Back to Clive Crook's blog homepage
Invesco Field
August 29, 2008
Those who came to Invesco Field on Thursday witnessed something they are unlikely ever to forget. Barack Obama gave an electrifying speech that silences—for the moment at least—doubts in the Democratic party that they have backed the right candidate. He commanded this vast sports stadium with calm authority, there were no false notes, and the attention of his audience never wavered. His listeners were enthralled, and they left believing they will win in November. After this, they were asking, how could the country fail to elect their man president?
The event started slowly, with enormous lines at security, a dreary succession of second-rate speakers, and a clutch of by-the-numbers political videos. Al Gore, Sheryl Crow, and Stevie Wonder raised the standard only a little, with dull renditions of their greatest hits, and the thought that this entire mega-production was going to backfire was impossible to suppress. Who in the world thought that the Greek temple stage-set was right? If the designer’s brief had been “low-budget hubris”, it worked; by any other standard it was a calamity. With the Republicans calling Mr Obama a vapid celebrity, this was outright self-parody. Yet none of it mattered when Mr Obama started to speak.
He began with a brief but seemingly sincere tribute to Hillary Clinton—who had given a well-received speech earlier in the convention. He wove vignettes of ordinary people’s struggles during the past eight years—the human element said to be missing from his campaign of late—into a statement of his own political philosophy. You cannot connect with people in a space of this size, but this was the next best thing. Part of his speech then crisply listed specific policy proposals, addressing the charge that he is too vague. He directly rebutted John McCain’s insinuation that he fails to put the country first: “We all put the country first,” he said with a touch of anger, to one of the loudest cheers of the night.
He attacked his opponent, but there was nothing vicious or vindictive in his criticisms. He said Mr McCain was for the wrong policies not because he did not care about people, but because he did not understand them and was out of touch. He gently contrasted his own modest upbringing with Mr McCain’s wealth. In that way, Mr Obama stayed true to the positive tone of his campaign, yet wounded his adversary as well. He closed by reiterating his earlier theme that this is not red America or blue America but the United States of America—in other words, with a renewed appeal to tolerance, moderation, and patriotism. More deafening cheers.
The costs of the policies he listed do not add up, of course: affordable college, affordable health care for all, subsidies for clean energy and every other good thing, and tax cuts for 95 percent of households. This is not exactly the count-every-dime accounting he claimed. Yet the measured force of Mr Obama in full flight is not to be denied. In modern American politics, he is peerless. How it looked on television will matter most for his campaign, but in the stadium it was a triumph.
Hitler could sway crowds. Hitler was the first to use stadiums.
Read the transcript of the speech and it is not all that out of the ordinary.
Many populist promises that simply do not add up.
People, come back to your senses!
Where is the pied piper leading you?
Posted by: RCS | August 29th, 2008 at 7:28 am | Report this commentTo RCS- He’s leading in a better direction than John McCain. That’s what counts.
The Hitler comparison is just downright dirty and in no way apt. It’s not just that he held the audience - it’s what he said. Valid criticisms of the failures of the Bush-Cheney era. Powerful yet measured criticisms of McCain. Ambitious goals for where he wants to take America.
Sure, it’s not all costed, but there’s always an element of theatre at a Convention, just as there will be next week.
To paraphrase Obama, John McCain would represent four more years of George Bush’s tough talk and bad strategy. McCain doesn’t have the temperament or the right vision to be President and safely manage Russia’s resurgence and China’s rise. This is clearly demonstrated by his League of Democracies proposal, which is a case study of old school, cold war thinking; yesterday’s mindset which is thoroughly ill-suited for the challenges of today or tomorrow.
Posted by: DKM | August 29th, 2008 at 8:52 am | Report this commentBarack Obama’s historic speech was even better on television that it must have been in the stadium. He made the case convincingly that he intends to lead America in a new direction, one based on cooperation, not confrontation, overseas, and caring for ordinary Americans, not only the rich and powerful, at home.
This is Obama’s real “danger” and the reason why the Republicans (and some Hillary supporters) are so desperate to bring him down. Unlike either the Clintons or the Bush presidents (not to mention Ronald Reagan) Obama really threatens to change the structure of power and privilege in America that has turned a country that used to be a democracy over to the rule of the Pentagon, the big oil companies and the Wall Street investment banks.
To put it another way, under another Clinton presidency, Democratic lobbyists would be once again welcome on K Street, not only Republican ones. Under an Obama presidency, there would no longer be a K street.
Even though I have often disagreed with RCS, I usually feel that he is a rational observer of US politics from his vantage point thousands of miles away and that his views deserve to be taken seriously. Therefore, I do not know what to make of his ludicrous comparison between Obama and Hitler.
