« Boy was I wrong | Main | Holy crap!! »

Rudy rules!

Whoa! I didn't even know they made cans of whoop-ass that big, did y'all?


Rudy really got 'em fired up. The ultimate fluffer!

But what did you think of Palin?

Well, as for me, I've heard that she can field-dress a moose, and after tonight, I'm inclined to believe it.

She made a helluva delivery with that speech. But if I fell every time a good speaker got me stirred up inside, I'd still be plowing cotton and attending some rural Pentecostal church over in the boonies of east Louisiana. And I would've been won over, at least temporarily, by Jesse Jackson in '88 after that great "Keep Hope Alive" delivery (especially after that guy they booed off the stage, remember him, the one from AR?)

Alas, I just sit back and enjoy the wonder of how a skilled speaker can so move us, whether we agree with their true agenda or not. Got to be something instinctive in us.

But what truly impressed me about Ms. Palin was how absolutely fearless she is. I can imagine any number of professional politicians who would've been all high-pitched and dry-mouthed from the adrenaline of such a nationally-exposed moment. I can't remember ever having seen anyone in such an environment make a point and confidently stare dead into the camera for a full second the way she did a few times. They (we) all tend to look around at the faces for a response.

If she's for real (are any of them?), and is actually a person of honor and character and whose actions will be congruent with her words, well here's to her, one finally slipped through the cracks.

But I refuse to be the first one to say what so many of us are thinking, though if you're old enough to remember a certain Prince song from the early 80s about making pretend, you know the line I'm talking about.

I'm still in a state of arousal.

I missed Palin's speech, but I just watched Guilliani's speech on youtube. My first reaction is boy that room was full of assholes. A whole lock of mockery and derision and the audience laughed at the punchlines even when there was no real setup to the jokes.

Of course, four years ago the joke was Kerry's purple hearts. Four years ago they mocked Kerry's military service. This year the joke was Obama's community organizing. Somehow Guilliani left out of McCain's life story his leaving behind of his first wife, as well as his support of Charles Keating before Keating got into jail. It was a lot of guilt by association. Guilliani mocked Obama's Harvard Education even though Obama hardly had a charmed life growing up. He also mocked his "Chicago machine politics" as if just being in Chicago made him worse than someone who divorced his wife to run off with a rich younger woman in order to get his start in politics.

There was all kinds of logistical jumps in Guilliani's speech. But it was whoop-ass, I suppose.

Jesus, PE, it's a political convention. What did you expect, the Confessions of St. Augustine?

Not exactly. I have, however, heard speeches that played to the audience's better nature rather than their worst. This was not one of those speeches.

I thought Fred Thompson and Romney gave great speeches, especially Romney, the day before.

Rudy's speech was good, he did what he was supposed to do - paved the way for Palin. He was the attack dog, and he's decent at that.

It's not at all surprising that hardcore Liberals see little good, let alone stirring in all this, just as hardcore Conservatives like myself see nothing good or stirring in speeches made by the likes of Ted Kennedy, Joe Biden or Barack Obama.

As to the magnitude of McCain's divorce, let's see, McCain divorced his first wife (not illegal, and for some reason a common practice among both committed Liberals and committed Conservatives - apparently somewhat more than among those who are more Centrist for some reason), while Eliot Spitzer gets caught with a bunch of hookers (very much illegal and not nearly as common as say having an affair or getting a divorce).

I don't get your consternation, PE.

I'm a Conservative. I oppose teen pregnancy and explicit (how to) sex ed and I oppose affairs, whore-mongering, etc.

BUT, I'd NEVER vote character over ideology.

Mother Theresa could be running on a Marxist platform against Newt Gingrich (who had an affair while Married, then dumped his wife on her sickbed) and I'd vote for Newt in a heartbeat and without reservation. In fact, I'd, at this moment, vote for Newt Gingrich over ANYONE on the American political scene. He's that good and he has the right ideology (no pun intended).

Maybe it's that secular non-religious people just don't understand those religious and "family values" folks...and how and why even THEY tend to vote for character-flawed Conservatives over apparently squeaky clean Liberals.

I DO know them. I know a fair number of evangelicals and "born agains". In fact a number of firemen I've worked with became "born-agains" (insufferable bastards on social issues - extremely judgmental) BUT, I've caught some of them looking at porn and doing "less than honorable things" and their response is universally - "Im already fogiven."

One guy I know beat his wife pretty severely and still sees himself as a good Christian and of course, one who is "already forgiven."

You mistakenly believe that folks like that judge harshly.

They judge YOU harshly. For themselves and the rest of "the saved" they look on themselves as "already forgiven."

Since about age 11 I never had such ephemeral concerns. I decided that I didn't accept the "my brother's keeper" crap Christianity preached and I certainly didn't accept "the sanctity of all life" crap. Such things tend to get in the way of self-preservation and other more vital stuff.

I initially (like many dumb atheists today) thought I'd renounced God, but my problem was only with manmade, organized religion...and as time's gone on, I see where religion actually helps some people be better people, so I've never had a problem with religious people at all, even when they aggravate me and try to get me to "find God."

Found Him....and as to "What would I tell Him," I'm honest with people religious or not, IF I were to be brought to account for some of the regrettable things I've done earlier on, I'd say, "You made me this way, and by the way, THANKS, it was a lot of fun."

I don't know about "forgiven," but I never really had much of what some people call empathy or a conscience, I did whatever I had to to get objectives accomplished. If I had to repossess a car, I didn't care at all about the prospect of possibly having to hurt someone else ("crack their crueller" in the parlance) to do it.

There was never any anger or willful wanting to hurt anyone else on my part, it's just that my own personal safety came first, the money (the cut from bringing that car in) came second and that other person's health and safety came in around 108th.

It was, for me, a very easy decision.

I take it for a "born again" it would be a very agonizing one, but if they acted like I naturally would, they'd be covered with the "already forgiven" thing.

I think THAT'S why secularists often overestimate character among evangelicals and other religious people - they don't get the "already forgiven" thing.

I agree that Fred Thompson's speech was better because it was largely about the ideological differences between Obama and McCain. Guilliani's speech focused on McCain's story and character while deriding Obama's background through insinuation. (Attending Harvard makes one an elitist. Being a politician in Chicago makes one corrupt.)

>I agree that Fred Thompson's speech was better...

From a content standpoint, I might agree if I'd been able to stay awake during it. On delivery though, he didn't come close. It was a phone-it-in performance, and I kept imagining this thought balloon over his head saying "When can I go home and bang my wife?"

Well last night I missed both speeches because one thing led to another. For the record, I'm not against sex. :)

Post a comment