rantings of 37+o or aspergirl that are more representative of actual insidious racism that does more harm than any Shaniqua post.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 28, 2008 1:47 PM | Report abuse

"Everybody I have spoken to today - whether Republican or Democrat- was impressed by the Clintons."

The Clintons are a pair of the most brilliant, expert and constructive political leaders of our era. It not only impoverishes the Obamas to ignore them or try to run against them as part of some monolithic white "establishment" "old politics", but it impoverishes the black community when it turns its back on the Clintons.

And we'd all be better off if the Obamas took up the Clinton legacy, befriended the Clintons and brought them into their circle as mentors and advisors. The Clintons proved that they were on the Obama's side. The Obamas should weigh in on Bill, ask him to stay through Friday, and really seek mentorship from the Clintons.

If there were true unity, centrists like myself would like the Obamas more. I'm not sure I'd vote for such an inexperienced president who is so cynical and political and rhetorical (bad combination). But I'd be less horrified at the prospect of Obama's presidency if he did take the Clintons into his inner circle.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 1:41 PM | Report abuse

It’s quite clear that a lot of Republicans here are masquerading as Clinton-supporters to bash Obama. Basically, anyone who truly supports the Clintons are insulting them and everything they stand for by refusing to be as magnanimous as they are. If you believe the Clintons, you will rise above spite and vote for Obama and the Dems this November.

The GOP know they cannot match Obama on his message of change and hope, so the only thing they can do is resort to fear and insults and pettiness. They want Americans to be very, very afraid of what Obama might do, but what America should be afraid of is what the GOP has already done. They’ve had their 8 years and they’ve run the country into the ground. Foreign policy is a mess with a misbegotten and mismanaged trillion dollar war. Domestically, the economy is in tatters with home prices dropping and food and energy costs soaring. The national debt increased nearly $3 trillion under Republicans, who should be relabeled the party of fiscal insanity. How much will McCain, who voted 90% of the time with Bush change things? The GOP can peddle fear, but the fear you feel should be of them.

Posted by: zvelf | August 28, 2008 1:40 PM | Report abuse

"The Republican National Committee (RNC) restarted the countdown clock since Joe Biden's last gaffe on August 27, 2008, at 10:49:52 p.m. MDT"
******************************************
Sure, let the Republicans keep on laughing - all the way to jail - while we help the Democrats rebuild OUR country!!

Posted by: Sheridan1 | August 28, 2008 1:39 PM | Report abuse

Everybody I have spoken to today - whether Republican or Democrat- was impressed by the Clintons. What a comparison to the Republicans, especially Bush, with his difficulty in pronouncing words or just stumbling over them. So glad he will soon be off the scene and out of our minds except for the horrors he has created for all of us from the eonomy to world-wide issues - the saddest being our dislike in the world!! Did he need glasses when he looked into the eyes of Putin or was that somthing else!! With God's help and the good-will and stamina of the American people we will survive!

Posted by: Rose Schisler | August 28, 2008 1:31 PM | Report abuse

This week we saw 3 of the best orators of our time - Bill Clinton, Hillary CLinton, and Barack Obama. We also heard the best ideas for ALL American people. We know that a Republican Presidency will keep the pain the same with McCain.
It's time for McCain's campaign to come up with something to say on the ISSUES - they can't just keep attacking Obama on his celebrity...let's face it, he IS a celebrity, but with substance. McCain needs to show us some 21st Century substance or why should he be President?? So that we can become more war-like, less diplomatic, take our dollar down even further, and DRILL DRILL DRILL instead of taxing the oil companies - it's all so ridiculous that anyone would want to be a Republican this year...unless you're rich. And according to McCain that's...5 million a year?
I would like to see ANY Republican at their convention make the kind of real connection with their speech as Bill Clinton, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama has given this week. And these word ring TRUE. This is not a bunch of slogans - these people are what our country needs NOW.
Obama/Biden '08!

Posted by: CrazyMe | August 28, 2008 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Everybody I have spoken to today - whether Republican or Democrat- was impressed by the Clintons. What a comparison to the Republicans, especially Bush, with his difficulty in pronouncing words or just stumbling over them. So glad he will soon be off the scene and out of our minds except for the horrors he has created for all of us from the eonomy to world-wide issues - the saddest being our dislike in the world!! Did he need glasses when he looked into the eyes of Putin or was that somthing else!! With God's help and the good-will and stamina of the American people we will survive!

Posted by: Rose Schisler | August 28, 2008 1:30 PM | Report abuse

When I was hearing Spike Lee last night mouthfouling President Clinton, I could not help but think of those black kids trying to pick up white chicks that insist and insist and insist and insist and insist and insist and being rejected after throwing all what they got, they spit "racist" to the girl. What else is left to the girl than give it up? Then, after leaving the kitchen full of bones, these fed kids accuse “racism”. Don’t ‘ey realize how self-defeating is this?

I mean, blacks got immense goods from Clinton, and yet accuse him of racism!@#? Hello?? Is that all they got? I don't believe it. They can do better than that.
I imagine how bitter Clinton must feel, and still, to stand up and deliver his last night speech for Obama,... wow! Blacks should learn how to team-behave and keep whine off.

What is at times exhilarating to me is to think of all these wonderful speeches of late as a whole, and be thankful (sort of, of course) to the damnation of the last years of Republican rule. It is like it generated a rebirth of America, from the depths of mischief and hellion Republican deaths. Is like the Phoenix rising out in competition into which politician is better wording this historical moment. Is like to counteract Bushs’ wintry wither and atrophy, intellectual spring flowers blossom up.
Because Clinton’s speech was a historical masterpiece. As was Obama’s speech on race. Biden’s and Hillary’s were they good too.

Comparing McCain’s and Obama’s proposals too, is like comparing a cement brick with Michelangelo’s David, don’t ya think?

Posted by: SouthStar | August 28, 2008 1:27 PM | Report abuse

>>Ken in Dallas wrote: "CNN's Christina Romans' supposed "fact check" was a one-sided half analysis worthy of the Fox Views Network. She actually set out to find a way to blame the ongoing banking crisis on Bill Clinton, by way of banking deregulation measures he signed as President. Her rationale was that by signing banking deregulation measures, Clinton set up conditions that enabled the housing bubble to occur. This was the whole of her analysis."

Clinton was wrong with that banking deregulation. It's was a disaster for our economy. There was a conflict of approaches between Reich and Rubin. I only have thumbnail info about the Reich-Rubin disagreement, but Reich was more of an opinion to foster public works and growth via jobs and investment in infrastructure. Rubin wanted to create more financial-banking conditions for growth. Clinton went with Rubin, which was a big mistake. Hillary Clinton has since repudiated her husband's action, which is the right but hard position to take.

Of course, Clinton's deregulation of banking/finance has to be put in Congress. I'm sure that when he signed that into law, he didn't envision such an almost criminally negligent Bush Administration that not only ignored the explosive growth of ponzi-scheme mortgage-backed derivative products, conflict of interest analyst ratings that overrated these products, Alan Greenspans printing-press monetary policy at the Federal Reserve and sheer deliberate ignorance of growing mortgage fraud. The Bush Administration even blocked states like Georgia from passing its own banking and finance laws to protect itself from the growing mortgage fraud and banking products fraud in the past few years. While the rate of mortgage and sub-prime lending fraud grew, the Bush Administration not only didn't grow its Justice Dept. resources to match the growth, but CUT resources to that kind of crime by 50% in recent years. The SEC has been worse than inert as far as this massive securities debacle is concerned.

If suing a president for malfeasant negligence or malpractice were possible, the Bush Administration could be hauled into court just on its banking, finance and mortgage-backed derivative products offenses alone.

Bill Clinton's banking and finance deregulation was wrong, as Hillary Clinton acknowledged as she came out this year and took that position. But it was a dramatically bad move mainly because of how Bush & Greenspan have allowed the exploitation of the vulnerabilities created by Clinton's deregulation to run rampant.

There's no way Clinton could have anticipated the depth of the incompetent and negligently malfeasant Administration that George Bush put in place.

Even so, in retrospect, the Reich approach was best. We should have been investing in infrastructure, public works and building a better fundamentals economy, instead of a paper-and-finance schemes one.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 1:24 PM | Report abuse

CC do you have to refer to the former president as "Bubba" ?

Posted by: Echo21 | August 28, 2008 1:20 PM | Report abuse

I thought Bill was amazing last night. He hit all the right notes, was generous with his praise of Obama and Hillary, and was almost (dare I say it) humble. Way to go, Bill. My faith in the Clintons as team players has been restored.

Posted by: Apa | August 28, 2008 1:18 PM | Report abuse

On 'fact checking Bill Clinton' at CNN:

CNN's Christina Romans' supposed "fact check" was a one-sided half analysis worthy of the Fox Views Network. She actually set out to find a way to blame the ongoing banking crisis on Bill Clinton, by way of banking deregulation measures he signed as President. Her rationale was that by signing banking deregulation measures, Clinton set up conditions that enabled the housing bubble
to occur. This was the whole of her analysis.

Clinton signed bills that removed some banking safeguards, but those measures were written and passed by the Republican Congress of the time, and the President can only sign or veto what Congress hands him. It's an awkward system, but without separation of powers, democracy quickly degenerates into oligarchy, so maybe we'd better just learn it and deal with the way it works.

Romans' analysis neglected to mention the California power crisis in August 2000, which triggered the big capital move from technology to energy and directly precipitated the dotcom bust. She forgot about the fact that the Bush administration, supposed supply-side believers, resorted to excessive Keynesian monetary measures when they got worried about the economy in the first Bush term, which actually drove bankers to reap the big interest rate spreads and led them to ignore their risk-management standards.

The Enron shenanigans that manufactured the California power crisis of 2000 were criminal acts, perpetrated by industry colleagues and personal friends of George W. Bush, not Bill Clinton. Greenspan's excesses occurred on Bush's watch, not Clinton's.

Fact check that, CNN.

Incidentally, one reason this post is on WaPo instead of CNN's own political ticker is that CNN blog "moderators" select and publish posts that incite emotionalism and deliberately reject posts that pose reasoned arguments and contribute to meaningful debate. At this rate, they're going to need to change their name to something with a "P" in the middle.

Posted by: Ken in Dallas | August 28, 2008 1:10 PM | Report abuse

CBrailey, you couldn't be more wrong about the polls. Young people, lower income, minorities, mostly people in the age group you mention, have cell phones, not landlines, and therefore are unable to take part in a phone poll. I call them "the ring-tone majority", and they vote overwhelmingly Democratic. Plus, they have been galvanized and motivated this year, more than any other election cycle. Yet the MSM ignores them and cites the landline polls like they descended from above. The GOP is in for a rude awakening if they ignore this vital and huge constituency. The WaPo politics chatters ignored my question about this until---
Check out monday's UWIRE discussion,on the WaPo site, and you will see exactly what I mean. And yes, I am the 48 year old Canadian...

Posted by: katem1 | August 28, 2008 12:54 PM | Report abuse

Great speech from Bill, Hill, Joe, Ted, Jimmy, Michelle and frankly, most of the other Democrats in Denver.

That's because I watch the convention unfiltered on C-SPAN. I will check out the Republicants next week on C-SPAN, while also seeing how "rough" the MSM go on them. I suspect they won't.

Posted by: tony the pitiful copywriter | August 28, 2008 12:37 PM | Report abuse

>>Anonymous wrote: "Once again Assgirl throws around insults to other people while trying to act like she is above it all. HYPOCRITE!!! Someone thinks they are better than everyone."

You like to call Republicans "trolls" but you come on here with no real interest in anything except to argue with others and promote your candidate as if this were a campaign-paid website that belongs to your candidate and not the Post. You're the one acting like a troll. It's not your right to force someone into arguing with you when they don't want to.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 12:29 PM | Report abuse

They should delete posts that have "shaniqua" in it. The Post should set that up for their filter.


1. shaniqua
(n.) a common name used to mock/describe a Black woman from the inner city...this name would include all of the stereotypes: long fake braids, big butt, ghetto voice
2. shaniqua
A steoreotypical name for young women living in the hood or ghetto.The common Shaniqua has a weave that is so cheap it looks like plastic,or very long thick braids.She wear extremely tight and short clothing topped of with ridiculously lond heels.
Other attributes include:long nails,husky/shrill iritating voice,4 children with different fathers.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 12:24 PM | Report abuse

Bill brought it back last night. Good for him.