Posted by: algasema | August 29th, 2008 at 10:30 am | Report this commentI did not compare Obama to Hitler, I compared their crowd appeal, which in my opinion is irrelevant to being president.
DKM makes a strong case for Obama, which rests on two advantages he has: 1. temparament; 2. Holistic world-view.
However, both of these can be viewed as disadvantages as well. His temperament might lead him to be a too passive observer of world affairs, as for instance was the charge against former secretary of state George Schultz. His world-view might be too abstract, even muddled, like some French philosopher — his supporters would certainly tag this as ‘nuanced’. The question is: is it actionable? Are there concrete measures which he knows he will take in certain situations? Otherwise, he risks finding himself in a Carter-like drift.
Both temperaments, Obama’s and McCain’s, have their place in the scheme of things, depending on what situation the world is currently in. In times of crises, one would prefer a no-nonsense actionable leader like Winston Churchill (who was blocked by his political opponents before the war erupted) or Ariel Sharon (who was similarly politically blocked before the Second Intifada). In other times, an Augustus-like figure would be more appropriate for an age of Pax Westana. The question is, which age are we in? Does Obama have the confidence bred of experience to navigate the rough waters of today’s geopolitics? (The Georgia crisis, where he acted slowly and meekly, is a case in point). Does he have the clear vision and Reagan-like moral certitude to guide his policy? Granted, such certitude has fallen into deep disrepute thanks to the actions of Bush/Cheney, the accidental couple who should never have made it to power, but does that mean it is altogether useless in today’s ‘postmodern’ world?
If Obama is elected, I predict that events during his tenure will be his undoing, just as happened to Carter, after which the pendulum will swing once more towards a clearer and more actionable view of foreign policy.
Posted by: RCS | August 29th, 2008 at 12:38 pm | Report this commentI am glad to see RCS’s welcome clarification of his Obama-Hitler stadium comment. But he has not yet withdrawn his “pied piper” remark, which is just another way of making the same invidious comparison.
I am also a little confused about what RCS means when he talks about Reagan’s “moral certitude”. Which ” moral certitude” is RCS referring to? Iran-Contra? Reagan’s support of “pro-American” dictators in Latin America and around the world? His invasion of Grenada? His redistribution of income in favor of the rich at home? His crushing of the air traffic controllers’ union?
Posted by: algasema | August 29th, 2008 at 1:15 pm | Report this commentThe supporters of John McCain and the Bush Administration who regularly comment here, such as RCS, must sound like the supporters of the Hoover Administration when Franklin Roosevelt was nominated, then elected.
Horrors for them that someone who with oratory and idealism that move people should in fact appeal to most people’s own idealism and hope in the face of disappointment of repeated election of dismal Presidents and Congresses such as Reagan, Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. and the right-wing ideologues ushered into Congress in 1994, many still there. McCain fits well within that group.
Senator McCain’s policies and comments are generally frightening, thoughtless and bordering on lunatic. His personal characteristics have widely been reported as irresponsible and scarily vituperative.
I listened to snippets from some of the speech-making in Denver on Thursday, including some of Senator Obama’s speech. No question that Senator Obama’s skills at speech-making are remarkable and no question that his oratory can evoke emotion in the listener. Very few politicians have those capabilities, even President Clinton. Also the contrast to President Bush Jr.’s abysmal public performances could not be more stark. Most impressive from my perspective was the enthusiasm of the crowd and the spectacle of the setting. There apparently will be quite a contrast in the expected under-attended event in Dayton Ohio where Senator McCain is supposed to announce his running mate.
I agree with those who recommend that the Obama campaign and Senator Obama himself directly, strongly and repeatedly attack Senator McCain’s policies and comments. There is a richness of lunacy among those that would frighten any voter aside from extreme right-wingers. I also think there is much evidence to legitimately attack Senator McCain’s character because of the history of deliberate misrepresentation of it going back the shrouds of myth around his actions as an aviator in Vietnam.
Posted by: Wendell Murray | August 29th, 2008 at 1:27 pm | Report this commentRoger,
Given that Obama’s campaign is full of lobbyists now, including lobbyist-in-chief David Axelrod (you remember the board member at Fr. Pfleger’s Church who arranged Michelle Obama’s job, and is currently working with Mayor Daley to destroy a lakefront park to build a shrine to one of Obama’s donors), I don’t think the claim that Sen. Obama has distanced himself from lobbyists holds much water.
Given that the uber-wealthy support Obama anyway (they have already figured out how to shield their wealth from greedy politicians-only the idealistic remain Republican) it is the small businessmen, mid level manager, carpenters, plumbers, doctors, who should be very afraid of a politician who promises to take their hard earned wealth (including their homes when they die, under the 2011 estate tax revival) and distribute it to his political allies.
