Here’s a note I got from a disgruntled (but still loyal and devoted) NLT reader:
Also, I completely disagree with you about the convention. I thought Thompson and Lieberman were incredibly good last night. They focused on character--McCain’s character and story are quite compelling, and if that is what voters focus on, Obama is screwed. Second, they connected this theme to the one where Obama thinks he can win--change. Fred and Joe both said if you want a real reformer, McCain/Palin ticket has an actual, tangible record on this. Obama’s got nothin. They are trying to win on Obama’s own ground! Brilliantly audacious! You need to have demonstrated character if it is change you really want. Third, their attack on Obama was focused. Joe’s comment about Obama was devastating. He’s young and eloquent--that’s IT, no match for an actual record of reform and judgment. Fred said this in a slightly different way: Two questions you’ll never have to ask about McCain: Who is he and can he be trusted as President?
Readers may not know, but Thompson's speech was not carried on any of the three major networks, {ABC, CBS and NBC}. The networks spent that time discussing the non-issue of Governor Palin's daughter.
Dan provides an argument for throwing away the TV. I listened to both speeches on the radio. I thought both Thompson and Lieberman (as angry as I am with Lieberman) gave strong performances and announced the upcoming themes of the campaign: reform, renewal, character.
I thought Fred was flat, except for the powerful account of McCain's POW experience. The crowd was silent and attentive at that point. As a matter of style, I was distracted by Thompson's constant clearing of his throat, but that's a minor quibble.
Dan: The Palin obsession over her daughter by the media will result in a backlash--should Biden have left the Senate when he was the lone caregiver of his children? It smacks of sexism to suggest the Baracuda should have and Biden should not.
I'm not sure about a "backlash."
I've learned that smears stick, it's almost impossible to restore a reputation once destroyed. Which is why I mentioned the other day on another thread, that I firmly believe dueling needs to be legalized. There are certain smears that cannot be answered except at dawn, and with a bullet or cold steel.
At the very least, Democrat orchestrated strikes against her fitnesss, her qualifications, the extent to which she was vetted, have SIGNIFICANTLY blunted whatever momentum her selection created.
For almost 72 hrs the media has been covering everything but her actual accomplishments in office. Which are considerable indeed.
This story, which is a complete non-story, this issue, which is a complete non-issue, has injured our ticket and our chances. And the media, wholly in the tank for the fraudulent one who has no record or accomplishment to boast of, {except that garnered through affirmative action...}, the media knows this blunts the traction our message might gain through coverage of our Convention.
4 years ago, the Democrat ticket was obliterated through hard-hitting speeches at our Convention. This go round, the media is damned and determined that such a thing won't recur.
Lies travel farther than the truth. We needed to be more prepared for the reaction her nomination would INEVITABLY cause. If McCain/Palin wins, the Republicans will effectively be guaranteed 16 years worth of dominance of The White House. Palin would be the clear and away favourite 8 years from now.
16 YEARS WORTH OF JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS ARE UP FOR GRABS IN THIS ELECTION.
And the hard Left knows it.
Two questions you’ll never have to ask about McCain: Who is he and can he be trusted as President?
The answers are of course "The Maverick" and "No".
Reverse this ticket (put the mav as VP and Sarah as P) then I would vote for it...
16 YEARS WORTH OF JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS ARE UP FOR GRABS IN THIS ELECTION.
That IS the only thing the GOP has anymore is it not - certainly not anything resembling conservative governance...
Christopher, tell it to the Democrats. Given our credible alternative for president, you have to be joking about not trusting McCain. We are going to have a new president in January. It is either going to be Obama or McCain. Who do you trust more?
Well, Kate, you're right, although I know some folks that would vote for Palin but won't vote for McCain. I don't think Mac could have won with her. Certainly not with Pawlenty, who apparently was the other last-minute option.
meant without her (not a Freudian or whatever...) in comment 7.
It is either going to be Obama or McCain. Who do you trust more
The answer is obvious: Obama. I can trust Obama to be who he is, a complete and unashamed euro-wacko liberal. What can I trust McCain on? appointing conservative judges? certainly not. Governing on this or that conservatively. No. Protecting the constitution? no. Protecting the borders? no. Supporting conservative legislation? no.
About the only thing we can trust McCain on is tacking to the left on something crucial just when you need him not to.
The only thing you can say to these facts is some variation of the "lessor of two evils" argument. For myself and many other traditional conservatives this is wearing thin - we are willing to go with the honest liberal over the dishonest one...
About the only thing we can trust McCain on is tacking to the left on something crucial just when you need him not to.
Allow me to say that again. Also, allow me to make a prediction: It will be the GOP, and not the Dem's, who complete the socialization (and ruination) of medicine. IF McCain wins, he is the perfect man for that. He will tack to the left and form a "gang" of "moderate Republicans" and Dem's and walla: "universal" health care.
Does NLT have an offshore gambling site? They should...
Then traditional conservatives have to present convincing arguments to pull McCain to the right. I surely do hope they do it. Such arguments might be made to a swayable McCain as they could never be made and won with and to an obtuse, obsidian-like, honest Obama.
I hope your prediction is wrong. McCain may have to "tack left" on health care, because the nation seems inclined in that direction. Whoever is available to make the credible political argument against it had better get cracking. No one is persuading the populace on this point as far as I can tell.