I know the idea is a bit hard to stomach, but truly, I lie not.
If you want to know how well a Democrat does at ANYTHING, switch to Foxy Noise immediately after. The more they criticize and moan about how awful it was, well, the better it REALLY was.
So take it from me President Bill Clinton hit a homer, and damaged Mitt Romney perhaps irreparably and made Barack Obama’s job a whole lot easier tonight.
Brit Hume mumbled, “it was a good speech” and then immediately added, “it was as usual, too long.” As we moved along the panel, more criticisms “he was off message, it was all defense”, the pace picked up. By the time it got back to Brit, the speech was still too long, but he now could add that it was “not forward” but “looking backward” and “about as good a defense as one could make–he basically explained why Obama failed.”
“Too much detail,” moaned another, “nobody sitting on their couch can remember all those facts.”
“The fact-checkers will be combing through it all night,” said the panelist who could not come up with any untruths himself.
Well, if you watched it, that certainly was not your impression. Of course people aren’t going to remember all the details. They don’t need to. What they will remember is that Bill Clinton explained the facts to them, and it satisfied them. It was classic Clinton. It was great.
What Clinton did regarding the GOP was masterful. He managed to praise many Republicans, he managed to shame them into remembering what and who they used to be before they became entranced with the Jezebel–TeaParty. He pretty much made it clear that they must bite their collective lips, grab the knife, and excise the abscess before it is too late. They are a doomed party until they do.
If you have any doubt, then follow this link and see what the crazy Right was saying about the empowering speech of Sandra Fluke, you know, the Georgetown law student who was vilified by Rush Limppaw and called a slut. It ain’t pretty folks, and the worst diatribes about her come from the likes of She-creatures Ann Coulter and Michelle Malkin.
If you have any doubt about the brilliant speech given by Michelle Obama, go and read John Heilemann’s assessment. It was every bit as good as I thought it was.
By the way, I went back and watched Ann Romney’s speech. It was good, but nothing to compare to Michelle Obama’s. She lacked the ability to carry the punch line, and she over emphasized words at times. Worst of all was her shrill, (vintage Oprah) “I love you Wiiiimen!” which was simply, well a caricature and caused great guffaws (Romney likes guffaws you recall) in our household.
An extraordinary talking point was the Bloomberg report that indicated that from 1962 or so, Democrats have added 42 million jobs to the workforce while Republicans only 23, and this is while they controlled the White House for more of those years.
Oh *snap*. Oh no he dint. No No No ! Paulie boy has been funnin’ with us again. Just when we thought he was a die-hard ideologue, albeit a lying one, he goes and poops in the can. It seems that all the while Paulie has been moaning and groaning and offering to slash your wrists if we don’t get rid of Obama and his CARE, well Paulie was sneakin’ around back of the barn and what? Yes. Yes. Yes HE WAS! Asking for some of them dirty old Affordable Health Care dollars his own self. For a clinic in his own district. Just like he was against the Stimulus before he begged for some it. Oh Paulie dear sweet stupid lying Paulie, you would make Sistah Sarah proud.
Ah, with that adieu, dear bloggy ones, for I am off to a location known as Gonzales Nursery to examine the fauna since our environs is a bit stark still with plenty of planters but each an empty wretch yearning to embrace the tendril roots of its beloved. Translation: we are going plant shopping. Hark, I think I shall write anew of things of Camelot.
- Krauthammer On Michelle Obama’s Speech: “I Didn’t Buy a Line of It” (nicedeb.wordpress.com)
- Brit Hume on Bill Clinton’s Speech: It Was Too Long (foxnewsinsider.com)
- Pundits swoon over Clinton’s speech (politico.com)
- Brit Hume Reacts to Mitt Romney’s RNC Speech: ‘He Was Not Trying to Sing and Be Poetic’ (foxnewsinsider.com)
- Eric Boehlert: Fox News completely barren of actual journalism (rawstory.com)
Terri Cole Pilarski said:
Well, see…I did not think Ann Romney’s speech was good. It was not compelling. To me it lacked a certain quality that conveyed that she was really speaking from her heart, it was “cool” and didn’t feel authentic. The words were all fine…it was her presence in the words that seemed to lack authenticity – not that she doesn’t believe them but rather that she really hasn’t lived them. She doesn’t really know what it feels like to struggle. Michelle does. Obama does. Sandra Flute does. Elizabeth Warren does. Sister SImone Campbell does. The authenticity of their real lived expereinces rings through their speeches. Even Clinton knows a bit about this, priviliedged white man that he is – and of course it helps that he is gifted with the ability to speak to the people and draw us in.
Well Terri, I was trying to be fair. I thought she did a good job but I do agree that I’m not sure she has a clue what real people experience in life. She thinks that because her marriage wasn’t perfect or that her health issues dampened things, that somehow that makes her relate. It’s a lot easier to handle all these things when you don’t have any financial worries to add to the mix, and that she is unable to even see I think. !END
Larry Beck said:
As long as it was you were kept interested with Clinton’s mastery of telling a story. The boy do know how to give a speech.
yes, I kept thinking, oh boy he’s gonna go too long, and you know, he really didn’t, and from start to back it was really great and answered all the stupid RR crap.
Loved Bubua’s speech. Barack’s was just as good last night.
Snoring Dog Studio said:
Clinton did what the Obama campaign has to keep doing – explain the arithmetic and keep explaining it. His speech was great and I loved Obama’s as well. It irritates me when the critics say that his speech lacked details – that’s really not what I think those speeches are for. Watch the debates – then you’ll get the details.
exactly right, and I have been howling for a long time that the Dems need to patiently sit with charts and explain the truth. It’s all very easy to see with charts, yet nobody uses them.
Snoring Dog Studio said:
I agree! Get more visual aids!