JBP
Posted by: John Powers | August 29th, 2008 at 1:41 pm | Report this commentHere in Ukraine we were also amazed of Yuschenko when he was a presidential candidate. Not anymore now.
The same was with Walesa in Poland.
Good orator is not necessarily good president.
Posted by: Kost Kirnas, Ukraine | August 29th, 2008 at 1:45 pm | Report this commentUnfortunately Barak’s undoubted intellectual gifts (he makes Bush look like a chimp in a suit) and reasonable policy stance on many issues will, I fear, count for nought. McCain just has to nominate a woman for VP and he’s a shoo-in. The commentariat has way underestimated the extent to which Hilary supporters are feminists first and democrats second. Alternatively, another Al-Quaeda outrage even slightly ‘close to home’ and McCain’s tough-talk will get him home. Needless to say, I hope my own prediction doesn’t come true.
Posted by: Laurence White | August 29th, 2008 at 2:24 pm | Report this commentThe $100 Million of Annenberg money on “education reform” he wasted with Weatherman Bill Ayers, has led me to doubt Sen. Obama “intellectual gifts”.
The undoubting has ended.
JBP
Posted by: John Powers | August 29th, 2008 at 2:43 pm | Report this commentIt was an exhilerating speech.
I hope this speech characterizes his campaign. Even were he to lose, he would do so with profound pride and honor.
I think Clive quibbles about the budget implicit in his words. Such speeches point towards the goals to work towards, where one’s sympathies and sensitivities lie, they do not necessarily mean you are going to try doing everything at once. Obama is too intelligent for that.
But implicit in Obama’s words is the dilemma for governing America, and it is no small thing.
A giant, complex society needs intelligent government to function efficiently.
But what America tends to get is leaders who pander and appeal to instincts and attitudes that yield anything but intelligent government.
At the same time there has emerged a privileged “inner party,” an establishment in Washington that is almost impervious to elections.
It is an establishment of a new form of aristocracy and it represents large corporate, family wealth, and imperialism.
This also is a form of highly inefficient government, just as the aristocracies of the 18th century.
It reminds me very much of what has happened in American education.
Despite its reputation for some outstanding schools, standards in general in America are poor. Grades are so inflated, they are meaningless. Teaching is often the equivalent of the efforts of Mao’s bare-foot doctors.
Schools of every possible description arise overnight to offer degrees or certificates in almost anything, including utter nonsense. Their standards are almost non-existent.
At the same time, the elite schools keep training the elites and filling the important offices of Washington’s establishment.
I don’t see how anyone can break through this structure, no matter how eloquent.
Obama’s rise has been almost a popular miracle, but even if he is elected that establishment is what he has to work with.
What is so maddening about, for example, the Clintons is that they made no progress against this trend in American society. Bill Clinton achieved nothing of real worth. He is known as the Democrat who ended welfare. And he had no hesitation is sending off fleets of missiles to kill innocents.
Hillary, who maybe fifteen years ago seemed a dedicated, tough-minded liberal of the best kind, shows absolutely nothing of the kind now. Indeed her appeals in places like Pennsylvania were sickening. Tom Delay wouldn’t have talked all that differently.
Her disgruntled supporters show just how irrational large segments of Americans are. They so wanted a woman that they‘ll vote for a skirt-chasing reprobate with the anger of a maniac and the private language of a stevedore? Simply insane.
I don’t think Obama can overcome that irrationality, just the same as he cannot overcome the strains of profound racism that remain in America. The polls won’t show it, but it is there.
I would like to see Obama campaign in the fashion he spoke last night. If he fails at least it would be with a profound sense of honor, but turning into a Hillary-like figure brings only the absolute certainty of more of the same.
It really would be nice to see some change, if only a little
______________________
Anyone who can make even an implicit comparison of Obama and Hitler really exposes the utter irrationality at work in America.
And when that person claims he or she has not made such a comparison but claims that this kind of speech is irrelevant to being president, he or she only adds ignorance of history to irrationality.
We remember Lincoln, Roosevelt, Jefferson, and Kennedy precisely by their moving words. Saying anything else is just delusional.
Posted by: JOHN CHUCKMAN, TORONTO | August 29th, 2008 at 2:54 pm | Report this commentOld, Crazy, Senile, Feeble, Shallow, War Monger= Bad President for sure.
No way, No how, No McCrazy
Posted by: sade | August 29th, 2008 at 3:00 pm | Report this commentMoving words are many times nonsense. The actions that follow are not all that hot.
Anyone pretending there is some kind of pride an honor in the Obama campaign should realize that his campaign attempted to shut down WGN Radio this Wednesday (a very pedestrian non-partisan news station in Chicago) for daring to put an Obama critic on the air.