Posted by: sugardaddy | August 28, 2008 12:22 PM | Report abuse

"Now I'm not going to discuss energy markets or policies with anyone at the dim-bulb, dogmatic political level of DailyKos. That is why I ignored your post."

Once again Assgirl throws around insults to other people while trying to act like she is above it all. HYPOCRITE!!! Someone thinks they are better than everyone.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 12:19 PM | Report abuse

"Do they say what the gaffe was?"

Maybe when Biden called John McCain "George"- perfectly understandable. Like Klein said, a gaffe is just the truth spoken by accident...

Posted by: kreuz_missile | August 28, 2008 12:12 PM | Report abuse

"It is ghetto slang for a black woman. She is calling her a ni&&er"

Not just that, but a prostitute

Posted by: kreuz_missile | August 28, 2008 12:09 PM | Report abuse

“Everywhere, in rich and poor countries alike, hardworking people need good jobs; secure, affordable healthcare, food, and energy; quality education for their children; and economically beneficial ways to fight global warming.” –Bill Clinton, August 27, 2008

Despite the soaring rhetoric, Barack Obama will just have to win anyway. Quality education; funny, Bill never mentions: http://theseedsof9-11.com

Posted by: Peggy McGilligan | August 28, 2008 12:08 PM | Report abuse

"

If you google "Michelle Shaniqua Obama" you get a lot of hits! LOL!

Posted by: Dianne72 | August 28, 2008 11:35 AM "

Also, a shoutout in an LA times article.

http://www.latimes.com/technology/la-na-onthemedia31-2008jul31,0,572662.story

Basically, you get hits on
1) message boards that Dianne72 has posted
2) articles about message boards on which Dianne72 has posted (LA Times)
3)Racist hate sites.

Google pulls up 7 pages with that middle name. Not very much for someone of her stature.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 28, 2008 12:08 PM | Report abuse

as someone who loves this country i was proud of the the democrats, especially the clintons for coming through and affirming that there are still sane political people out there willing to give up their ego and ambition to fight for us all. Mad Mac is NOT an option, everything and anything must be done to stop the corruption and madness of the repub party. our democracy has been highjacked, take it back before Mad Mac crashes it into what's left of our constitution.

Posted by: preAmerikkkan | August 28, 2008 12:06 PM | Report abuse

Why is Barack Obama being held to a higher standard that George Bush?
An Obama Presidency will be a step up from the stumbling Bumbling George Bush.
This was indeed a very enjoyable Convention. My advice to the readers -- do not listen to tthe talking heads on CNN, NBC FOX MSNBC et. al. Go to CSPAN there you will see the whole Convention
UNFILTERED with no one telling you what you saw when you know you saw something completely different.
Viewing CSPAN will give you all the great speches by the minor players like the Gov of Montana, Like Congressman Joe Murphy, like Sen.Claire Maclaskill of Missouri and Sen Bob Casey of Penn. The real salt of the earth Democrats the ones who will deliver the White House for Obama.
Carville and Jeff Toubin and others are complaining that there is NO RED Meat... Hello... this is not the time for Red Meat..
Obama wants this campaign to be
" above the fray"
We are not getting down in the muck and mire of Karl Rove politics. Off couse MCCain can't play on that level that is why his campaign and his commentator friends like Sean Hennedy and Mark Levin and others want to continue with Rev Wrigt and William Ayers eventhough no one under 40 has a clue as to to William Ayers is..
I just cant wait for the debate.
A Harvard Honnor Student going up against a Naval Academy D student.
On this the 45th Anniversary of the March and Washing when Dr. King deliverd his now famous " I have a Dream " speach the Stars are in allignment for an Obama Presidency.

Posted by: Carprin | August 28, 2008 12:02 PM | Report abuse

It is ghetto slang for a black woman. She is calling her a ni&&er
------

>>Diane72 wrote: "If you google "Michelle Shaniqua Obama" you get a lot of hits! LOL!"

Is this her real name? Or did you create it?

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 11:46 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 12:01 PM | Report abuse

Oh yea!

"And what about Katrina and cronyism?"

So while the Republican's will be partying in Minnesota, Now Orleans will be lashed by another hurricane. Just in case people had forgot about what a jaw-dropping debacle THAT was.

Seems to me that even God is voting Democratic this year.

Posted by: NoOneImportant | August 28, 2008 12:00 PM | Report abuse

"Together, we prevailed in a hard campaign in which Republicans said I was too young and too inexperienced to be commander-in-chief."

This after rattling off the litany of the blunders and failures that the more seasoned Republicans have delivered.

Posted by: NoOneImportant | August 28, 2008 11:51 AM | Report abuse

""The Republican National Committee (RNC) restarted the countdown clock since Joe Biden's last gaffe on August 27, 2008, at 10:49:52 p.m. MDT""

Do they say what the gaffe was?

Posted by: DDAWD | August 28, 2008 11:50 AM | Report abuse

>>Diane72 wrote: "If you google "Michelle Shaniqua Obama" you get a lot of hits! LOL!"

Is this her real name? Or did you create it?

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 11:46 AM | Report abuse

Online forums aren't worth being on until the DailyKos sockpuppets and racial politics fanatics clear out, probably after the general election...

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 11:45 AM | Report abuse

Bill's speech was great. He made the best case yet for Barack and he was in a unique position, as a two term former President, to make it.

He and Hillary did what I was confident they would do. Now it's Barack's time.

I wish many of Barack's supporters did not hate the Clintons but they do. I hope these supporters are in the same position 8 to 16 years from now and defend Barack.

Posted by: bj123 | August 28, 2008 11:36 AM | Report abuse

If you google "Michelle Shaniqua Obama" you get a lot of hits! LOL!

Posted by: Dianne72 | August 28, 2008 11:35 AM | Report abuse

How do you think Michelle Shaniqua Obama will handle having a "special needs" child in the White House.

Posted by: Dianne72 | August 28, 2008 11:33 AM | Report abuse

>>chop1 wrote: "McCain received a ZERO rating by the League of Conservation Voters last year - ZERO. What's that mean?"

They're biased in favor of a Democratic party candidate. Just like MoveOn.org, which is supposedly a Democratic advancing advocacy group, became anti-Clinton, pro-Obama propagandists this year. The liberal advocacy groups have become highly politicized, cynical and divisive this year.

>>""It means he didn't vote in favor of one - ONE - environmental initiative. You're going to trust this clown to support the environment? I've got a bridge to sell you as well then...."

And how many survived the Bush Administration oppression and the Democrat grandstanding this year to be something worth voting on? Congress has been notably underperforming with its near-crippled, virtual 50-50 split and both sides' posturing game-playing. Congress is totally dysfunctional in the past 2 years, which is why Dems need a clear (but preferably not filibuster proof) majority to get anything done.

>>"McCain supports offshore drilling - and that's a positive to you? Oil interests already have rights to drill in 81% of America's offshore holdings. They're not. What will happen if we give them the other 19%, besides environmental degradation? According to the Department of Energy, we'll all save @ 2-3 cents per gallon - in ten years. How cheap are you when you're willing to F up the few remaining pristine offshore areas to save 2 cents a gallon a decade from now?"

Not going to discuss this w/you. You're reciting talking points. It takes time and money to drill exploratory wells, there is a shortage of rigs, and so on. Oil rig companies' stocks are trading at huge premium due to a shortage of resources and engineering services. Your assessment of the price impact of oil shortages doesn't reflect an awareness of the complexity of the issue.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 11:32 AM | Report abuse

>>DDAWD wrote: "We are going to have a black president and there is nothing asper can do about it other than hopefully taking the option to kill herself."

Yes, it's all about race. It's worth reading up on black liberation theology just to know how to talk to people like you.

>>"I'm in the deep south, so there are quite a few frothing racists here. I ignore them just like I would with asper. I could not care less about their political opinions."

Why even bother to come onto forums if you sort all viewpoints into simplistic one-or-two dimensional bins (racist, Republican) and then block out anything your black-and-white world bins out?

Shouldn't you be writing up some solipsistic black-studies sociological grand theory that reduces every issue -- from economy, sexism, energy and historic geopolitical divisions in the Democratic party -- to being explained solely by racial politics?

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 11:23 AM | Report abuse

Regarding AsperGirl's post - let's talk about McCain's "embrace of climate change in defiance of the global warming deniers in the Republican party is to environmental platform."

McCain received a ZERO rating by the League of Conservation Voters last year - ZERO. What's that mean? It means he didn't vote in favor of one - ONE - environmental initiative. You're going to trust this clown to support the environment? I've got a bridge to sell you as well then....

McCain supports offshore drilling - and that's a positive to you? Oil interests already have rights to drill in 81% of America's offshore holdings. They're not. What will happen if we give them the other 19%, besides environmental degradation? According to the Department of Energy, we'll all save @ 2-3 cents per gallon - in ten years. How cheap are you when you're willing to F up the few remaining pristine offshore areas to save 2 cents a gallon a decade from now?

Save it with the McCain energy plan - he's a Republican, and he'll be a slave to the energy interests like all of the rest of them. He's a Republican with a terrible environmental voting record as well, so regarding his caring about climate change and our offshore environment - sell it to someone who doesn't know what he's talking about....

Posted by: chop1 | August 28, 2008 11:15 AM | Report abuse

LOL. The Joe Biden gaffe clock updates is being reported on stock trader news wires.

"The Republican National Committee (RNC) restarted the countdown clock since Joe Biden's last gaffe on August 27, 2008, at 10:49:52 p.m. MDT"

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 11:14 AM | Report abuse

"Statements such as this only demonstrate your inability to accept others opinions. That is not a wise nor considered choice for anyone to make. Further, I used to post a lot on WAPO and now very rarely do not because anyone has necessarily convinced me to change my views but because the futility of trying to conduct a conversion in which both sides are considered is all but impossible."

What exactly are these opinions? There is always some troll action against people of both sides of an issue, but, you know, as long as it isn't just white paper, people usually are willing to losten. I'm afraid that Republicans have been reduced to white paper this year. They are just so wrong about everything this time around.

And not willing to even consider asper's opinions is a good thing. I'm in the deep south, so there are quite a few frothing racists here. I ignore them just like I would with asper. I could not care less about their political opinions. It's just a shame that people need to talk about it. I suppose people just like to discuss these trainwrecks of personalities.

It doesn't matter, though. We are going to have a black president and there is nothing asper can do about it other than hopefully taking the option to kill herself.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 28, 2008 11:12 AM | Report abuse

Great speech! I can't believe Americans are even considering voting for McCain given the past 8 years of screwed up war, systematic torture, massive and increasing deficits, stock market crash, housing market crash, etc etc etc....

Posted by: chop1 | August 28, 2008 11:09 AM | Report abuse

>>swheelock wrote: "[Obama] had supported biofuel from corn because--duh--his constituents were from a corn state and he was elected to represent them."

Well, then in this ethical system there is nothing wrong with Bush being in the pocket if Big Oil. I mean if it's okay for Obama to be in the pocket of King Corn and pushing a hideously pointless and destructive and economy-damaging corn ethanol biofuels policy, why is it okay for Obama and wrong for Bush?

I admire John McCain's principled stand on the corn ethanol biofuels issue. It is to his energy platform what his immigration stand in defiance of Republican base xenophobia is to social welfare platform. It is to his energy platform what his embrace of climate change in defiance of the global warming deniers in the Republican party is to environmental platform.

John McCain has a great renewable, alternative, oil drilling (yes to offshore, no to ANWR) and nuclear energy platform. His energy platform and awareness blows away that of Obama.

He's better on energy than Bush (who is in the pocket of Big Oil) was, and better than Obama (who is in the pocket of King Corn) will be. Energy is a critical problem for America that has national security, economic health and environmental implications, and this is why I really, really like McCain. His character and principled stand on energy details is also very admirable and reveals his depth.

It's a shame that energy platforms is one subject area in which the media is obfuscating and misreporting and putting up spun (rather than accurate) comparisons of the candidates, to help Obama win.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 11:07 AM | Report abuse

>>RetCombatVet wrote: "Further, I used to post a lot on WAPO and now very rarely do not because anyone has necessarily convinced me to change my views but because the futility of trying to conduct a conversion in which both sides are considered is all but impossible. Being this narrow minded shows an inability to conduct an intelligent give and take discussions over anything, age, race, disability or gender or the time of day for that matter. It only encourages other to not listen to who is talking. When you realize that people are not listening to what you are saying you, (and anyone else), must also realize your conversation is meaningless. I in fact have watched as hundreds have quit posting that were on this blog regularly until feeling that their opinions would not be considered and they left."

