2 of 4
2
DNC 2012 -  Wow!
Posted: 05 September 2012 03:59 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  637
Joined  2012-04-25
TimB - 05 September 2012 02:32 PM
George - 05 September 2012 01:40 PM

You don’t need to take the speeches seriously, Cuthbert, to be able enjoy them. Take it for what it is: a show. Shot down your rational part of the brain and let your emotional senses take over. I can certainly enjoy a well performed speech by a liberal, even though I know it’s all just BS. I can similarly enjoy celebrating Christmas in the Christian tradition although I am an atheist or a sport game once in a while, trying not to think too much about how primitive sports actually are. Politics is fun. Stupid but fun.

Cynicism is easy as it alleviates any sense of responsibility to participate in the process.  But, I am pretty sure that it makes a big difference who is selected President.  e.g., I think that world events would have proceeded quite differently if George W. Bush had not become POTUS in 2000.

Naivete is easy as well. It makes one think all is ok or will be ok if only the right votes come in.  It allows one to believe in feel good myths like democracy is alive and well in the USA. Or that gee if only Gore had a couple more votes…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 September 2012 05:02 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2799
Joined  2011-11-04
CuthbertJ - 05 September 2012 03:59 PM
TimB - 05 September 2012 02:32 PM
George - 05 September 2012 01:40 PM

You don’t need to take the speeches seriously, Cuthbert, to be able enjoy them. Take it for what it is: a show. Shot down your rational part of the brain and let your emotional senses take over. I can certainly enjoy a well performed speech by a liberal, even though I know it’s all just BS. I can similarly enjoy celebrating Christmas in the Christian tradition although I am an atheist or a sport game once in a while, trying not to think too much about how primitive sports actually are. Politics is fun. Stupid but fun.

Cynicism is easy as it alleviates any sense of responsibility to participate in the process.  But, I am pretty sure that it makes a big difference who is selected President.  e.g., I think that world events would have proceeded quite differently if George W. Bush had not become POTUS in 2000.

Naivete is easy as well. It makes one think all is ok or will be ok if only the right votes come in.  It allows one to believe in feel good myths like democracy is alive and well in the USA. Or that gee if only Gore had a couple more votes…

What you are calling naivete, is not easy at all, if you actually actively participate in the political process.  Delegates at national conventions often look like they’re having a good time, but trust me, they went thru a lot of crap to get to that point, the tedium and difficult deliberations of a precinct convention and a state convention, without compensation. other than a sense of fulfilling one’s civic responsibility.  And canvasing neighborhoods and taking part in phone banks is tiresome and tedious unpaid work, as well.  If more people believed in and fulfilled such responsibility, Gore might well have gotten a few more decisive votes.  Unfortunately, most Americans are so caught up in enjoying the fruits of the society that they live in, that they never get around to actually trying to have a positive impact.  Resorting to apathy and simply saying that it makes no difference what anyone does, may resolve one’s cognitive dissonance, but it is not, IMO, a morally or intellectually superior position.

 Signature 

“Our lives are not our own. From womb to tomb… We are bound to others, past and present… And by each crime and every kindness… We birth our future.”  Sonmi, 2144.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 September 2012 09:03 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5187
Joined  2010-06-16

Wow, did my mind get changed.  Tonight, Sandra Fluke gave a very good speech, Elizabeth Warren was excellent, but I couldn’t believe Bill Clinton.  He nailed the entire Republican party to the cross.  I was dazzled by his speech.

I also smiled recalliing Rocinante’s rant about the use of teleprompters.  Apparently Clinton stuck so many ad libs in his speech (which was over twenty minutes longer than planned) that the teleprompter technicians were going crazy trying to keep up with where he was.

Occam

[ Edited: 05 September 2012 09:07 PM by Occam. ]
 Signature 

Succinctness, clarity’s core.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 September 2012 10:43 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  695
Joined  2007-10-14

`
Obama is a very lucky man to have Clinton give the speech he gave tonight for him, that’s all I can say :)

The best part about it, imo, was that it wasn’t just great rhetoric, it was more substantive than I was expecting (i was anticipating great flair but not such an emphasis on stats/facts)

`

 Signature 

‘we are so fundamentally constituted of desire that we go on hearing music…...even though we know the band is gone and the stage is silent’

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 September 2012 09:31 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2799
Joined  2011-11-04
Axegrrl - 05 September 2012 10:43 PM

`
Obama is a very lucky man to have Clinton give the speech he gave tonight for him, that’s all I can say smile

The best part about it, imo, was that it wasn’t just great rhetoric, it was more substantive than I was expecting (i was anticipating great flair but not such an emphasis on stats/facts)

`

Obama, if he gets another term, may turn out to be the greater President, but Bill Clinton is, no doubt, the Alpha Politician.