JBP
Posted by: John Powers | August 29th, 2008 at 3:21 pm | Report this comment“McCain just has to nominate a woman for VP and he’s a shoo-in. The commentariat has way underestimated the extent to which Hilary supporters are feminists first and democrats second.”
McCain is about to nominate the governor of Alaska apparently as his running mate. Political pandering that will not work, but adds some new twists to the appearances that play a huge role in these campaigns.
The rabid feminists who support Senator Clinton and aver to not support Senator Obama are few in number and merely strident.
I think Mayor Daley should announce that Chicago is a break-away socialist Republic from the Illinois and the USA, aligning itself with Russia, inviting in Russian military advisors and asking the Russians to have one of their oligarch-owned construction companies convert Midway Airport into a joint Chicago police force/Russian military base.
Posted by: Wendell Murray | August 29th, 2008 at 4:17 pm | Report this commentalgasema,
Read Reagan’s diary where he writes (with touching misspellings) of his inner fight to overcome his anger and forgive his would-be assassin. That is moral certitude. A great man (even if not a phony intellectual like Obama — Obama’s off the cuff list of names and ideas which we encountered I think on this blog, in some quote from one of his books, just goes to show a lack of deep thinking, an urge to show-off his supposed intellectual credentials. Let us overcome this nonsense, Obama is not that intelligent: suffice it to listen to one of his interviews on YouTube to form such an opinion. The Economist article I cited in the previous thread claims McCain is intelligent, but “not as intelligent as Obama”. Ridiculous. Listen to McCain speak without notes, or answer questions, or show his wit, and it becomes obvious who is the more intelligent, including emotional intelligence, of the two candidates. As for Obama having been a law professor and editor of the Harvard Law Review — those are outward signs of accomplishment and status. I do not know how he received them, but I reserve judgment to my own observations. Believe what you see, not what you are told exists.)
Posted by: RCS | August 29th, 2008 at 4:27 pm | Report this comment>>RCS– As you can see from my posts today on Gideon’s blog, we are not far from each other in our distaste for stadium politics. Nuremburg rallies are not the best way to make the point, however. Today’s world, nonetheless, is in too many ways not far from that envisioned by the stagers of those mind-deadening spectacles. James Burns’ State Department guys were instructed to take good notes on those elements of Nazi governance and economic management that transformed post-Weimar Germany. Today’s Neocons have authored books drawing parallels between the America that the Clinton’s found and Weimar Germany. Obama’s speech was a call for discipline and focus. Good things, but…we will see.
Obama made clear that he intends to lead a Universal US, which should please you. He also made clear that he intends to lead a good, old-fashioned Army. Defence contractors must have felt good, as McCain has been an annoyance for the Defense Department’s procurement teams. Certainly, if one advocates Universal Governance to pave the way and support a Global Consumer Society, then it would seem clear that McCain is not worth the price of admission to any stadium. Obama should be your man.
He’s not mine today. And I appear to be in a minority in not seeing wonder in his words and faultless staging. In fact, as I’ve said, I see new reason for concern.
I had hoped for a US president who would reverse the arrogance and self-righteous abuse of power demonstrated by two Administration. I had hoped to hear words to the effect that the US would lead in the 21st century by rejoining the international community. As I have sensed for months, this was not in the offing, and there is a risk that the man now putting on ten-gallon hats is much shorter than he thinks he is.
McCain’t taller. Older is a liability, and a pretty Alaska face will not enable him to top last night’s act. Only a realisation amongst US voters that more of the same, with a crusty personality on the front page, may be safer than a true evangelical star will win the November day for the Republicans.
You have picked up on one of Reagan’s better sides, but I do not see merit in the US reviving his Evil Empire world view in order to buy time and dollars to (literally) save its house.
Posted by: wcm | August 29th, 2008 at 5:11 pm | Report this commentDear wcm,
Reagan’s evil empire view was the correct view for its day. It helped bring about an end to the cold war (much credit is also due to the great John Paul II). When circumstances changed, Reagan was quick to embrace Gorbachev.
Definitely, reviving the cold war is not in anybody’s interest. (Is Putin, sorry Medvedev, aware of this?) However, the way to prevent that is not through appeasement, rather embracing Russia (and other rogue countries) whilst deterring them at the same time. It is a delicate act to perform, I doubt Obama has the experience to tackle this and other foreign policy challenges. I am glad you agree.
Posted by: RCS | August 29th, 2008 at 5:45 pm | Report this commentWell, McCain has nominated a woman for VP, one whose lack of experience would make Obama seem like a 30-year Washington insider by comparison. What a cynical ploy to get the disaffected Hillary “feminist” vote. At least McCain didn’t nominate Romney. If McCain is another Bush, Romney would have been another Cheney.