Maybe you can come back more often after the election is over and the netroots are cleared out.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 10:58 AM | Report abuse

A unified democratic party will be unbeatable, and may well score a landslide victory not only in the presidential race but also in the race for greater majorities in the house and senate. The republicans whined for decades about how they could show the superiority of their ideas and their leadership if just given the power. They got their chance and they blew it, big time. The democrats will get another chance starting in January. Let's hope they've learned from all of Dubya's mistakes. Obama has it in him to achieve greatness in the next eight years, continual republican efforts at sabotage notwithstanding.

Posted by: Jim | August 28, 2008 10:56 AM | Report abuse

>>swheelock wrote: "Yeah, I posted a fairly serious attempt to engage AsperGirl on an issue rather than something she'd dismiss as a personal attack over an hour ago, as she requested, and have been ignored."

swheelock, you posted: "Actually, the Post reported as long ago as April that Obama had discussed this point quite candidly in Indiana. He had supported biofuel from corn because--duh--his constituents were from a corn state and he was elected to represent them. McCain's constituents are in Arizona, Clinton's in New York, neither an especially big corn state, neither caring much in their current role about the welfare of farmers in Illinois. Obama said even back then that corn was not optimal, that it is at best a transitional solution. What he did not say explicitly, but that springs pretty much from common sense, is that his projected constituency now changes--not that he will flip to outright opposition to corn-based ethanol, but, as he said, he will support it as "at best, a transitional solution." Contrast that and the Democrats' desire to cure our addiction to oil ASAP through quick development of alternatives with McCain and the Republicans, whose proposal revolves around, not addressing our addiction, but just changing dealers."

Your level of discussion on energy policy is too superficial for me to be interested in engaging in a discussion of this complex topic with you. Moreover, your level of discussion is too derivative, quoting from talking points and meaningless memes. E.g. "the Republicans, whose proposal revolves around, not addressing our addiction, but just changing dealers" I mean that's how little sophomores in college discuss, in affected, pseudo-sophisticate diction, things they don't understand.

I will just make two points in response to yours above:

First, I'm not interested in discussing energy policy at a sophomoric level of battle-of-talking-point-memes that goes on at DailyKos. The fact that the netroots suppress all meaningful discussion of issues to enforce with thought-policing only the recitation of talking point memes mean that none of you are really issue-aware or worth exchanging points with.

Second, the below news bit hit the newswire at 10:36 this morning:

"The International Energy Agency on Thursday said it is ready to coordinate the release of oil stocks from member states if supplies are sharply disrupted in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico."

What does this mean about where we are in the energy price shocks problem. This is a revealing hint that is very, very serious.

I'm forming the opinion, not necessarily one that is unique among traders, that the price of oil has come under manipulation to keep it artificially low. There are signs in how trading in taking place that don't make sense unless manipulative trades were taking place. Someone is benefitting from concealing the energy problems for a while, otherwise they wouldn't be doing it.

This morning, just because of the storm in the Gulf, the price of oil spiked to over $120/bbl. The fact that the IEA is (and we are) at a point where oil reserves are being used to keep price spikes from occurring is a serious point to be at, that I think is escaping public notice.

There is an ongoing, big problem with energy that is being obscured from public view right now for probably cynical purposes. Oil reserves are being used to keep the price of oil down. The energy problem isn't subsiding, it's only being covered up.

Now I'm not going to discuss energy markets or policies with anyone at the dim-bulb, dogmatic political level of DailyKos. That is why I ignored your post.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 10:50 AM | Report abuse

"I would also bet that the Majority of people on here have never been on the Daily Kos or whatever"

I do not agree with AsperGirl on nearly anything but I must take issue with this post and others like it. I believe most of the bloggers do go to Daily Kos and many many other variant blogs and websites.


"Just know that the majority of the people on this comment section vastly outnumber your vote."

Statements such as this only demonstrate your inability to accept others opinions. That is not a wise nor considered choice for anyone to make. Further, I used to post a lot on WAPO and now very rarely do not because anyone has necessarily convinced me to change my views but because the futility of trying to conduct a conversion in which both sides are considered is all but impossible. Being this narrow minded shows an inability to conduct an intelligent give and take discussions over anything, age, race, disability or gender or the time of day for that matter. It only encourages other to not listen to who is talking. When you realize that people are not listening to what you are saying you, (and anyone else), must also realize your conversation is meaningless. I in fact have watched as hundreds have quit posting that were on this blog regularly until feeling that their opinions would not be considered and they left.

"maybe it was because we saw her try to ride on her husbands accomplishments and call them her own"

Or maybe it was because ALL politicians lie. Our job is to determine which lies are most likely to affect it us more or less.

If people were open minded they might view this statement differently.


"maybe it was the assassination comment, maybe it was the sniper incident, maybe it is because she claimed 35 years of experience, when in reality it was more like 7."

You (rhetorically) cannot have it both ways. Either inexperience is an issue or it is not. I don't think it makes much difference but I respect your right to disagree without the name calling. Maybe some of these things have been misinterpreted maybe not.

by: Someone needs a hug | August 28, 2008 10:00 AM

We can only hope that Michelle Obama and Barrack Obama will be treated with respect and decorum. The Clintons have accomplished many great things and just like the "muslim" and "Rezko" comments many of these supposed crimes that they committed did not in fact take place. Had they I am sure the Republicans would have used it to their advantage. Just as the Rezko things may or may not be true in the end neither Bill Clinton nor Hillary have been convicted of anything. The last time I checked you are supposed to be treated as innocent until proven guilty. Many people like to say "but Bill Clinton was impeached". In fact there were articles of impeachment brought against him but those, like the law must be proven and they were not. If that wasn't true GWB would have been gone long ago as articles of impeachment have been standing against him for a very long time.

Posted by: RetCombatVet | August 28, 2008 10:44 AM | Report abuse

Clintons, Clintons, Clintons. yada, yada, yada. This is not the Clintons' convention, even though the media thinks it is. Bill Clinton's speech was good, but self-serving. The best and greatest speech of the night was John Kerry's, but, of course, its likely the media ignored it because the were still discussing Bill and Hilliary. WATCH C-PAN's coverage, people. You be the judge, not the screwballs on the cable networks.

Posted by: janet | August 28, 2008 10:43 AM | Report abuse

Democrats deserve better than the biased coverage of their convention by Brokaw and Williams among others; always expressing doubts,downers, suspicions and questioning motives. Shame on MSNBC.

Posted by: david | August 28, 2008 10:39 AM | Report abuse

Bill Clinton showed he can still hit the home run and reminded us of how much better a president he was than dubya. Not even close.

Both Clintons really delivered, but I may be biased...I'm a Dem. What really objectively verifies it for me is the mass of GOP sour-grapes comments I'm seeing. You almost see how they grimace over the thought of their impending defeat. They are getting pretty desperate since their petty and pathetic "divide and conquer" tactic has failed.

Best of luck to them. I do not hate McCain, but we have to fix the country after 8 years of GOP robbery and ruin.

Posted by: Donny | August 28, 2008 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Watching the Democrats, they appear as a collection of greivance committees, filled with the desire for a government that will rectify what they failed to accomplish in their personal lives. This is just a power play. Those who did not develop enough power via the usual route (education and hard work), will have government to rectify all that they did not achieve.

Posted by: hipshot | August 28, 2008 10:29 AM | Report abuse

Yeah, I posted a fairly serious attempt to engage AsperGirl on an issue rather than something she'd dismiss as a personal attack over an hour ago, as she requested, and have been ignored. She'd rather attack DailyKos for what she apparently believes is their monopoly on personal attacks.

Time to move on. Or MoveOn, if you will.

Posted by: swheelock | August 28, 2008 10:28 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: kreuz_missile | August 28, 2008 10:25 AM | Report abuse

Bill Clinton was great last night. He really delivered for Obama and I was very pleased (except for the line about Obama being prepared for national security now that Biden is on the ticket). Clinton showed last night once again why he is such a masterful politician.

Posted by: clevelandparker | August 28, 2008 10:24 AM | Report abuse

"There was no sexism during the primaries, there is no media bias and everything is perfect in Obama world except for those mentally disturbed people who are so distressed over Hillary's loss that they vote for McCain because they're too stupid to see how brilliant and inherently superior in every respect Obama's semiotic candidacy is to any other one that has preceded it in history."

Question: So how do we beat the b---h?
McCain: (Laughing), let me try to re (laughing), how do we beat Hillary Clinton? That's a great question and I thank you for it. (Early this year)

Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father! (McCain 1998)

Yeah, vote for McCain because of alleged sexism in the Democratic primary. It shows strong rational judgment on your part.

Posted by: kreuz_missile | August 28, 2008 10:21 AM | Report abuse

Your points are all valid. But they don't sway me. It is what it is. And there are lots of people who feel the same way that I do.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 10:20 AM | Report abuse

I can not believe it, when I hear anyone, especially Democrats who say, they will vote for John McCain, because my candidate was not chosen. I will borrow from John Kerry last night, "Are you kidding me". You save that kind of indignation for when you are cheated out of an election, not when an election was won fair, but your candidate didn't win, you can be sad, or even mad then you move on. But to say you will vote for the opposition because you are mad, knowing not only does he not stand for what you stand for, they have messed up so badly, that this Administration will go down as one of the worse, if not the worst in history. Bill and Hillary got it right. They told you last night. They were upset, but they are moving on. This is bigger than them. This is about where we go from here. We need change and we also need to let the rest of the world know this is a new day. If you agree with starting a war under false pretenses. Then vote for McCain, If you beleive there should be two classes of people in this country, the rich and the poor then vote for McCain. If you think the President of the United States should not have to answer to the Congress or the people. Then vote for McCain. If you like the high cost of living then vote for McCain. If you like the fact that over seas our soldiers or losing their lives and at home people are losing their homes then vote McCain. If you like the fact that most people can not afford healhtcare insurance then vote for McCain. In other words if you want everything to stay the same, then vote for McCain. If you want change stop the drama and vote for Obama!!

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 10:16 AM | Report abuse

>>Someone needs a hug wrote: "Its Ok AsperGirl, Its apparent that you are seriously mentally disturbed or distressed over Hillary's loss....Just know that the majority of the people on this comment section vastly outnumber your vote."

Oh yes, there is no dissent, there are no breakaways to the McCain camp, no unhappy Clinton supporters. There was no sexism during the primaries, there is no media bias and everything is perfect in Obama world except for those mentally disturbed people who are so distressed over Hillary's loss that they vote for McCain because they're too stupid to see how brilliant and inherently superior in every respect Obama's semiotic candidacy is to any other one that has preceded it in history.

Posted by: Hug This | August 28, 2008 10:16 AM | Report abuse


You ain't just kidding bud. Clinton just handed Obama the best argument for himself that anyone, Obama included, has or will make. Let's hope he isn't too arrogant to realize it and lets Clinton school him on how to win, and stops hanging around with light-in-their loafers losers like Kerry et al.

Posted by: Chicago1 | August 28, 2008 10:15 AM | Report abuse

"Barack Obama is ready to lead"

Yesterday the GOP talking heads, shills, and flacks were bleating that Hillary didn't say those exact words. Well, a highly popular, effective former president has now said them.

Thanks, talking heads, shills, and flacks!

Posted by: Spectator2 | August 28, 2008 10:13 AM | Report abuse

Maybe Aspergirl's views aren't popular, but she makes sense, presents her points civilly, and has good points. Ignore her if you want, but some of us are interested in what she has to say. What are you? The playground bully who decides who gets to play and who gets shunned?

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 10:13 AM | Report abuse

One other point Aspergirl: I am not part of any personality cult. I support Barak Obama because I really do believe that it is time for America to turn the page on the old culture wars. It is time for both the left and the right to stop obsessing over old, irrelevant issues from the 60s and the 90s. In short, it is time for the American people to really move into the 21st century.

The GOP, McCain, the Bushes and the Clintons, the Limbaughs and the Carvilles, The Michael Moores and the Pat Robertsons, the old CROSSFIRE gang and conservative talk radio--and for that matter conservatives and liberals themselves, are all living in the past. Both left wing and right wing certitudes have been a part of our governing philosophies of the 20th century and have been found wanting. It is time for a New Age. An Age of Pragmatism that incorporates the best of both of these philosophies and discards the rest.

Posted by: Jaxas | August 28, 2008 10:12 AM | Report abuse

Can we all please just ignore AsperGirl? She/he's is getting too much attention.