 Signature 

“Our lives are not our own. From womb to tomb… We are bound to others, past and present… And by each crime and every kindness… We birth our future.”  Sonmi, 2144.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 September 2012 10:17 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  637
Joined  2012-04-25
Occam. - 05 September 2012 09:03 PM

Wow, did my mind get changed.  Tonight, Sandra Fluke gave a very good speech, Elizabeth Warren was excellent, but I couldn’t believe Bill Clinton.  He nailed the entire Republican party to the cross.  I was dazzled by his speech.

I also smiled recalliing Rocinante’s rant about the use of teleprompters.  Apparently Clinton stuck so many ad libs in his speech (which was over twenty minutes longer than planned) that the teleprompter technicians were going crazy trying to keep up with where he was.

Occam

  Report back in one year, after Obama gets re-elected.  See if even one thing from any of the grand speeches comes true.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 September 2012 10:20 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  637
Joined  2012-04-25
TimB - 05 September 2012 05:02 PM
CuthbertJ - 05 September 2012 03:59 PM
TimB - 05 September 2012 02:32 PM
George - 05 September 2012 01:40 PM

You don’t need to take the speeches seriously, Cuthbert, to be able enjoy them. Take it for what it is: a show. Shot down your rational part of the brain and let your emotional senses take over. I can certainly enjoy a well performed speech by a liberal, even though I know it’s all just BS. I can similarly enjoy celebrating Christmas in the Christian tradition although I am an atheist or a sport game once in a while, trying not to think too much about how primitive sports actually are. Politics is fun. Stupid but fun.

Cynicism is easy as it alleviates any sense of responsibility to participate in the process.  But, I am pretty sure that it makes a big difference who is selected President.  e.g., I think that world events would have proceeded quite differently if George W. Bush had not become POTUS in 2000.

Naivete is easy as well. It makes one think all is ok or will be ok if only the right votes come in.  It allows one to believe in feel good myths like democracy is alive and well in the USA. Or that gee if only Gore had a couple more votes…

What you are calling naivete, is not easy at all, if you actually actively participate in the political process.  Delegates at national conventions often look like they’re having a good time, but trust me, they went thru a lot of crap to get to that point, the tedium and difficult deliberations of a precinct convention and a state convention, without compensation. other than a sense of fulfilling one’s civic responsibility.  And canvasing neighborhoods and taking part in phone banks is tiresome and tedious unpaid work, as well.  If more people believed in and fulfilled such responsibility, Gore might well have gotten a few more decisive votes.  Unfortunately, most Americans are so caught up in enjoying the fruits of the society that they live in, that they never get around to actually trying to have a positive impact.  Resorting to apathy and simply saying that it makes no difference what anyone does, may resolve one’s cognitive dissonance, but it is not, IMO, a morally or intellectually superior position.

Let me ask you this… what would it take to make you consider the idea that “the process” you claim is so noble and worthy of the time and effort is really rotten to the point of being a mere fiction? I’m not saying it always was. I’m saying that it is now (starting with the 2000 (s)election of Bush. What would it take?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 September 2012 12:25 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2799
Joined  2011-11-04

...Let me ask you this… what would it take to make you consider the idea that “the process” you claim is so noble and worthy of the time and effort is really rotten to the point of being a mere fiction? I’m not saying it always was. I’m saying that it is now (starting with the 2000 (s)election of Bush. What would it take?

I already consider that possibility, not since 2000, but since the Supreme Court decided that money equals speech.  If the Republicans get a Presidential term now, the Supreme Court will be lost, irrevocably to the extreme right, for generations to come. But until that eventuality plays out… the work begins again, hope arises anew, and the dream lives on.