Posted by: algasema | August 29th, 2008 at 6:04 pm | Report this comment>>RCS– As one who traversed and knew well Communist “Eastern” Europe, when Reagan made his comments, I remarked that they were misguided. All one needed to do was go there and see how desperately decrepit infrastructure, supply and food chains were in any of the countries to realise that Communism had failed fatally by 1980. Even I–a guest at Intourist hotels–stood gladly in queues in a town square in Wrocslav (at the end of Martial Law in September 1983) to buy a glass of prune juice in order to get a dose of vitamin C. US diplomats and policymakers knew full well the vulnerability in the Soviet Sphere. Reagan’s rhetoric did little but satisfy the US public. Albeit, it did its part, but it also served to draw a deeper divide between the societies of the East and West, which proved a challenge in the 1990s for Europeans, as the success of US propaganda drew Central Europeans to tie up with US interests before those of Europe.
Reagan was a decent human being. This I give him credit for. Records show his decency proved an inconvenience for more zealous policymakers more than once.
‘…the great John Paul II…” Really? I won’t waste my time arguing this one, except to say that he was one of the century’s slickest operators and that his virulent anti-Communism funded and fueled some incredibly nefarious deeds and “projects”. When the history takes on ink, if it does anymore, he will be a controversial as Pius XII.
I agree with DKM (aka Miliband, as I read somewhere) that McCain’s League of Democracies is truly one of the most lame ideas in the ethernet at the moment. He shouldn’t need five minutes to even ponder it, so I conclude he is out of his depth. Obama may be out of his, but his machine is setting the discussion agenda now. My trouble is that it is looking too contrived and compromised and commercially appealling.
Posted by: wcm | August 29th, 2008 at 6:09 pm | Report this commentRe: McCain’s Palin (clearly no relation to the Beeb’s esteemed Michael) surprises. It seems as though the Republicans prefer to go into opposition, as we say in Europe.
So, any insights as to whom he really wanted? And as to those who turned him down?
As for women voters, I cannot imagine this apparatchik (how does one spell “chick” these days in the US?) appealing to any woman who has experienced childbirth as a profound joy. She will, however, mobilise armies of corporate can-do women.
Posted by: wcm | August 29th, 2008 at 6:18 pm | Report this commentI agree completely with Clive Crook’s comments on the Obama speech.
Posted by: James Canning | August 29th, 2008 at 6:31 pm | Report this commentI don’t understand the wealth and growing up issue about McCain. His father started out as a Lt. and worked his way up. When McCain was born, his father was still a low to mid-level officer. And as a spouse of a recently retired officer in the Air Force, I can tell you we are middle class. Sure, the Generals and Admirals now can make pretty good money, under 200k but over 100k, but it is not wealthy. In any event, McCain was grown up and living off of a Lt’s salary when his dad became an Admiral.
Posted by: Tom | August 29th, 2008 at 7:16 pm | Report this comment>>Tom– Please explain Sarah Palin to those of us who’d forgotten that Alaska was yours.
Posted by: wcm | August 29th, 2008 at 7:27 pm | Report this commentClive,
For some reason the FT has decided to title your post “Obama silences critics”, which really isn’t the point (doubters are not necessarily critics), but oddly enough, is accurate giving the building storm in Chicago over the Obama campaign trying to shut down the Milt Rosenberg show on WGN (a non-partisan book club on the air) who dared mention Bill Ayers name.
JBP
Posted by: John Powers | August 29th, 2008 at 8:12 pm | Report this commentGive credit where it is due; It is normal to choose sides, it is normal not to like a side, or in some instances affiliate with something. But here we are in a new world today. As a person and I believe many americans are facing way too many challenges. We want to talk discuss issues. Obama does that; how do you want to present himself without talking? And when he talks you call that empty, how empty is a statement of chasing Bin Laden to the gates of hell is? That being said what would that cost in terms of a normal american life? unemployment? Foreclosures? a lunatic society? unaffordable healthcare?….
What we an ordinary american is facing today is real life. Not fiction, some of the people like RCS are entitled to their minds. But do not feed this to everyone and pass it off like you can only look at one side and completely have ignore all issues as a whole. Can you tell us in a perspective what a Mcain presidency would do and steer us americans to clear waters free from this storm we are amidst? Life here is not a hobby anymore for someone to sit somewhere in a nice setting and unleash something close to garbage. The problem is that most of the people who do not like Obama have in common that he is not like what is percieved to be a president of U.S.A. which means such people would have their ego lead them even if they are actually one step to into hell; At what cost? Obama is an american not less an american than Mcain. When it comes to defending the nation, I have never seen a recruitment exercise note that if you are of a certain colour please stay away. The American spirit and promise are way beyond what kind of person you are. This is how this great nation was born. and to refer you back to history even if I am not that old ‘In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American…There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag… We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language… and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.’