Posted by: 1/20/09 | August 28, 2008 10:11 AM | Report abuse

>>Jaxas wrote: "MSNBC treated Tueday's Gallup tracking poll ad BREAKING NEWS when for the first time McCain broke into this massive lead of--2 points! Today, the poll shows a three point swing with Obama taking the lead 45% to 44%."

I agree that this is Obama's convention bump. If a bump due to a surge of unity following Hillary Clinton's speech, was going to appear, it would start showing up today and continue for a couple of days. Any surge after that is due to a better second half to Obama's convention than its strangely no-message start.

Obama should try to convince Bill Clinton to stay for the final day. He should try to be friends and start getting platform and campaign advice from the Clintons, who are clearly on his side.

For a candidate who allegedly has "300 foreign policy advisors" and hundreds of other "advisors", he's overlooking the biggest, best assets.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 10:09 AM | Report abuse

Bill Clinton also gave another invaluable insight and edge to the Obamas: it's the economy, stupid.

Wall Street's consensus is that both candidates are weak and lame on the economy. Both candidates and their party platforms are weak. Bill Clinton's insistence on speaking about the economy instead of national security points the way to an Obama victory.

From an issues perspective, Obama nailed himself to the national security front when he picked Biden as VP. That choice was a shore-up-a-weakness choice that from a strategic team-building perspective only helped make Obama less vulnerable against McCain on that front and leaves McCain with a first-round draft pick that he can do anything he wants with.

McCain's VP pick and upcoming convention will reveal a lot about who's ready to start the playoffs with a stronger team and playbook.

Whichever candidate can seize leadership on the economic problems and command that ground will win the election. This is one of only 3 ways Obama can win the election after his Biden pick.

I hope the Obamas realize how much the Clintons gave to them.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 10:05 AM | Report abuse

Its Ok AsperGirl, Its apparent that you are seriously mentally disturbed or distressed over Hillary's loss.

I would also bet that the Majority of people on here have never been on the Daily Kos or whatever you keep using as an excuse as to why people think you are idiotic.

Just know that the majority of the people on this comment section vastly outnumber your vote.

So cry and complain that Hillary is brilliant, and why oh why cant people see that. Maybe because we saw through her smile, maybe it was because we saw her try to ride on her husbands accomplishments and call them her own, maybe it was the assassination comment, maybe it was the sniper incident, maybe it is because she claimed 35 years of experience, when in reality it was more like 7. Maybe you are wrong and just dont know how to admit it, so you lash out like a spoiled child who doesnt get their way. Maybe....

Posted by: Someone needs a hug | August 28, 2008 10:00 AM | Report abuse

Bill was spectacular, inspiring, charismatic as always. I loved the speech and I love the Clintons. But I'm still not voting for Obama.

Seeing the Clintons at the convention just reinforced how much I wanted Hillary to be president. I can wait until 2012.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 10:00 AM | Report abuse

Aspergirl, I did not intend to imply that there was no dissent. Of course there is. That's what conventions and campaigns are for. In case you haven't noticed, there is quite a lot of dissent going on in the McCain campaign this morning if one is to give any credibility to Bob Novak.

Look. All I am saying is that people need to be more astute. They need to understand that when you watch your favorite cable news channel or listen to talk radio, they are highly motivated to create drama where none really exists. At the moment, the fictional daily tracking poll--especially Gallup--is the favorite vehicle for manufacturing drama. MSNBC treated Tueday's Gallup tracking poll ad BREAKING NEWS when for the first time McCain broke into this massive lead of--2 points! Today, the poll shows a three point swing with Obama taking the lead 45% to 44%.

The truth is very little has changed since July. The real race has Obama up by about 5 or 6 points. It has remained remarkably stable notwithstanding the media's attempt to create drama.

Posted by: Jaxas | August 28, 2008 9:59 AM | Report abuse

Who WAS that guy Kerry? There is another guy named Gore speaking tonight. I am told he is ANOTHER great speaker. Why didn’t
the Democrats run these guys after Clinton left office?

Seriously… Kerry, Clinton, Biden ~ what a lineup and what a
presentation!

Just to get out of the ENDLESS psycho-babble from Faux, CNN and MSNBC, we turned on C-span to just WATCH THE CONVENTION. No commentary. It was like being there.

However, we appreciate that the FIX does not speak WHILE THE
SPEECHES ARE IN PROGRESS. C-span for listening to the convention. Analysis later on the other stations.

Posted by: Jersey John | August 28, 2008 9:56 AM | Report abuse

>>G.P. Carvalho wrote:

"I hope that the hotheads in the Obama camp fully understood how much their candidate would have lost if they had insisted on excluding the Clintons from the Democratic Party Convention. Bill Clinton's speech was the best segment of the entire reunion and an additional proof of his great political acumen.

"The Obama camp needs to show maturity by building bridges within the Party and in the society as a whole. It takes hard work to accomplish this. Luckily for them, the image of their present adversary is marked by blind adherence to the past, exclusionary social policies and a barely disguised aversion to science and technology. These attributes cannot be confused with maturity or traditional values. They rather appear to reflect a regrettable preference for political obsolescence."

-- I agree. I wonder if the Obama campaign appreciates how much the Clintons contributed. Whether the Obamas realize it or not, the Clintons tried to show them the benefits of shifting the focus off adoring and portraying The Greatness of The One (and The One's Wife) for a while and focusing on big-picture and team-building discussion and concepts. The insane, persistent focus of the Obama campaign on the person of Obama (and his wife) is counterproductive in many ways and was making for a weirdly narcissistic and lame convention message.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 9:55 AM | Report abuse

I was so disappointed in Bill and Hillary during the campaign, but I firmly believe that their speeches at this convention have gone a long, long way to dispell the media created hype over the so called split in the Democratic Party.

Over the last few days, the papers played it all up. In the end, both Hillary and Bill delivered masterful speeches that correctly framed what is at stake for this country. And both of them delivered in superb fashion. They did so much to their credit, and have shown this country that we cannot afford four more years of failed leadership. Bill Clinton laid it all out there for everyone to see.

The Clintons are 100% right. This country cannot afford John McBush. The time is now to take back our country from fascism, corruption, ineptitude, pillage, rape and plunder.

OBAMA/BIDEN '08

Posted by: Thank you, Hillary and Bill!! | August 28, 2008 9:46 AM | Report abuse

>>dch wrote: "Aspergirl: ""Your affected, condescending comment marks you as one of those C-average, liberal arts losers from a 4th rate state school that lurks DailyKos who convince each other they're so droll and sophisticated and on the side of right with their lame, pseudo-intellectual meme-swapping."
-- "If THAT is not a rant, I don't know one."

It's not, it's my standard response to the DailyKos sockpuppet ad hominem attack. One of the things that netroots do as part of their activism is to lurk on DailyKos, and when someone takes note that an actual discussion critical of Obama or favorable to an opponent breaks out in some forum, they come to DailyKos and state that "help" is needed on that forum. So them DailyKos members flood that forum with attacks on the poster who is saying things that they don't want to allow discussion on: criticism of their candidate's platform or their candidate's weaknesses or anything favorable to their opponent. They also flood forums and comments of writers or article topics they object to, to slander the reporter who wrote it and jeer at the article. This is all very organized, in netroot-world.

So the netroots, most notably as organized and lurking on DailyKos, act as spoilers of public discourse that they want to discuss and dominate. Their cyberbully culture is a lot like the turn-of-the century gangs who used to roam immigrant ghettos in local elections who used to beat people who discussed or rallied in ways benefitting opposition candidates. Their forum-spoiling and opposition-discourse-disrupting tactics are a modern, Internet, cyberbully version of smash-mouth gang politics.

Bill Clinton was right when he said that Obama's organization had the instincts of a Chicago street thug.

Bill Clinton's off-the-record comments are more revealing and insightful than most people realize.

I wish the Washington Post would track IP addresses of sockpuppets who take over forums for campaign purposes.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 9:46 AM | Report abuse

Agree.
Reminded me of what it was like when he was president. He is very good at what he does.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 9:45 AM | Report abuse

Agree.

I’m a Kennedy Democrat looking for politicians that inspire me as John and Robert did. In Bill Clinton I found it, but his star had tarnished during this presidential campaign. Last night, he delivered a message like few others have the capacity to do. He has the ability to frame the issues that are easy to grasp while providing a clear distinction between Democrats and Republicans. Make no mistake about, Bill Clinton returns to relevance in this election.

Posted by: Barry Fellabaum | August 28, 2008 9:39 AM | Report abuse

I hope that the hotheads in the Obama camp fully understood how much their candidate would have lost if they had insisted on excluding the Clintons from the Democratic Party Convention. Bill Clinton's speech was the best segment of the entire reunion and an additional proof of his great political acumen.

The Obama camp needs to show maturity by building bridges within the Party and in the society as a whole. It takes hard work to accomplish this. Luckily for them, the image of their present adversary is marked by blind adherence to the past, exclusionary social policies and a barely disguised aversion to science and technology. These attributes cannot be confused with maturity or traditional values. They rather appear to reflect a regrettable preference for political obsolescence.

Posted by: G.P. Carvalho | August 28, 2008 9:39 AM | Report abuse

"Your affected, condescending comment marks you as one of those C-average, liberal arts losers from a 4th rate state school that lurks DailyKos who convince each other they're so droll and sophisticated and on the side of right with their lame, pseudo-intellectual meme-swapping."

If THAT is not a rant, I don't know one.

Posted by: dch | August 28, 2008 9:34 AM | Report abuse

>>Jaxas wrote: "Also, I suspect that the so-called "Hillary voters" the media is talking to are old, recalcitrant, Limbaugh Operation Chaos republicans pretending to be Hillary supporters to create the illusion of a revolt among Hillary supporters. Illusion seems to be achief feature of Limbaugh's childish repertoire."

Obama supporters are in denial that any dissent exists.

I'm not going to respond to these ad hominem attacks anymore. That's another DailyKos cyberbully tactic. You attack the poster so that they're engaged in defensive back-and-forth and the forum degenerates into fighting.

Why don't you contain your campaign activism to speaking out instead of trying to silence others on forums that don't belong to your netroots web or the Obama campaign?

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 9:31 AM | Report abuse

>>Sowega Man wrote: "What's up with Aspergillus Girl? Ranting fanatics who flood discussion forums are the reasons forums become irrelevant."

If you don't know the difference between a rant and the posting of substantial points, you're one of the DailyKos cult members, because your affect intelligent comment without saying anything meaningful re: any point.

Your affected, condescending comment marks you as one of those C-average, liberal arts losers from a 4th rate state school that lurks DailyKos who convince each other they're so droll and sophisticated and on the side of right with their lame, pseudo-intellectual meme-swapping.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 9:28 AM | Report abuse

Aspergirl. whether there is a disatisfied chunk of the Hillary electorate that is still angry and disenchanted seems irrelevant to me. If they truly had as much impact as you seem to think, one would think that that wopuld show up more dramatically in the state battleground polls. Yet, Obama has maintained steady leads in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Oregon, Washington, New Mexico, New Jersey and now surprisingly has opened a lead in North Carolina.

Most people pay far too much heed to the cable news shows and talk radio who have a vested interest in a close race. Thus, they dwell obsessively on meaningless national, head-to-head matchups that do not include other parties that will certainly be on the ballot. John Zogby has been quietyly warning the networks that they are undersampling Obama's support by ignoring these other players. In his polls, even as the media is telling people this race is tied, he shows Obama winning by an electoral landslide.

Also, I suspect that the so-called "Hillary voters" the media is talking to are old, recalcitrant, Limbaugh Operation Chaos republicans pretending to be Hillary supporters to create the illusion of a revolt among Hillary supporters. Illusion seems to be achief feature of Limbaugh's childish repertoire.

Posted by: Jaxas | August 28, 2008 9:26 AM | Report abuse

Welcome back and welcome aboard Pres.
Clinton,old glory is looking good today,
the republicans are falling apart,they
want to be a part of this history,OH
SEANITA,I FOUND THE PERFECT WIG,AND PINK
TIGHTS FOR YOU ON ARE DATE IN ST.PAUL,
I WILL BE A PROTESTOR AND LOOKING FORWARD
TO SEEING YOU HONEY!!!!!!!!!

OBAMA/BIDEN(08)

Posted by: HORNY FOR HANNITY | August 28, 2008 9:24 AM | Report abuse

Bill Clinton last night delivered. He simply delivered.

What we saw last night was vintage Bill Clinton.

And the republicans should be scared this morning... because if this is the Bill Clinton that will be out on the campaign trail for Obama then John McCain has no chance.

