And I wonder whether he’ll really get that post-RNC bounce. It’s your standard laundry-list stump speech, uninformative, uninspired and uninteresting. He’s being a bit sweeter than those who spoke before him; he’s not slamming Kerry as hatefully and absurdly as his VP or Zell Miller. But he’s still repeating the standard BS about the $87 billion and Kerry’s voting against weapons systems, framing it as though he was against defending America, although Cheney voted against those same systems.
All in all, it’s amazingly uneventful. I really would have thought Rove and Hughes would do better. I wasn’t 100 percent happy with Kerry’s big night, but he did way better than this. The best I can say about the speech is, at least bush didn’t rant about steroid abuse and sending a man to Mars….
They have in no way succeeded in telling us why we should vote for bush — only why we should vote against Kerry. They’ve done this well, and their messages are as powerful as they are untrue. It could really hurt. But I was expecting to see more. Meanwhile, Kerry has maintained his edge in the polls, even after weeks of the most merciless political crucifixion ever witnessed in this country. So I’m going to remain very cautiously optimistic. Especially after watching bush tonight. For all his efforts to display gravitas, there’s no getting around the sorry fact that he’s just a shrub.
1
By Dan
I, for one, think it’s a great strategy. No one listens to the State of the Union speech, so take everything you should have said there and put it in your Convention speech!
Though I guess with Arnold around, he couldn’t really make cracks about steroid abuse.
Also, Laura Bush’s hot pink dress is breaking my TV
Man, I can’t wait for midnight
September 2, 2004 @ 9:12 pm | Comment
2
By Dan
Ugh. Kerry, you’re a good guy, but you’re not too quick in the brain at midnight.
Maybe he can try this speech again when he can put together a coherent sentence. He can practice every day between now and November.
September 2, 2004 @ 10:08 pm | Comment
3
By richard
Are you referring to Kerry’s response speech? I thought he did well — he was a human being, not a robot. He’s not a great orator like Edwards or Clinton, but he was honest and real and direct. And he wasn’t even reading off a teleprompter (though he did glance down at a cue card).
September 2, 2004 @ 10:13 pm | Comment
4
By vaara
I’d like to know why it’s perfectly OK for the President of the United States to bash an entire state.
I’m referring, of course, to his little jab at Kerry:
WTF? Just imagine if John Kerry had said similarly insulting about Texas (or Utah, or Mississippi, or some other ultraconservative state) — he’d have received dozens of death threats by now, because if there’s one thing that ultraconservative Southerners and Westerners aren’t, it’s thick-skinned.
And this, friends, is the main reason why I support John Kerry for President: because it’s about damn time we had a Yankee sitting in the White House. (Yes, I know Li’l George is actually a Yankee too, but don’t ever dare say that to his face…)
The North shall rise again!!
September 3, 2004 @ 11:10 am | Comment