Posted by: Steven | August 29th, 2008 at 8:14 pm | Report this commentTheodore Roosevelt 1907
Steven,
If you are such an American patriot, then you should be writing ‘color’, not ‘colour’.
As for your insinuations of racism — prove it. What a neat way to shut up any criticism of Obama. The Bolsheviks would have felt ashamed.
Posted by: RCS | August 29th, 2008 at 8:39 pm | Report this commentSteven,
In real life we have had 7 years of economic growth (3.2% last quarter), decent employment/record exports, record home ownership levels, and a million added to the insurance rolls last year rather than Leftist hysterics of “unemployment? Foreclosures? a lunatic society? unaffordable healthcare?….”
JBP
Posted by: John Powers | August 29th, 2008 at 8:49 pm | Report this commentBoy, was this Democratic voter bored by his speech.
Posted by: jgl | August 29th, 2008 at 8:50 pm | Report this commentSarah Barracuda–as she is nicknamed in Wikipedia.
Serious Republicans must be banging their heads against the wall, and it wouldn’t just be because they will likely lose the White House this year (contrary to my thinking 24-hours ago that he still had a chance). This selection will bring ridicule to the Party. How did it happen? Who put her name up to begin with? Who vetted her?
It is McCain’s judgment–reportedly hasty in this case–that needs to be debated. This was his first critical decision, and he failed and created unforeseen risks for the Republican Party, the US and (potentially) the world.
Will Party rules permit an open floor vote on his candidacy? Surely there is a Glenn-Close or Tilda-Swinton-type lawyer who can sort the legal details at this late hour. Or are they still hoping a hurricane will strike?
Posted by: wcm | August 29th, 2008 at 10:00 pm | Report this commentRCS, you are going to sleep with one eye open ready to pounce and grasp at anything; me in turn I will present my case.And how low can we get? Being patriotic cannot be defined just by as little as a word. So what is colour is used as opposed to color - err cheap! talk typical of what we are witnessing these days.
I said you are entittled to your opinion; All I am doing is educating you about my case. And yes! I support Obama can you educate me more about Mcain? I understand and belive that you are a person of intellect. But please I will not buy into your cheap kind of critique. Apart from a large majority of people like you assimilating to an easy choice (Mcain) er why? because he looks like me; and you try to disguise it under the naked sun. Please enlighten me about Mcain? tell me how his speeches are the best thing that has ever happened since sliced bread; oh tell me how he has substance and how he has laid out a paln to address the problems we are facing today, I believe he was a good pilot and he is good at dropping bombs. And yes he was a very good and patriotic american.
The challenges we face today are far more than what a person of your intellect tries to sugar coat and sell to the less informed or those unable to understand what issues there are. JBP; I may not know what kind of life you are leading, but that comes across as that of someone who is in good stature and intelligent too. Maybe where you are all the streets are paved with gold. Yes not all animals are equal right? There are people whose have gone out of jobs, not because they want to? but because the jobs have been shipped to lands far away. They go back home to their wives, children with empty hands, I know of people who babies; who ended up with a certain sickness; they died; the prents still had an enormus bill and in the end also had their house foreclosed; They both held college degrees; Not from Havard though as a few folk here. All this is happening here in America. Apart from people like you JBP who can afford a comfortable lifestyle; let alone maybe a nice vacation afar in europe. The last time I was in Europe, My dollar could not afford me pop, even a news print and I am not talking gibberish here…..good day people
Posted by: Steven | August 29th, 2008 at 10:27 pm | Report this commentSteven,
Of course bad things happen to people under Democrats and Republicans. But there seems to be some hostility towards arithmetic among the Democrats in describing 3.2% growth as a “recession”.
Three % growth is not a recession, a downturn, the worst economy since 1929, an economic disaster or any of the other partisan rants.
The refusal of the current crop of Democrats to display child’s knowledge of Math makes me doubt their ability to manage much of anything.
JBP
Posted by: John Powers | August 30th, 2008 at 8:54 pm | Report this commentJBP — growth in the last two quarters was 0.9% and 1.9%. Unemployment numbers are up (5.7%, not terrible but the trend is somewhat alarming)
If we were hoping to spend our way out of a recession, the main problem right now is that the balance sheet simply stinks. The federal budget deficit is half a trillion dollars (about 20% more than total revenue), and that excludes “emergency” appropriations bills for the war.
In addition to this, we have a credit crisis which has so far led the government to buy about 29 billion dollars of mortgage related assets (that’s about 3/4 the money saved in the “deficit reduction act”, or about the same as food stamps or federal welfare spending) to bail out Bear. Hank Paulson recently asked for the authority to bail out fannie and freddie. This poses a lot of uncomfortable questions (if the treasury decides the govt must intervene, what should their future be ?)