The republicans, during 8 years of Clinton in the White House, never figured out how to fight him. And they aren't going to figure it out in the next 2 months.

Posted by: corbett | August 28, 2008 9:24 AM | Report abuse

What's up with Aspergillus Girl? Ranting fanatics who flood discussion forums are the reasons forums become irrelevant.

Posted by: Sowega Man | August 28, 2008 9:23 AM | Report abuse

" ignorant "neo-libs" under Obama's identity politics personality cult."

"Makes you sound like an idiot cult member whose ego system and value system is tagged to the Lord of the Flies."

"Your use of these terms marks you as a DailyKos cult fringe babbler-of-memes."

"This is not DailyKos. Please go there if you want to use verbally abusive language dehumanizing other posters."


Do as I say not as I do, eh? YOU ARE A HYPOCRITE ASPER GIRL, YOU LACK CREDIBILITY!!

Posted by: McCain | August 28, 2008 9:22 AM | Report abuse

There is no question, Bill Clinton is still the best. His logic, his framing of the issues and his impeccable delivery produced the apocryphal "grand slam." It is a mystery to me how anyone could listen to him, regularly agree with him and not believe him and his wife that they strongly support Obama over McCain. The single most important quality a President needs is judgement. On the big issues, Barack Obama has gotten it right, McCain has gotten it wrong. Yes, Obama is young, but at some point, the work begins and you have to trust whatever it is that a person brings to the Presidency. Perhaps we all need to watch the Republican convention to remind us how much worse things COULD be and will finally be ready to get behind Obama. He IS a good man, America, and I believe Bill Clinton when he says "Barack Obama is ready to lead."

Posted by: dch | August 28, 2008 9:15 AM | Report abuse

Chris,

Bill Clinton Delivered. I am so proud of him. Flaws and all, I am proud that he was POTUS ever, with the circumstances provided during his administration; I only wish that the progress that had been developed during his watch, was continued and improved during this current. You highlighted some key statements, but there were some others that stood out as well. Apart from his speech about Obama, I took note of how he was speaking on behalf of the people themselves. For instance, when he talked about the increased level of productivity under the vast people's hard work in this country, and then listed the "rewards" for that in return, you know, the treatment. I would say, in brief, neglect. Bill Clinton was quite thorough with the time frame he had, and I was very pleased that the crowd took a moment to let him know that he is quite appreciated. I really loved the way he gave credit to his family even; his wife and daughter. Bill Clinton was outstanding. Some see this as "Obama's Convention." The way I see it, it was EVERYBODY'S convention. Hillary owned it, Bill owned it, Kennedy owned it, Kerry, everyone else who spoke, and everyone who were present. I see that as an entire family of people's convention. This entire week of events should be recorded and remembered for everyone there, not just Obama, in my view.

God Bless America

Posted by: Obama2008 | August 28, 2008 9:14 AM | Report abuse

The Clintons are brilliant, and they think and they elicit thinking and intelligence with their speeches, in their platforms and in their politics.

The Obamas impose submission to thought policing, punishment of dissenting or debating voices and obedience to the Obama-focused personality cult features of their "movement".

Good bye Clintons. Hello "neo-libs".

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 9:14 AM | Report abuse

I didn't have a TV available to me last night. Did Bubba actually finish his speech in the allotted time for once? It sounds like what I can scrounge up like he did a typical Bill Clinton rabble-rouser speech, and his fan-base just ate it up. I swear he reminds me of a political Elvis.

From the sound of NPR this morning the Republican's are just trying to figure out how to get their stance as a party down to one speech without discrediting McCain - their Maverick. Ah well...should be interesting to contrast the two conventions.

Good day to you all!
K.

Posted by: K. | August 28, 2008 9:13 AM | Report abuse

AsperGirl is not "with the Clintons", or she would not be so negative. In the posts here, and elsewhere, she sounds more like Rush Limbaugh than a Clinton supporter. We know Rush would like to drive a wedge between the Clintons and the Obamas, but Bill and Hillary emphatically put an end to that. Maybe she could persuade Dick Cheney, that famous non-neocon, to run. Then she would have a home.

Posted by: Gene Smith
________________________________________________________________________________________

Maybe you should worry more about yourself and your candidate rather than to post some childish drivel. If you can tell who people are from their posts, maybe you can find a place in the Barry camp for your delusions. Do you know what the term "class" means? It is something you don't possess.

Posted by: Jack Straw | August 28, 2008 9:11 AM | Report abuse

>>From AsperGirl: "WHAT THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA WON'T TELL YOU ABOUT OBAMA'S ENERGY PLAN" ... and a long diatribe on Obama's support for biofuels from corn (which criticism, by the way, I don't necessarily disagree with).

Actually, the Post reported as long ago as April that Obama had discussed this point quite candidly in Indiana. He had supported biofuel from corn because--duh--his constituents were from a corn state and he was elected to represent them. McCain's constituents are in Arizona, Clinton's in New York, neither an especially big corn state, neither caring much in their current role about the welfare of farmers in Illinois. Obama said even back then that corn was not optimal, that it is at best a transitional solution. What he did not say explicitly, but that springs pretty much from common sense, is that his projected constituency now changes--not that he will flip to outright opposition to corn-based ethanol, but, as he said, he will support it as "at best, a transitional solution." Contrast that and the Democrats' desire to cure our addiction to oil ASAP through quick development of alternatives with McCain and the Republicans, whose proposal revolves around, not addressing our addiction, but just changing dealers.

Posted by: swheelock | August 28, 2008 9:11 AM | Report abuse

>>Sharon wrote: "Aspergirl, I have been reading your posts for months now, and you have to be the most negative person I have ever encountered...As I have told you before, if you don't like Senator and Mrs. Obama, that is OK, you don't have to. But you don't have to spread your poison here either."

And this is one of the first tactics trotted out by the Obama culture that helps earn it the "Kool Aid Drinker" descriptors.

As soon as one starts talking about specific policy issues, one is attacked as attacking the Obamas based on some irrational thing. Any attempts to discuss policy, platform or substantial details is met with accusations that one is acting mentally ill or irrational, strangely. At DailyKos, the thought police simply delete or hide substantial discussion of policy issues that stray near the bounds of permissible talking points. No discussion of Obama's wrongheadedness on issues, ignorance in his campaign platform or incompetence is permitted.

I think you skipped a step. Weren't you supposed to start with calling me a "racist" simply for criticizing him on a policy issue first? By going straight for an accusation of personal problems you're not following the critic-attack formula.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 9:10 AM | Report abuse

>>DB wrote: "By the way, Aspergirl, don't make too much out of John McCain's stand on biofuels. He has NEVER voted in favor of supporting renewable energy-- do you really think he's going to "find religion" on this topic and do anything meaningful when the campaign is over?"

Oh give me a break from the faux reality talk of the Obama Kool Aid drinker world.

Nancy Pelosi is a poster child for disrupting, blocking and polluting energy bills so that the opportunities to vote on clear and distinct energy policy never happen.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 9:04 AM | Report abuse

Damn good speech. They really cranked it up last night.

Who the hell is that Kerry guy that spoke last night? I don't think I've seen him before. He looks like a guy that ran in 2004, but he sure didn't talk like him!

Bill was at his best. He really brought some confidence back.

And Biden was a friggin' bulldog too! He'll chew up anyone the 'pubs can stick in the VP slot--can't wait for the debates. He's my kind of Yankee.

And for the fellow saying that only the young participate in phone polls. Maybe, but also consider that the younger you are, the less likely you are to have a land line. The young kids are generation "W"--for wireless, not Dubya.

Posted by: Sowega Man | August 28, 2008 9:02 AM | Report abuse

AsperGirl, whatever internal consistency your arguments may have does not save them from the false premise they are based upon--that your opinions are, in fact, self-evident truths. In other words, while they seem clever, your posts are full of *.

I thought Bill Clinton's speech was significant in that it seems to cement a validation of Obama's candidacy by the Democratic establishment that (except to hysterical conspiracy theorists) had been lacking. Effectively, Obama's coup has been endorsed quite forcefully by the leaders he deposed. From a historical perspective, I think this is rather stunning.

Posted by: Lucky | August 28, 2008 9:01 AM | Report abuse

Aspergirl, I have been reading your posts for months now, and you have to be the most negative person I have ever encountered. Your envy of Senator Obama and his wife are so telling. Do you think they have taken something away from you?As I have told you before, if you don't like Senator and Mrs. Obama, that is OK, you don't have to. But you don't have to spread your poison here either.

Posted by: Sharon | August 28, 2008 9:01 AM | Report abuse

>>Gene Smith wrote: "AsperGirl is not "with the Clintons", or she would not be so negative. In the posts here, and elsewhere, she sounds more like Rush Limbaugh than a Clinton supporter."

How long are Obama supporters going to deny that a dissatisfied chunk of the Clinton base exists? And that their ideas, opinions and votes are meaningful to the election?

"Unity" = "shut up and get on board" only works with people who are comfortable with a personality cult and young, dumb, first time voters.

The Democratic party is unnecessarily bleeding conservative and centrist Democrats -- the thinking ones -- to the Republican party as the latest polls show. In part, my posts are a reminder that the dispute with the Obamas isn't just about personality and snubs or mistreatment of the Clintons. It's about Obama's fundamental incompetence on policy issues, cynical and bad stands on critical problem areas we face today, and the refusal of the Obama camp to permit any discussion that challenges the talking-points-du-jour.

You can pad the electorate with new kids, marginal voters who are so uninvolved they never even registered before, and extremists, but you're losing people from the center. The thinking center is more essential to good governance than a stupid, fanatical extreme base.

The Obama camp is ignorant and cult-like. Go ahead and follow in the neo-cons, evangelical-base model of modern politics that the Bush Administration thrived on. The new Republican party under McCain's leadership is the real change in diet this year, while Obama's is more of the same junk food but just in other flavors.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 9:01 AM | Report abuse

By the way, Aspergirl, don't make too much out of John McCain's stand on biofuels. He has NEVER voted in favor of supporting renewable energy-- do you really think he's going to "find religion" on this topic and do anything meaningful when the campaign is over?
I cannot believe how naive or misinformed (or both) you are... and so I don't.
The only conclusion I can reach is that you're a Republican shill flogging the same tired BS McCain's campaign is all about.
Get a life. You aren't fooling anyone.

Posted by: DB | August 28, 2008 9:00 AM | Report abuse

I thought Bill Clinton did a terrific job last night. Yes, the Republicans will be all over every last syllable of his speech-- but they would do that anyway.
Expect Obama to put it away with his acceptance speech tonight. After the one-two punch of Clinton and Biden last night, the Republicans have to know they will have a VASTLY harder fight on their hands than they've had since a guy from Hope hit the stage back in '92.
And they'll lose.
DB

Posted by: DB | August 28, 2008 8:57 AM | Report abuse

Bubba said it. Get behind Obama in the fall regardless of who you supported in the Primaries.

Don't fall for the same old Republican scare tactics for a third time. The world can't take any more of failed Republicanism.

Posted by: Mike | August 28, 2008 8:55 AM | Report abuse

Yes he did, but all this contrived dramarama is silly and/or annoying.

Posted by: johng1 | August 28, 2008 8:54 AM | Report abuse

Does AsperGirl ever shut up? She needs to go back in the kitchen and make dinner.

Posted by: AsperMan | August 28, 2008 8:53 AM | Report abuse

Interesting but we were going to use the John Kerry time slot to refill our snack bowls... WOW, did he make an impression on us; those snack bowls never did get refilled. He was so unlike the John Kerry who spoke when he himself was a presidential candidate. He was almost a Pitbull!!

Posted by: OHREALLYNOW | August 28, 2008 8:49 AM | Report abuse

The speeches to this point have all been surreal for me. To think that just 40 years after my high school was under marshall law for fear that whites would continue to attack innocent blacks, we would have an endorsed black man leading a major political party with total public support from the party's key leaders, wow. Senator Kennedy set the stage for me. Joe Biden continued it and President Clinton put the icing on the nomination coronation. Is Barack ready? According the the key democratic leaders, yes he is! Good luck dems. God bless America.

Posted by: BET ONE | August 28, 2008 8:49 AM | Report abuse

This is the Bill Clinton I know and love!

Posted by: OHREALLYNOW | August 28, 2008 8:45 AM | Report abuse

I think aspergirl's post was right on target. We're going to get more of the same no matter who's elected, it will just be a different flavor if it's Obama. Grab your ankles people, and hope whomever gets elected is polite enough to ease it in.