 Signature 

“Our lives are not our own. From womb to tomb… We are bound to others, past and present… And by each crime and every kindness… We birth our future.”  Sonmi, 2144.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 September 2012 12:34 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2018
Joined  2007-04-26
CuthbertJ - 06 September 2012 10:20 AM

Let me ask you this… what would it take to make you consider the idea that “the process” you claim is so noble and worthy of the time and effort is really rotten to the point of being a mere fiction? I’m not saying it always was. I’m saying that it is now (starting with the 2000 (s)election of Bush. What would it take?

This isn’t really the question you need to answer. No system is incorruptible and uncorrupted. Its all a matter of degree and you could argue all day about what shade of grey you are talking about. There are only three relevant questions when you evaluate this process.
1) Does the electorate have accurate information and the tools to choose the best leader
2) Does the electorate have the power to enact their choice
3) Is there a better system you can think of for choosing our leaders and if so what?

The information needed to make an intelligent choice is readily accessible today and more so than ever. The problem is that each voter needs to take the time to sift through the propaganda and separate the fact from the fiction. Its not that hard to do, but people are generally lazy and take the easy way out. They prefer to have their information prepackaged and spoon fed to them. The result is that candidates with the most money and the most efficient political machines can spoon feed the most people and win the election, but it wouldn’t be that way if voters took the time to check the facts.

The electorate absolutely has the power to enact their choice. Voting in this country is easier than any place in the world. Everyone over 18 is eligible to vote and no one is going to threaten you or attack you at the polling booths. Despite that only a minority of eligible people actual vote in most elections.

Is there a better system? You could argue whether other forms of democracy are more fair. Ours is not the only form of democracy. European democracies have done a better job of making the moves necessary to provide health care to their people without the gridlock we have here but on the other hand they face many of the problems we have and some even more severe. Maybe we should have a meritocracy or a geniocracy but no matter how powerless you currently feel, a government that transfers all power from the general population to a special class of people is always at risk when the population gets dissatisfied with things.

I’m not saying our system is perfect or even great, but I am saying that complaining is easy. Its far more difficult to develop and enact good solutions. Lots of people complain all the time but very few are creative or motivated enough to actually try and improve things - there are two types of people who really do that, activists and politicians. For all the vitriol directed at politicians (and they do deserve a lot of it), they are the ones who are out there trying to make a difference. Can you say the same about yourself?

 Signature 

For every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, obvious,.... and just plain wrong

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 September 2012 12:55 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 25 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4052
Joined  2006-11-28

Yes, Clinton’s speech was awesome. His condemnation of the personal demonization of Obama and his defence of compromise and cooperation were inspiring, and he showed a much greater respect for fact than the Republicans did in their speeches (particularly Ryan). Brilliant!

 Signature 

The SkeptVet
The SkeptVet Blog
Militant Agnostic: I don’t know, and neither do you!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 September 2012 03:46 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 26 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1805
Joined  2005-07-20

The Dems did good research, and sounded candid and concerned with the people.  The GOP sounded good because they were rehearsed, but they were all promises and no history of their results, and the happy come-together message unity cleaved with their recent pledges to stop Obama’s re-election as their single most important task from McConnell, Boehner, and others… so the Republican convention looked good loving kind happy, but had no connection to the reality recent history in the Congress.

“They beat a Republican congressman with almost 100 percent voting record on every conservative score because he said he realized he did not have to hate the president to disagree with him. Boy, that was a non-starter, and they threw him out.”

I wonder which Republican that was, I know that in Indiana Senator Dick Lugar was voted out for a Tea Party member.  Maybe he meant Cliff Stearns’ loss to Ted Yoho in FL?

And the hypocrisy of demanding that the government keep its hands off of the economy, and the Republicans plan for de-regulation, and then they are holding Obama responsible for every job lost in the nation.  downer

“But I am telling you, the claim that President Obama weakened welfare reform’s work requirement is just not true. But they keep on running ads claiming it.

“You want to know why? Their campaign pollster said, ‘We are not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers.’”

Did anyone see that ad?

 Signature 

I saw a happy rainbow recently.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 September 2012 10:37 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 27 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  637
Joined  2012-04-25
macgyver - 06 September 2012 12:34 PM

...There are only three relevant questions when you evaluate this process.
1) Does the electorate have accurate information and the tools to choose the best leader
2) Does the electorate have the power to enact their choice
3) Is there a better system you can think of for choosing our leaders and if so what?
...