The financials have been hit hard by the credit crisis, and the expectation of lower bonus payouts is going to hit tax revenues hard in some places (e.g. it’s a big problem for NY state, but could have wider implications)
We’re still not through with the housing correction yet.
So while I’d distance myself from emotive rhetoric such as labeling it a “depression” or “worst since 1929″ or whatever, we are in the middle of a credit crisis, a runaway deficit, and two unsuccessful “nation building” efforts.
Those who do not take these seriously, and would sit on their hands and assure us that we are on sure footing, are in my opinion unfit for office.
Posted by: Elflord | August 30th, 2008 at 11:54 pm | Report this commentElflord,
Nope, the rate was actually 3.3%. Your numbers are old, just pulled the 3.3 from Bloomberg a minute ago.
Take it seriously, the economy is growing.
JBP
Posted by: John Powers | August 31st, 2008 at 3:39 am | Report this commentMostly in agreement with CC. However i must also register my agreement with wcm:
The quinessenntial question concerns the program you use to win. Are the policies you advocate the right policies for the country?
As far as the internal policies advocated i am in agreement : Get hold of the tax code and turn it around to the benefit of the common man:
i) fix education and properly finance it.
ii) make housing affordable to the middle classes
iii) Introduce and fund universal health care and guard social security.
These three issues should become his core issues. He seems to be doing this. This is what he was saying to day in Dublin (Ohio)
All this, however, will be forgotten if he follows the Bzrezinski, Albright line of continuous military expansion abroad– in particular the attempt to encircle and coerce Russia and China while at the same time supporting Israel. If you add to this the parlous state of the american economy you have the components of a boonerang which will completely vitiate internal policy.
The other team is clueless.
Posted by: Cassandra | August 31st, 2008 at 4:22 am | Report this commentJBP — thank you for the correction, I hadn’t seen the revised numbers. It will be interesting to see how the discussion on the new number plays out, but it has largely been attributed to an export jump on the back of a weak dollar. Commentators are still bearish (e.g. WSJ: “Don’t turn off recession siren yet”) and after a brief rally, the stock market bounced back down on weak Personal Income data.
The growth number for the most recent quarter neither paints a comprehensive picture of the current state of the economy, nor does it address the other issues with the economy.
Posted by: Elflord | August 31st, 2008 at 7:02 am | Report this commentOk, I get it. Obama can talk and deliver a speach if not write one. But this country needs more than rhetoric and hyperboli. Obama’s speach while delivered with skill, was dissapointingly typical far left, striking on a littany of topics that of course everyone whould agree on…of course we our kids need a good education, of course we need a cleaner environment, of course people need affordable housing, of course critically sick US citizens should receive heathcare.
Posted by: Jack4u | August 31st, 2008 at 2:08 pm | Report this commentThe problem is Obama talks about change in such vague terms what one is left with is the same liberal socialist social engineering idealogy that produced high rise slums and the dismal education systems found in many if not all of this nations big cities.
One example is Obama’s complete failure to take on the machine politics in Chicago and the teacher’s union at a time when Chicago’s inner city is desperate for change in education opportunities and results just shows that Obama himself does not “get it”, and does not have the political capital to fight outright abuse in Chicago.
Obama’s call for Change and Hope fall short into nothing more than a very fortunate political newcomer who can delivery a speach.
We can do better.
A number of posts here and US media clippings serve to warn that Jerry Springer viewers are most often likely counted as Independents.
The US political system is not fit for the 21st century. Certainly, it is not fit to sustain US dominance of the international stage. Investors will continue to decouple.
Clive Crook seems stunned. He’ll likely explain that he lost his US charger for his laptop when leaving the FT House in Denver.
Posted by: wcm | August 31st, 2008 at 4:24 pm | Report this commentElflord,
You sound as though an export boom is some sort of penalty. Maybe it is part of a business cycle, that sooner or later balances itself.
Something about John Deere and Caterpillar succeeding while Bears Stearns and Fannie Mae go under is satisfying to me, suggesting a reward for prudent planning and investing, and a penalty for gambling.
In the meantime, I suggest that the Leftist cries of economic disaster be trashed as partisan garbage.
JBP
Posted by: John Powers | August 31st, 2008 at 5:02 pm | Report this commentWhat’s with the criticism of Greek columns? Greek columns are a STANDARD part of Western architecture, used in hundreds of government buildings, banks, theaters, etc, across the United States. My local movie theater sports Greek columns. And the Invesco field setup was a theater-esque setting, so there’s no problem with it.