Posted by: Not so sensitive | August 28, 2008 8:45 AM | Report abuse

This is the Bill Clinton I know and love!

Posted by: Sharon | August 28, 2008 8:44 AM | Report abuse

Tony is obviously an R pretending to have been a D. His comments are not worth much.

Overall, last night's speeches were well done. Bill Clinton and Joe Biden did well at providing some meat to our party's case for the presidency. I thought, however, that John Kerry impressed me most. Not that he had the best speech, because he didn't. But it appeared that he was angry with what happened to him in 2004, and he walloped McCain over the head with his flip-flopping and tactics. It made me wonder why he and Gore did not have the guts to campaign like that when they ran. It made me worry that Obama will do the same and end up pissing this election away. Bill Clinton was the only recent Democrat who had been willing to make the R's look foolish while stating his own case for the job. If Obama doesn't do that, he'll lose.

Hopefully we will learn from the past and come out swinging from here on out. We need more of the attacks made by Kerry, Biden, Gov. Schweitzer and Bill Clinton, and less of the fluff garbage of Mark Warner. If Obama's campaign lets the dogs loose, I like his chances. If not, say hello to President McBush. In that case, we'll only have ourselves to blame.

Posted by: PSU Chris | August 28, 2008 8:32 AM | Report abuse

AsperGirl is not "with the Clintons", or she would not be so negative. In the posts here, and elsewhere, she sounds more like Rush Limbaugh than a Clinton supporter. We know Rush would like to drive a wedge between the Clintons and the Obamas, but Bill and Hillary emphatically put an end to that. Maybe she could persuade Dick Cheney, that famous non-neocon, to run. Then she would have a home.

Posted by: Gene Smith | August 28, 2008 8:30 AM | Report abuse

Good bye, Clintons. Good bye intelligent, brilliant governance for the Democrats.

We're seeing a "neo-libs", tribal and ignorantly ideological trend in the Democratic leadership this year that is no better than that of the "neo-cons" of the Bush Administration.

The "neo-cons" were enabled by a cynical, ignorant Bush who masqueraded as a real-down-to-earth outsider and born again "compassionate conservative" but who was in reality an under-qualified, clueless ivy league face man lightweight who was rapidly shuffled into a bubble world while the country was run by neo-cons and a Republican majority congress. We're setting ourselves up for more or less a repeat of the Bush Administration, but with the Democrats and the ignorant "neo-libs" under Obama's identity politics personality cult.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 8:25 AM | Report abuse

This was Bill Clinton's best speech ever. I was particularly impressed with its organization, delivery and substantive content. He said a lot in a very short period of time and did all Democrats a huge favor by giving them his best effort. I was very impressed and I frankly don't like him, although last evening mitigated my dislike for him quite a lot. - Independent voter for Obama in '08.

Posted by: maxfli | August 28, 2008 8:21 AM | Report abuse

>>swheelock wrote: "That's OK; our two votes, based on policy and some degree of depth, will more than offset AsperGirl's personality-over-policy rant."

Okay, let's debate Obama's core stands. I got issues with him in each major policy area that are serious agenda-topping problems this year.

WHAT THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA WON'T TELL YOU ABOUT OBAMA'S ENERGY PLAN

The U.S. corn ethanol biofuels program is pure evil, pure pork, and pure corrupt politics picking taxpayers pockets for no good public benefit, and Obama is all for it because it pays big $$ in subsidies to Illinois farmers, fuels the Midwestern farm boom and creates a spike in the agribusiness-agricultural commodities boom.

Groups tracking world hunger spikes and food inflation problems this year are blaming the U.S. corn ethanol program for diverting farmers from growing food into growing fuel. Global warming advocates point out that it takes more carbon, overall, to produce, distill, refine and burn corn ethanol biofuels than regular oil or natural gas. Making ethanol from corn is so inefficient that we can never use it for energy independence; we already use 25% of our national corn crop for ethanol. Finally, it costs more to use gas blended with ethanol as cars get markedly fewer miles per gallon than they do with regular 100% gas, but you pay as much at the pump for the ethanol blended gas. Motorists who know what they are doing seek out 100%, no-ethanol blend gas stations, even.

The corn ethanol biofuels program solves no problems, creates food inflation, and it's a ripoff -- King Corn country welfare program to already-flush farmers. From one pocket, the taxpayer pays massive subsidies to corn ethanol growers in farm states, while from the other pocket we pay higher prices at the grocery store for food as a result of the biofuels-caused food inflation. Meanwhile we get poorer gas mileage from ethanol blends while paying the same prices as we pay at stations that sell 100% gas.

We could solve a big chunk of our crippling economic problems this year if we do away with the corn ethanol biofuels program because of the big role that program plays in the inflation side of this years' problems.

From 2006 to 2007, 15 million new acres of corn were brought into production in the United States, contributing to the depletion of fresh water supplies and adding to agrochemical runoff from the country’s corn belt that has already created an enormous dead zone where the Mississippi River enters the Gulf of Mexico. The Gulf of Mexico is an ecologically important zone; for example, serving as the breeding ground for many Atlantic species, like dolphins. The dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico, caused by agricultural, sewage and industrial runoff, is expected to grow just as the Environmental Protection Agency is considering a petition to waive the federal ethanol mandate in the 2007 energy bill. The EPA could intervene in the federal ethanol mandate on account of how destructive the corn ethanol programs have been environmentally.

Obama is all for corn ethanol subsidies programs and has been a staunch supporter of them. Illinois is the second largest recipient of corn ethanol farming subsidies. Obama supports corn ethanol even as there are food riots in Southeast Asia and a price-caused famine in Africa where people are starving due to world price spikes in grain.

Why doesn't the mainstream media discuss Obama's striking support for corn ethanol biofuels, which has been denounced by energy experts and economists alike, in covering the candidates' energy stands? In fact, it seems that mainstream media has stopped covering how bad and damaging the corn ethanol biofuels program is, ever since Obama's strong support for it has emerged. How biased and low the media will sink, to promote Barack Obama and ignore his flaws?

This is a prime example how cynical, special interest politics helps the lesser politician advance over the better one, by providing invisible, powerful bases of support, that his more ideological supporters can pretend don't exist.

John McCain, by the way, has taken a principled stand against the corn ethanol biofuels program, even though it cost him votes in Iowa. On the other hand, Obama scored his widely-acclaimed Iowa caucus victory on the back of his unscrupulous corn ethanol support. The corn ethanol biofuels issues is not only an argument McCain's energy leadership over Obama's, but an example for his taking principled stands against madness, and taking a hit in his support with some constituency.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 8:20 AM | Report abuse

For those of you that continue to say "you're voting for McCain", you have some serious problems in defining yourself as a concerned American. After all this country has seen, suffered and will continue to suffer from the extending debt and policys of this administration and from a McCain that has committed himself to the continuance of those policys, your personal issues are more important than the future of America.

Its your freedom to vote as you wish irregardless to any common sense effort to vote the best person under existing circumstances. Just remember the freedom's and the Constitution that have taken a beating under the bush administration and a McCain that have advocated and praised each and every one of them. Don't be misled by false, misleading statements, and intimidation as in the previous elections. Time to use common sense and look past the gutter politics of the carl rove party and that of bush and McCain.

We only have one vote each and to me that makes it most valuable. If used unwisely bad things can happen. Unwise votes put bush back in office for another four years of bad leadership and could again be cause for a bush wantabe, John McCain. Think about it before you waste your vote for your own personal agenda.

Posted by: Ken | August 28, 2008 8:10 AM | Report abuse

It was wonderful! The man is a master. It is sad to think what might have been.

Posted by: Sara B. | August 28, 2008 8:07 AM | Report abuse

The Clintons' speeches have reminded everyone that Obama's campaign of being his being as good as or better than anyone else in the field of candidates has been overblown. They remind everyone what an experience-and-qualifications based candidacy is like. The subtle negative of having the Clintons speak at Obama's convention is, of course, that they are better, more qualified people.

So there is a split emerging. Some Clinton supporters who had substantial interest in substantial leadership moving more strongly into the McCain camp, and that includes me. Some Clinton supporters who are more comfortable with the whole personality-cult thing and who are party-first diehards and who are comfortable having First Black President outweigh other issues on the agenda, are moving into the Obama camp.

I suspect that there are more of the latter than the former.

The extent to which the Republicans can argue against the Clintons' speeches against them, will depend on how much McCain uses his convention to set himself apart from Bush and reformulate the Republican platform and agendas. McCain's best hope of picking up more Dems right now is to carve into the latter group of the Clinton supporters.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 8:03 AM | Report abuse

I'm voting Obama. I worked for Bill back in the day. That being said, I heard that speech and all I could remember was Bill in NH back in March, telling us that Barack WASN'T ready. I'd have like to hear how he's come to think differently now. One can only do so much in a short time, but it's an important point. After all, one thing we know Bill does extremely well is fake sincerity.

Posted by: Max Sewell | August 28, 2008 8:00 AM | Report abuse

>>swheelock wrote: "That's OK; our two votes, based on policy and some degree of depth, will more than offset AsperGirl's personality-over-policy rant."

There is no basis on which to talk about Obama or this contest except on personality-over-policy because Obama has made the election year about his personality cult.

There is no point in debating policy differences between two politicians when one is a chameleon who simply transforms himself by poll-driven flip flopping on issues, supported by a fanatical, personality-cult base who is okay with that kind of cynical politics.

Obama's lost all debates he's participated in, about two dozen by now. He even "lost" in a forum where the questions were about the candidates, their beliefs and their defining life experiences.

There's no point in debating policy differences between two candidates when one of them is so shallow that they don't understand the position papers written for them by academics and posted on their website.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 7:57 AM | Report abuse

>>"Clinton's speech last night was the dagger in the neo-cons heart. Stick a fork in them, they're done."

The neo-cons were mostly ousted in 2006. Then Condoleezza Rice and others took the lead. That's why the past two years has been marginally better than the first six, except for the economics of course, where the Republicans have just been negligent and incompetent and incoherent.

If the Democrats don't recognize that they aren't opposing neo-cons, they won't oppose McCain successfully.

It's now McCain's job to show that the Republican party is not the same under his leadership as it is under Bush's.

McCain will be able to do that if he himself can show some leadership instead of being dominated by the right-wing base who keep forcing him to the right into failed and outdated positions and postures on which the Republicans no longer have any credibility.

Firstly, I think the media will largely ignore and smother the Republican convention, because it's in the interest of the Obama camp to show that it's the same as the Bush-led Republican party and what better way to do that by not reporting on McCain's convention and shifts in the platform?

Secondly, I have questions myself whether McCain's platforms and agendas will be dominated by the right wing base's or whether he will lead them to more moderate, intelligent platform and agendas.

Thirdly, I wonder whether the Republicans will use their convention to rally the base behind McCain (which will squander yet more time and resources on a spoiled and off-track base dominated by right-wingers) or to present a dramatically moderated new platform and agenda under McCain's leadership (climate change abatement, new energy platform including alternative and renewable energy programs, new immigration agendas and stands, a moderation of the abortion agendas for less religions agenda priorities, economic platform and agendas that are more coherent than Bush's with less focus on growth and more focus on regulation and good governance). It will be interesting to see if the convention panders to the spoiled and deluded right-wing elements of the Republican base, squandering yet more resources on the past, dead positions, or if it is used to redefine the Republican platform and agendas and set McCain apart from Bush.

There are 2 ways that McCain can make bold gestures setting him apart from Bush. That's with his VP pick and with his convention.

After the Republican convention, McCain won't be so able to run so far ahead of his party as he is now. Either McCain will get dragged down to where his party is (and lose the election) or his party will get dragged by force up to where he is (and win the election). The potential for which will happen will depend on how much the base dominates the convention or McCain's moderate agenda changes do.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 7:53 AM | Report abuse

That's OK; our two votes, based on policy and some degree of depth, will more than offset AsperGirl's personality-over-policy rant.

BTW, I'm not sure who this "independent-thinking moderate and principled McCain" is that she's so enamored with, but it sure isn't the 95%-voting-with-Bush, foul-mouthed adulterer with a temper problem that the Republicans are running.

Posted by: swheelock | August 28, 2008 7:42 AM | Report abuse

>>Denver Source wrote: "Get this... Jesse Jackson Jr. amid frustrations of a unified party breaks down into tears over Dems not having enough time to unite around Barrack Obama. Has to be consoled by Chicago's Mayor Daley."