1) Not by any means. If you listen to any two knowledgeable political debaters, the discussion always boils down to Person 1 says A, and A is the absolute truth supported by the facts. And Person 2 says, no actually it’s Not-A, and Not-A is the absolute truth supported by the facts. And each will have a whole list of facts, supported by a whole list of experts. I’ve listened to a zillion such conversations. Point is, if two experts can come to the exact opposite conclusions, based on the facts, no ordinary person will be able to do so ESPECIALLY when there are so so many issues to think about. They may think they figured it out, but they didn’t.  I think political organizations realize this and therefore focus on all the feel good crap and nice speeches to win votes.

2) Not at all. At some point they have to vote. There’s a concerted effort to suppress the vote and to steal elections. Very few people even know this yet alone feel empowered to fight it. And with electronic voting machines it’s even easier to bypass whatever efforts were made to “get out the vote”.

3) A system where all parties are welcome, not ruled out by the scheming of the DNC and RNC. A system where only 2 or 3 months of campaigning are allowed. A system where a set dollar figure is given to each candidate. A system where information is vetted by a neutral 3rd party that all parties agree is neutral.

Point is, there comes a point where you can’t honestly say “gee our system sucks but it’s better than anything else”.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 September 2012 11:45 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 28 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2799
Joined  2011-11-04
CuthbertJ - 07 September 2012 10:37 AM
macgyver - 06 September 2012 12:34 PM

...There are only three relevant questions when you evaluate this process.
1) Does the electorate have accurate information and the tools to choose the best leader
2) Does the electorate have the power to enact their choice
3) Is there a better system you can think of for choosing our leaders and if so what?
...

1) Not by any means. If you listen to any two knowledgeable political debaters, the discussion always boils down to Person 1 says A, and A is the absolute truth supported by the facts. And Person 2 says, no actually it’s Not-A, and Not-A is the absolute truth supported by the facts. And each will have a whole list of facts, supported by a whole list of experts. I’ve listened to a zillion such conversations. Point is, if two experts can come to the exact opposite conclusions, based on the facts, no ordinary person will be able to do so ESPECIALLY when there are so so many issues to think about. They may think they figured it out, but they didn’t.  I think political organizations realize this and therefore focus on all the feel good crap and nice speeches to win votes.

2) Not at all. At some point they have to vote. There’s a concerted effort to suppress the vote and to steal elections. Very few people even know this yet alone feel empowered to fight it. And with electronic voting machines it’s even easier to bypass whatever efforts were made to “get out the vote”.

3) A system where all parties are welcome, not ruled out by the scheming of the DNC and RNC. A system where only 2 or 3 months of campaigning are allowed. A system where a set dollar figure is given to each candidate. A system where information is vetted by a neutral 3rd party that all parties agree is neutral.

Point is, there comes a point where you can’t honestly say “gee our system sucks but it’s better than anything else”.

I, also, think that there is a lot about our political system that sucks. And there may be better one’s (Australia’s maybe?).  But we’re here with this system.

So we can either make the best of it as it is, try to change it, or not try to do anything at all, other than complain about it, and allow it to get worse, by default.

 Signature 

“Our lives are not our own. From womb to tomb… We are bound to others, past and present… And by each crime and every kindness… We birth our future.”  Sonmi, 2144.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 September 2012 08:48 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 29 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7641
Joined  2008-04-11
mckenzievmd - 06 September 2012 12:55 PM

Yes, Clinton’s speech was awesome. His condemnation of the personal demonization of Obama and his defence of compromise and cooperation were inspiring, and he showed a much greater respect for fact than the Republicans did in their speeches (particularly Ryan). Brilliant!

I have to say, that was the best political speech I’ve ever heard!

 Signature 

Church; where sheep congregate to worship a zombie on a stick that turns into a cracker on Sundays…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 September 2012 08:53 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 30 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7641
Joined  2008-04-11
CuthbertJ - 06 September 2012 10:17 AM

  Report back in one year, after Obama gets re-elected.  See if even one thing from any of the grand speeches comes true.

The DNC speeches inspired me, the RNC speeches terrified me. If the GOP gets the presidency, I would hope NONE of his promises are kept.

 Signature 

Church; where sheep congregate to worship a zombie on a stick that turns into a cracker on Sundays…

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 4
2