As for the idiot that compared Obama to Hitler (and therefore Godwin’ed the comments with the very first comment) because both spoke in stadiums, Obama’s not the first American to accept the nomination in an outdoor arena. JFK did it and one other candidate (whom I can’t remember) did it.
Posted by: P | August 31st, 2008 at 6:37 pm | Report this commentCassandra,
Zbig Brzesinski offers some of the best commentary on the fallacies of Bush administration policy toward Iran, and in Afghanistan. He warns against a large increase of US forces there.
Posted by: James Canning | August 31st, 2008 at 7:50 pm | Report this commentAnd so, of course, the very first response to this post from the very first McCain supporter is the inevitable Hitler reference — this from people who worshipped Ronald Reagan like a tin demigod.
Well, I spent eight years jeering at Ronald Reagan and his synthetic brand of GE-manufactured optimism, and only saw him go from strength to strength.
Face it guys: You’ve allowed yourself to fall into the trap of running against optimism and hope (in America no less!)
Maybe by 2012 you will have figured it out, although at this point I seriously doubt it.
Posted by: Peter Principle | August 31st, 2008 at 8:30 pm | Report this commentwcm,
That is fairly close to slander, even for the Daily Kos.
So much to sticking to the issues.
Didn’t this blog make a paean to some type of high minded campaiging a while back?
JBP
Posted by: John Powers | August 31st, 2008 at 8:53 pm | Report this commentI didn’t invent the story and a google search on “palin grandmother” will clue you as to how much noise is out there in less than 24 hours. Stories like this about Obama have seemed more questionable or spurious straight off. Of course, it is in rudely bad taste to discuss it, but this the eve (or was the eve) of a convention that is expected to oonfirm her candidacy–and his.
This is not just a National Enquirer story given her value statements. If there is any truth–and perhaps even now if there is no truth–to this story, then it merits wide attention or, now, absolute denial. The reasons are clear and in the public interest given her political positions and the possible fact that she has not been vetted or lied. It is not the objective that she and her family suffer humiliation and pain. Muckraking is not the interest here.
If Gustav is not a killer, the Republicans face a challenging week. It is already a most unexpected one.
Posted by: wcm | August 31st, 2008 at 10:41 pm | Report this comment“Nope, the rate was actually 3.3%. Your numbers are old, just pulled the 3.3 from Bloomberg a minute ago. Take it seriously, the economy is growing.”
Herbert Stein, a wise man even if Richard Nixon’s economics advisor, used to write that the any Administration’s policies generally matter little in growth or contraction of the US economy.
That is overstating it somewhat, but generally true. Administrations however can be responsible or irresponsible in terms of how tax-payer funds are raised and expended. The Bush Adminstration has been grossly irresponsible on both counts: in regard to tax policy (abysmal) and military spending (equally abysmal). The Administration has fought any increase in beneficial social spending while favoring its crony-bribers at every turn.
Also the allegation that the fifth child of Governor Palin is in fact her daughter’s child is pretty wild, but obviously explosive, if true. Let’s hope some competent, impartial journalists are investigating. Regrettably, Governor Palin lied blatantly during her presentation to USA voters, so I suspect a lot of unsavory activity, both personal and policy-oriented will quickly be uncovered.
Mr. Crook’s latest column asserts that the Palin choice is savvy. On the most superficial of measures perhaps, but Governor Palin’s qualifications are solely constituted by her adherence to the craziest of extreme right-wing opinions. That is something undoubtedly appealing to the nut-case, “Christian”, “gun-loving”, facts-hating right-wing voter, but more likely it will repulse any independents across a wide range of opinion.
Posted by: Wendell Murray | August 31st, 2008 at 10:48 pm | Report this commentI just read tomorrow’s column from Clive and marvel at how he has transferred his once-constant exuberance for Obama to Palin. This is not a horse race. Or maybe it is. For a world and a US that are rather distressed these days and lacking a viable 21st-century governance structure, this debate needs to be better than a betting forum or a stock pick.
Palin certainly should be boosting the shares of Blackwater, DynCorp, Boeing, Dassault, Siemens, Erynis, UNISYS and SAIC (and others) today.
Surprisingly, I still see nothing in a Palin presidency that would work for Israel. Welcome, however, to the golden age of supranational enterprises, as government as it has been known will be reduced for all intents and purposes to running DMVs, police and state troopers. Sarah Palin prefers home education to public schools, and who knows what she thinks about health care.
Posted by: wcm | August 31st, 2008 at 11:05 pm | Report this commentWendell,
You can bet if the economy contracted 3.3% the Democrats and their cronies in the media would be shouting the stats from every street corner.
You may hate the fact that the economy grew, fewer people are uninsured, and income inequality decreased, but these remain facts rathe than partisan yammerings.
JBP
Posted by: John Powers | September 1st, 2008 at 12:38 pm | Report this comment