JJ, Jr. is an Obama supporter. But IMO this is true, the Clinton supporters are ignored and shut out by the Obamas. The Clintons had to fight to get a few minutes to show their support for Obama. Otherwise, Clinton would've had no presence at all, her name wouldn't have been put into nomination, her supporters and campaign wouldn't have been acknowledged at all, and there would have been nothing but derision and divisiveness. Whatever "unity" moments were fought for and brought to the convention by the Clinton supporters and the Clintons themselves.

And still, whatever unity moments existed at the convention, what you have is in the Obama camp the notion that the Clinton donors and supporters are allowed and encouraged to get onboard because their votes and money are needed. But there is no outreach and they have to accept a status lower than longtime Obama supporters (if any at all).

Clinton said that Obama had the instincts of a Chicago street thug. That's perfectly true. He and his camp are very tribal in their behavior. And ignorant when it comes to true leadership. At this point, the only unity in the Democratic party is that being forced on the Obamas by the Clintons, the narratives of some of the more influential journalists (which are not necessarily true) and the desire of some rank-and-file to be on the same side no matter what.

The Obamas are tribal and ignorantly strong-man in their culture. Their whole "movement" is about Obama, like a personality cult.

I feel sorry for people like Jesse Jackson, Jr. who have a personal stake in the legacy of the older generation of Democrats and the new one. The fractured, newer generation that goes forth without its legacy, with hostility and contempt for the elders in the party, is not a good party with depth and the ability to lead and govern well.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 7:39 AM | Report abuse

How anyone who supported Clinton can support McCain is a mystery. He is against all that she is for. She is pro-choice, anti-war and for universal health care to name a few. He is totally against all of those. As Hillary said " were you just voting for her as a person and not the issues". Crazy

Posted by: clramsay | August 28, 2008 7:29 AM | Report abuse

Most Clinton supporters will now vote for Obama, but the damage seems to have been inflicted. Without the commited support of Clinton's campaign workers - they may vote but won't work - Obama seems doomed. We'll see....

Posted by: rguitte | August 28, 2008 7:27 AM | Report abuse

Most Clinton supporters will now vote for Obama, but the damage seems to have been inflicted. Without their commited support on the campaign trial - they may vote but won't work - Obama seems doomed. We'll see....

Posted by: rguitte | August 28, 2008 7:25 AM | Report abuse

I'm with the Clintons. Sorry Obama. You should have united with them instead of forcing them to fight you to get a grudging few moments in which to try to show they will be on your side.

Obama isn't the kind of "leader" and "healer of divisions" he pretends to be. The convention confirms that he is all about himself and the campaign is all about himself and, unfortunately, he's not experienced, knowledgeable and talented enough to run the country alone. Obama's shaping up to be a bubble boy like Bush, an iconic figure beloved by the most extreme elements in the party and with lower power centers in the party running amok with policy and administration.

No thanks. I'm happy with the thought of an independent-thinking moderate and principled McCain as a bipartisan president in the White House with a Democratic congress that has a clear majority. I think that's the recipe for a productive, moderate and issue-focused government that will be more about problem-solving than ideological excesses, for the next 8 years.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 7:24 AM | Report abuse

Although people like me didn't get as much reporting attention ahead of time, I must admit I came into this convention with some lingering bad feelings toward the Clintons after the primary. Because my side won I couldn't say the feelings out loud too much because that isn't being a good sport, but we all know that doesn't make them go away. The Clintons and their supporters and delegates have completely changed this for me over the last few days. (I credit the convention planners, too.)

I listened to Hillary's speech twice, with admiration, enjoyed seeing both Hillary and Bill's reactions as they watched the convention unfold, and was gripped by the live video of the roll call on washingtonpost.com. President Clinton gave a wonderful speech, but for me, the best part came at the beginning when the applause was so big that he couldn't get started. I am grinning even now at the memory, and I was cheering at home too. It's just so great to be back together again. And now let's win this thing!

Posted by: Fairfax Voter | August 28, 2008 7:19 AM | Report abuse

No one's watching.

Posted by: tommcc123 | August 28, 2008 7:19 AM | Report abuse

>>Anonymous wrote: "Even the trolls attacks seem somewhat subdued."

blah blah blah. The netroots like at DailyKos talk about Republicans and anyone who criticizes Obama, as if they were animals and with dehumanizing language. Your use of these terms marks you as a DailyKos cult fringe babbler-of-memes.

"Tomorrow, Obama. Then on to the Republicans.... The Democrats so far seemed at a pretty good balance to me."

I don't think so. I think Obama's convention has been remarkably lame when it comes to theme so far.

"I wonder how independents perceive this whole thing, or if they are even watching? (People here who claim to be truly independent are Trolls, and need to get a life)."

Can you try to keep your "Trolls" talk to a minimum? Makes you sound like an idiot cult member whose ego system and value system is tagged to the Lord of the Flies, infantile memes and themes of DailyKos. This is not DailyKos. Please go there if you want to use verbally abusive language dehumanizing other posters.

>>"(The anti-immigrant xenophobia of the Republican party, it's attacks on science, and it's lack of any ideas for foreign affairs other than trying to bully the world make it persona non-grata in my book.)"

Then go hang out at DailyKos where you can unload your verbally dehumanizing labels and memorized partisan memes without being offended by the presence of "trolls" and "world bullies." Everything will be in your comfort zones because the thought police there "hide" everything that people like you don't want to here.

Maybe after you turn 16 you can go to an open forum for adults that isn't all about what you feel comfortable with.

>>"The lack of a bounce in the polls so far may indicate a couple of things. One, the electorate is pretty much divided, and minds are already made up. Two, those who haven't made up their minds, aren't watching."

There probably was a bounce but it in recent days it has been concealed by the steady outflow of Clinton supporters, like myself, who are moving toward McCain because Obama snubbed Clinton. There is no convention bounce so far because Obama's lame narcissistic convention has been about himself and Michelle. There will be a small bounce from the Clinton speeches and Biden's good performance but those won't show up until starting with today's tracking polls and rising for the next few days.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 7:15 AM | Report abuse

My generation (boomers) in the '60s embraced everything that was new. We lacked the sophistication to separate the bad from the good and the impractical from the practical. We could not say "NO". Those of us who left that crowd are today known as conservatives. Those who remain behind are known as Democrats, with Republicans somewhere in between.

Bill's motto: If it feels good, ....

Posted by: hipshot | August 28, 2008 7:14 AM | Report abuse

Clinton was best in his popular professor mode, delivering important points about the economy and Republicans. He is one of the few politicians who can make people at a rally think, really think, and when he's at his best he can make people think and be passionate at the same time. This is part of the power of his charisma that enabled him to do functionally beneficial things when in office. The Obamas lose a lot in terms of a powerful spokesman and advocate for causes they might try to enact, when they isolate themselves from the talented Clintons.

Obviously, the Clintons split up the help they were going to give Obama. Hillary was about commitment to the party and unity, etc. Because unity is not about individual self, her speech necessarily didn't focus on herself as an individual or Obama as an individual. The only individual's traits she really spoke about was McCain, to invoke something to unify against. That was very smart. Bill Clinton got the job of speaking about specifics and individuals. So he had the job of talking about Obama and how Obama was qualified and ready to be Pres. This was really smart.

Both Clintons gave Obama more than he deserved. Hillary not only told her supporters to support Obama and released her delegates, in several ways, she's pushing her supporters off the gangplank. Bill linked his legacy to Obama's, which is something that the Obamas have rejected. Michelle Obama's face didn't look happy when he did this. The Obamas' rejection of the Clinton legacy (indeed, even running against it) points us to an interesting issue with the Obamas' no-legacy strategy.

The reason why Obama never linked to these themes before is that he is all about himself. His campaign is all about himself as the embodiment and deliverer of the Democrats' need to be free and to govern. Even this victory that was brought about by many people and groups to have a first black president, the Obamas have instead striven to make it about him, disconnecting the campaign from all previous legacy. There is no legacy; it's all about Obama, who is The One.

If the Obamas have their way, Obama's nomination, too, is not about a moment in history that is something that is an achievement for Democrats. It's only about a man in history: Barack Obama.

This is the distinction and the key one that will keep him from winning.

I fell asleep during the Biden speech. I hear rave reviews. The first part seemed indifferent. Was it good?

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 28, 2008 7:02 AM | Report abuse

Bill was awesome -as always. And I have disagreed with him over policy in the past, but always admired him. He and Hillary did a great job for the party - but I am voting my heart - not the party. This is not the same party as FDR and LBJ. This is a weakened poor excuse of a party. Good luck without the hardcore PUMAs. The way these morons assaulted the Clintons as lying, pathetic, racist, greedy, conniving, "more of the same" -- was outrageous. I will not take part in a party that beats down its greatest leaders. That's suicidal.

Posted by: Tony | August 28, 2008 7:01 AM | Report abuse

Clinton's speech last night was the dagger in the neo-cons heart. Stick a fork in them, they're done.

Posted by: DirtyHarry | August 28, 2008 6:58 AM | Report abuse

The world has just started laughing when we Chose Barack a racist who calls everyone else racists if they critic him...

Posted by: Marsten | August 28, 2008 6:30 AM | Report abuse

The 2nd half of Bill Clinton's speech was the best, a logical deconstruction of the last 8 years, perfectly delivered. I honestly didn't think he started that well, but overall, he more than did his job.

Posted by: KCallahan | August 28, 2008 6:27 AM | Report abuse

GOP has been a disater for America. The world has stopped laughing at us since we gave Barack his opportunity. Now they are saying that Americans are fair minded, broad minded, tolerant thinking people. I am a world traveller and when Bush was making a fool of our great country it was almost embarrassing. It is great to be able to travel and be proud of our great nation again.

Posted by: Bill Kane | August 28, 2008 6:19 AM | Report abuse

jt...

a) I don't believe you. I think you are a republican hack.

b) you're an idiot.

sophisticated rebuttal, I know.

Posted by: Boutan | August 28, 2008 5:19 AM | Report abuse

The Clinton's rolled out the "magic carpet" for Barack in a wonderfully gracious way that speaks "fathoms" of the Clinton's commitment to the Democratic Party.

"Very Admirable and Generous"

WoW! Hillary and Bill were both outstanding.

The Clinton's love this country and the "power of their example" in conclusion of this heart-wrenching contest was a display of political noblility the likes we may never see again.

You can love'm or hate'm but nobody can say the Clinton's are not DIE HARD AMERICANS... They are worthy of our admiration and unwavering respect.

The Clinton's kick butt!

"Hillary16"

You Go Grrrrrl...


Posted by: Randy | August 28, 2008 5:16 AM | Report abuse

To VJ Machiavelli:
You are a certified jackass; your videos are too silly to be taken seriously by any intelligent person. Who pays you to spew this garbage?
I wish there were a way to stop you from using the name of Machiavelli. There is nothing of him in you or in the trash you promote. Machiavelli was a patriot and decent human being who sacrificed himself for the city of Florence and its safety. Reprobates like you have no respect for historical accuracy; your slander of Machiavelli by simply associating his name with your hideous politics is not fooling anyone in his/her right mind. Viva Niccolo'!! And you, ciuco, somaro, asino, scecco, VAFFANCULO!!

Posted by: J. | August 28, 2008 4:22 AM | Report abuse

Bill and Hillary were awesome, as always. But neither one is running in Nov, and they were race baited in the worst way by Obama during the primaries.

So, I'll give credit where it's due, but this one of the 18 million is voting McCain.

Posted by: jt | August 28, 2008 4:03 AM | Report abuse


The speeches have been pretty good. I wasn't that impressed with Mark Warner. But Schweitzer was great! Michelle Obama did a good job, Hillary was terrific, and so was Bill. Biden was better than I have seen him in a long time, he looked very comfortable as a VP candidate, and seemed to be enjoying all the applause.

The Democrats who don't unite around this, are a lost cause probably. People who work in politics need to learn how to loose gracefully, as both Clintons showed us. People who don't learn how to loose gracefully have no future in politics. It's bad form.

Even the trolls attacks seem somewhat subdued.

Tomorrow, Obama. Then on to the Republicans. It will be interesting to see how much of their focus is on positive themes, and how much on attack. The Democrats so far seemed at a pretty good balance to me.

I wonder how independents perceive this whole thing, or if they are even watching? (People here who claim to be truly independent are Trolls, and need to get a life). (Disclaimer, I will vote for either Obama or the Greens, depending on my mood. The convention has made me feel good, but there are those sticky issues, such as Biden mentioning biofuels.)

