chronicle of my journey through my matriarch years - love , work, dreams, frustrations, poems, paradoxes
My goodness, we see things differently in regard to anger. I have seen anger from Democrats, moreso than from Republicans.I think both conventions evidence a lot of emotion. I certainly felt stirred up emotion when I watched the Democratic convention. The Republican convention is no different.I agree 100% re issues. I want to vote issues too. And will. I do think in the next weeks there will be much discussion of issues. It will be an interesting campaign.May the best issue-based candidates win!
Mary, I didn't mean that I thought Republicans are in general more angry than Democrats. I just felt more anger on Wednesday night with the speakers - especially Gulianni. His scathing tone talking about obama's career as a community organizer, for instance, really bothered me. Tonight, when the McCains spoke the tone seemed very different - an honest presentation of their ideas about what is best for the country, not attacks.
I think each person in a campaign may have his / her roles. I did not, however, see Rudy Giuliani's speech as being anger-based. I considered it strong, forceful, with a particular message. However, in both campaigns so far I have heard the term 'attack dog' which I had not heard in previous campaigns. Actually I do not like the term. I have heard that Joe Biden is the 'attack dog' and now have heard it in regard to Sarah Palin. I wonder if the 'attack dogs' will be making the 'tough' speeches this year, a particular role? Perhaps Rudy G. is going to be one of the Republican attack dogs with his particular style.I also think that the Republican party with John McCain has a lot to overcome in that it is obvious that they have to overcome the legacy of the present administration. The strategies, I believe, have to be a bit different than the strategy of the perceived probable winner...which I believe Barack Obama would be right now. Perhaps the goal of Rudy's speech was to light a fire under people who are complacent. I don't know. But I think what we saw at both conventions was a lot of strategy. The pillars that Barack Obama used to look like the Lincoln Memorial was strategy. The music that is played in the background at both conventions was strategy. Perhaps the speech of Giuliani that you did not like was part of 'strategy.'However, you said you didn't like what Giuliani said in regard to Barack being a community organizer. I would have to look at the specific words to see exactly what he said; but I believe that both sides will spar over the experience issue...whether Barack has enough experience to be running for President, whether Sarah has enough experience to be a heartbeat away. This will be an ongoing issue for both parties. Just watch the television ads that will result over this issue...from both parties.
It IS interesting to read different perspectives on the political scene. I consider myself one of the 'swing' voters, and have not yet made my decision. The truth is, neither party matches my ideals, so I will make my decision based on what I think are the most important issues. Both Obama and McCain claim to be willing to be bi-partisan. I hope that is true!As for Guilliani's speech, I did not see it as angry. This may shock you, but I found it funny! Kind of like a Jay Leno monologue. Leno takes pokes at both parties, and I do not find his pokes offensive -- even though I might not agree with them. I see Guilliani as a tough, smart man who obviously could lead the city of New York in one of the most devastating times in history. If not THE most devastating time. Let's face it, these pokes and jabs are going to happen, even if we don't like them. I know that is what most of us HATE about politics. However, I have seen times of respectfulness from both presidential candidates, and they are both serious and determined men.
One thing I did like about McCain's speech in particular was how he so clearly rejected taking the same pathway as Bush. That gave me great hope for the future leadership of the country who ever wins. I had a basically emotional reaction to Gullianni and was repelled by his attitude of a fighter and what seemed to me arrogance. One thing I did admire was Obama's recent statement saying that Sarah Palin's family was off limits. I also plan to vote on issues, but the people are important as well. The scary thing about campaigns is that they all are to some extent putting on a show to win votes. One thing that does scare me is the possibility of Sarah Palin stepping into the presidency--I think we need more than a pit bull with lipstick to lead the free world. I keep hoping the Republican party will use Palin to get the campaign infused with new energy and then have her step down with some excuse like she doesn't want to move her family to Washington DC.
Peggy, if you are reading this, I sincerely believe that whoever turns out to be President, it is the advisors they surround themselves with that is important. As far as experience, I don't see that Bsrack has any more than Sarah, and Sarah is the VP candidate.I am glad that you are planning to vote on issues. There are many important issues this year.
Interesting how much comment this thread is generating. I'm also hearing people talk a great deal about politics in real life. Good that a dialog is open and we are not apathetic, believing the choices we make in leadership do matter and making them with both thought and passion.Diane T, it is an odd and interesting twist that you found Gulianni's comment funny. i know I am humor impaired, especially about humor using any sarcasm. I also know it is harder to hear humor used against someone I respect. I also very much respected and like Gulianni in the days and months after the September 11 attack. He was in my personal prayers for months, because his position in that city at that time was so difficult and important. His style as a campainer does rub me thewrong way. Both things can be true. And Mary, I do agree with you, that, on both sides, people have different roles and I know Democrats have their "attack dogs" too. I cringe at attack style politics whoever is doing it. As I posted Thursday night, Peggy, I agree with you about like the way McCain separated himself from Bush policies - both practical for him and ethically right, I think. HIs speech was much more what I expected, and I was relieved that he did state that he appreciates the difficulties many Americans are experiencing at this time. The denial of those difficulties in speeches the first night really concerned me, and was not present in either John or Cindy McCain's speeches.
I definitely am enjoying the discussion too. It is good to be able to discuss with people who do NOT shout. Tonight on Fox I look forward to watching Greta Van Susteren's special on Sarah Palin, which includes interviews from before she was chosen as VP. It really is good, I think, to gain as much information as one can about the candidates....whatever one's party affiliation or persuasian.Unlike you, Peggy, I hope that Palin does not step down. I am very disappointe that Oprah has said she will not have Palin on her television program. I know she supports Barack, but her excuses about not having any political candidates on her program seem lame to me. I don't think she wants Sarah Palin to have national exposture on her program. I wonder what she is afraid of.
Post a Comment