(The anti-immigrant xenophobia of the Republican party, it's attacks on science, and it's lack of any ideas for foreign affairs other than trying to bully the world make it persona non-grata in my book.)

The lack of a bounce in the polls so far may indicate a couple of things. One, the electorate is pretty much divided, and minds are already made up. Two, those who haven't made up their minds, aren't watching.

An interesting year!!

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 3:42 AM | Report abuse

Copied from a British logger: "He is awesome. He totally ought to be president or something."

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 3:39 AM | Report abuse

Kinslor - I haven't gone back and looked at any archives of the 2004 speech, but the bit about gay friends in red states and poking around in libraries was the exact clip played during the second(?) hour of the convention on Monday.

While I watched it via a CNN feed on their website, the clip was broadcast on the big screen for everyone in the convention hall and everyone watching gavel-to-gavel. So. perhaps, if it's missing from some official archive, someone may have cut instead of copied, but it's clearly not being hidden because it was one of the few videos shown during the first couple of hours of the show.

Posted by: Magister | August 28, 2008 3:32 AM | Report abuse

"Bill has always been one of the best people I have ever seen at giving a speech."

I've seen him speak in person twice. He is the second best speaker I've ever seen in person.

The best I've ever seen in person speaks tommorow.

But at that level, its just splitting hairs.

Was anyone impressed with Kerry's speech? I thought it was pretty damn good.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 28, 2008 2:41 AM | Report abuse

It's going to be interesting to see how "George" McCain and the cardboard Repubs will line up in contrast... The bar is already very high and Obama hasn't even spoken yet.

These are some powerful and historic speeches.

Posted by: DonJulio | August 28, 2008 2:33 AM | Report abuse

Bill has always been one of the best people I have ever seen at giving a speech.

Posted by: Prem Janardhan | August 28, 2008 2:20 AM | Report abuse

Jesse Jackson Jr. really did that? That is just more signs of weakness in our party. I swear the Jacksons are a curse to Obama

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 2:16 AM | Report abuse

Scrivener,
Re.

How did you discover the text of the Obama 2004 address was edited out? Enlighten us.

Posted by: scrivener | August 28, 2008 1:10 AM

I was having a look at the http://www.demconvention.com/ site and decided to watch Obama's 2004 speech (yet again!). I realised I had not heard one of my favourite lines and so had a listen to a youtube version to work out where in the speech it came. If you go to the DNC Convention site, find it and listen, about 13:30 in you hear a change in the cheering where it was cut out.

I am a fan of Obama (though admittedly an antipodean who watches from a distance) and am just curious to find out why those lines were cut. Everything else seems to be there.

I agree with your point about twitter. Less two line twittiness and more analysis from the Fix, please.

Posted by: Kinslor | August 28, 2008 2:06 AM | Report abuse

These is not mine but this guy is good...

Clinton fullfilled his duty. But also praised himself and MCcain too much; showed stark contrast between himself and Obama by mentioning the Rep's called him young and inexperienced also. Don't forget Clinton also said he had more experience than Obama during the primes when it was first pointed out by Obama. Suttle digs at Obama kept coming. Clinton off the record has reportably compared Obama to a Chicago thug also at this convention...

Posted by: Denver Source | August 27, 2008 9:54 PM

Get this... Jesse Jackson Jr. amid frustrations of a unified party breaks down into tears over Dems not having enough time to unite around Barrack Obama. Has to be consoled by Chicago's Mayor Daley.

Posted by: Denver Source | August 27, 2008 10:08 PM

Posted by: reposter | August 28, 2008 2:03 AM | Report abuse

Aleks...

Okay you have publicly crossed the line... and I believe your superiors are monitoring your transparent performance. You are using a major media web site to stalk and harass and you are breaking the law and guess what! You're busted. Have a nice day.

Hey Chris, if you're reading this... WaPo sites are being used to commit cyber terrorism. Pass it on to your i team please. This is going too far.

Posted by: scrivener | August 28, 2008 1:57 AM | Report abuse

He was as good he has ever been . nobody frmes things like he does.

Posted by: mitchell Kaplan | August 28, 2008 1:55 AM | Report abuse

Clinton's talk tonight was powerful. I was very impressed with him, but the highlight of the convention so far for me was the roll call vote today when Hillary moved to suspend the rules and nominate Obama by acclamation. Wow. I've never seen anything like that.

I'm very much looking forward to tomorrow night, and to election night.
Obama/Biden '08

Posted by: Sunshine | August 28, 2008 1:50 AM | Report abuse

Senator Obama has an opportunity to demonstrate how he will lead the United States and work to solve the crises that President Bush has ignored for so long. The Convention has shown that Obama will be able to work with a talented team of Democrats in the Senate, state houses and in retirement (Bill Clinton) who can help him to implement the solutions and change he promises. See my full views on my blog - http://kandashan2008.blogspot.com/2008/08/party-of-leadership.html

Posted by: Kan Da Shan | August 28, 2008 1:45 AM | Report abuse

Bill Clinton at his best! His ability to connect with an audience on an almost psychic level, is unprecedented. He loves his audience and his audience in turn loves him. His fluency and his brilliance in making his case was truly masterful. It was a pleasure to hear him speak again. Hillary had a job to do in speaking to her supporters and she performed it magnificently. But only President Clinton was really in the position to rise above and make the judgment about Obama's readiness to be the President. The Clinton's really showed the full extent of their talent and patriotism -- two home runs on behalf of Obama and the Democratic Party.

Posted by: rjc116 | August 28, 2008 1:44 AM | Report abuse

I think there will be a ton of Americans shocked by the end numbers after election day. I think McCain will win in land slide fashion. These poll numbers you see are mainly people ages 25-40 because, the older a person gets, the less likely they are to participate in a 20 minute phone poll. If you factor in the millions and millions of seniors, I think you have a sure win for McCain! I think McCain wins Florida, Ohio, and PA

Posted by: CBrailey | August 28, 2008 1:39 AM | Report abuse

This speech, the roll call and the Convention itself reveal once and for all that the "Unity" story line was one the media created. Next week in St. Paul there will be TWO conventions and there would be no happy role call if it was close between Huckabee and McCain. The extremists would walk out and for a 3rd convention. Bit the media will not start a story line about Republican disunity. John McCain owns them.

Posted by: Pragmatist | August 28, 2008 1:30 AM | Report abuse

Kinslor:
How did you discover the text of the Obama 2004 address was edited out? Enlighten us.
Posted by: scrivener | August 28, 2008 1:10 AM

Like ringing Pavlov's bell . . .

Hey Scivener, I heard that Obama was covertly born in Eilat, he's actually a secret Jew!

Posted by: Aleks | August 28, 2008 1:27 AM | Report abuse

Both Clintons did what they were supposed to do for the party! They both gave a great speech for Obama. Can you ever give Hillary a break..does anyone remember Ted Kennedy refusing to shake Carter's hand when he lost in primaries..that is ok! What about JFK and Johnson..they were bitter rivals...and yet JFK was smart enough to take him as his vice president! Hillary gives a great speech as does Bill- yet it is never good enough! He is great- she is so so... So our country has progressed enough to voter for a black MAN- but don't let a SMART woman get the upper hand! How misogynistic!!

Posted by: twistedsister | August 28, 2008 1:21 AM | Report abuse

While the “APPEASEMENT CONVENTION” was
singing “GIVE PEACE A CHANCE”
The Terrorists are singing "GIVE BOMBS A CHANCE

VJ Machiavelli
http://www.vjmachiavelli.blogspot.com

Posted by: VJ Machiavelli | August 28, 2008 1:19 AM | Report abuse

I think the Clinton's have done their part to heal this party. It's now up to the Great Community Organizer from South Chicago to do the rest. If he can do that and make all the Clintonites happy again than, contrary to what Ralphinpnx predicts, this Ralph in Phoenix will predict that he is full of manure. NO HOW-NO WAY-NO MCCAIN. We can do without this trigger happy warrior who, with the help of Lieberman, will probably start WWIII. Actually it's kind of fun to see those two geriatrics with their arms around each other, planning another war. Their time is long gone except they do not know it. I can't believe the Republicans picked this guy but I will not look a gift horse in the mouth. Yes, I am from Arizona and John McCain is WAY over the hill.

Posted by: Opa2 | August 28, 2008 1:18 AM | Report abuse

Fix,
You nailed it. This was the home run that everybody said Hillary hit (cause she needed to hit one, so why not just say it?)

Bill is obviously hugely more comfortable addressing himself to the American nation at large than parochial parts of it -- ie his party, his wife's campaign, even his own family.

His speech closed the book on party unity, but more than that I think it will be a very, very strong tool for Obama to use to shore up his support in precincts he struggled in in the primaries. Bill Clinton spoke on behalf of Barack Obama to his entire constituency: the American people.

Posted by: Mike | August 28, 2008 1:16 AM | Report abuse

I don't care what you say about Mr. Clinton, I thought we had a GREAT 8 years with Mr. Clinton !!!

Posted by: Bedford 1942 | August 28, 2008 1:11 AM | Report abuse

Kinslor:

How did you discover the text of the Obama 2004 address was edited out? Enlighten us.

Posted by: scrivener | August 28, 2008 1:10 AM | Report abuse

Man. Terrific speech, and rehabilitated his (and his wife's) image in the democratic party. This convention desperately needed Bill Clinton at his best, and we got it. He's an incredibly talented politician. He blew his wife away .. I was very disappointed in her, but this was tremendous.

Posted by: keilprti | August 28, 2008 1:09 AM | Report abuse

Chris:

Wait 'til the GOP comes out with the "compare and contrast" ads juxtaposing Clinton's recent interviews about Obama's qualifications ("The Constitution sets the qualifications...") with lines from his speech. Things might not look so rosy.

But it was a masterful performance. Most notably, Clinton seems to have recovered from whatever was affecting his motor skills a while back.

And what's with this "twitter"? Keep it here... nobody needs a minute by minute account. That's what is destroying what's left of journalism. No reflection, not for a minute...

Posted by: scrivener | August 28, 2008 1:08 AM | Report abuse

Hi Chris

On a different note, can you find out why the 2008 Democratic Convention website's version of Senator Obama's brilliant 2004 convention speech has had a key part edited out?

His famous line (and I am paraphrasing slightly) about "serving an awesome God in the blue states" and having gay friends in the red states, coaching little league and not liking people poking around our libraries, that bit has been cut. It is just after the 13 minute mark, when he talks about the red state / blue state divide. Why have they done that?

Cheers

Posted by: Kinslor | August 28, 2008 1:08 AM | Report abuse

It was masterful, wonderful. Clinton has restored his image among Democrats, but more importantly, he really explained this election and our choices so well. Man, I hope he really does go out and stump for Obama--Clinton's restored my optimism again!

Posted by: Beth in VA | August 28, 2008 1:05 AM | Report abuse

All that the 2008 Socialist Democrat Liberals Convention in Denver,Colorado has
done,frankly is to prove that only the dimwit Democrats can constantly and repeatedly without fail nominate an endless
chain of losers,like the latest one that
of Messiah and King Barack Hussein Obama the First, Queen Michelle Obama and Obama
Court Jester Crazy Old Motor Mouth Joe Biden, And,who now will join the ranks of
fellow Democrat Losers such as Windersurfer
John Kerry and Pretty Boy Adulterer John
Edwards,Al Gore and Joe Lieberman,Bill Clinton and Al Gore,Micheal Dukakias and
Geraldine Ferrora,Mr Peanuts Jimmy Carter
and so Thank You Dumbarse Democrats for
Electing Republican John McCain the Next
President of the United States!

Posted by: Ralphinphnx | August 28, 2008 12:59 AM | Report abuse

Wow. I am flat out amazed, overwhelmed, blown away. Bill Clinton just guarranteed that Barak Obama will be our next President. I was expect Biden to do what President Clinton did. Instead, in a calm and gentlemanly manner, he tore the heart out of the McCain campaign.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | August 28, 2008 12:55 AM | Report abuse

President Clinton sure did deliver. How exciting was that! I felt that Hillary had held back a little in her support of Senator Obama and that she was the weaker for it. No such issues for the former President, who spoke passionately, intelligently and convincingly. His point about how the Republicans had said he was too young to become Commander in Chief before he was elected, that he was ready and that Barack Obama is ready were telling.
Also, Senator Joe Biden took a few good swings at Senator McCain. I thought his acceptance speech was pretty strong too.

Posted by: Kinslor | August 28, 2008 12:43 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company