August 25, 2008
Why the hell is Giuliani the keynote speaker for the Republican convention?
ADDED: Tomasky is from Guardian America and The New York Review of Books, and Lowry is from The National Review. There's something really gloomy about this clip, but the mood is lightened when Tomasky eats what appears to be a cookie. That's a Bloggingheads first, perhaps. Who eats on Bloggingheads? Drinking is the norm, but eating? That's wild. Oh, now I'm remembering that Mickey Kaus ate pizza that time....
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
31 comments:
"the hell"
WTF. The man is a bloody American hero. Putting him in the keynote nails national security for the Repubs.
What am I/you missing here?
"the hell" is an allusion....
One can't disagree with Lowry that the party is in urgent need of an overhaul, but I think it would be much better - and much easier - to do that against the backdrop of a McCain administration that is conspicuously competent and effective than it would be against the backdrop of the firesale that we will see if Obama squeaks in backed with a Democratic Congress.
So there's a lot of work to be done, but I think it would be a serious mistake for American conservatives to look at success in this election as the analog to John Major's win in '92, as a kind of last hurrah. I think the party has to recognize that its brand has been heavily tarnished by the Bush-DeLay-Frist axis of avarice, the kind of malignantly lethargic corruption and incompetence that reigned between January 2003 and January 2007. By selecting McCain, it has started that process, insofar as McCain was (along with Tom Coburn) one of the staunchest "inside" critics of the worst aspects of the Axis years. It would do well if it ejects people like Ted Stevens and other emblems of corruption. The party has to start standing for what it used to stand for, and it has to be credible.
I'm guessing that Giuliani is going to remind us that voting R is the only way to protect ourselves from another 9/11.
Ann added:
"Tomasky eats what appears to be a cookie. That's a Bloggingheads first, perhaps. Who eats on Bloggingheads? Drinking is the norm, but eating? That's wild. Oh, now I'm remembering that Mickey Kaus ate pizza that time...."
I immediately think of the Egg Salad Challenge... Oh, that's painful to watch now. I feel so guilty for contributing!!
The hell you say...
This only means we are being notified of McCain's winnowing the VP pool.
Good. One old fart down, half dozen to go.
Bloody American hero, my ass.
Rudy is best in theory--as an idea--not in practice, as was shown in the primary. The thinking must be that he makes money on the speech circuit so folks are assuming that he must be a better communicator than was shown during the primaries.
Jindal would have made more sense. This kills a lot of birds with one stone, unless he made BHO look like an elder by comparison and/or he sucked when compared to BHO in 2004.
There aren't any obvious choices. Romney's already on VP night. The money-centric conservatives don't like Huck, and they're paying for the show.
There are some no-name state folks that could fail to rise to the occasion or bore the tube and tubes viewers.
PS
Simon, your party is more corrupt and controlled by business interests and rich folks than you know. Not that the Ds are much better, but at least the Ds have a better record with deficit control.
I'm for the corruption that only sells out today, not today and tomorrow. Tax and spend is bad. Borrow and spend is worse.
1jpb, you're right. I mean, it's so corrupt that we've got a Senator defending the credit card company his own son works for! oops.
mcg,
Do you think that credit card companies are disproportionately based in Delaware and South Dakota?
Your accusation should be adjusted to account for the real influence.
1jpb, no one whose party is associated with big labor is in any position to tell me my party's inappropriately in hoc to special interests of one flavor or another. When the Democrats eject the unions, they can credibly lecture me about the power of "business interests."
Can you eat Nicorette?
Anyone who says "Jindal" is clueless. You might as well put Kathrene jean Lopez (NRO) on the podium to talk in tongues about Satan and aborted babies....real crowd pleaser.
Obviously Rudy is speaking because he appeals to moderates and right-leaning Dems, obviously.
UWS,
I think the anti-Jindal stuff is over the top. He would give a carefully worded speech, and then all the talking heads would blather on about how he's so wonderful--they couldn't help themselves, unless he really sucked.
UWS
Well ya that and then how does he miss, Thune, Perry, Steele, Hunstman, Cantor, Portman, ...
The only young up and comers are Romney, Palin and Jindal?
Romney is in the "young" column?
They need to change to bigger states for the primaries-we all know why Rudy couldn't gain any traction...
Giuliani is perfect for McCain because he is not a conservative either. I bet you could swing a dead giraffe and not find a conservative speaking at the R convention.
Trey
Because Rudy represents the direction the GOP should be heading if they want to regain relevance. It is only because of the epic battle for control of the Democrat Party that the GOP has any shot at winning in November.
Like it or not, Rudy and Pops are towards the center of America. Everyone can identify with failed Xtians, but African Liberation Theology and Mormons not so much.
Not that the Ds are much better, but at least the Ds have a better record with deficit control.
Only if you (a) selectively limit your list of Democrats to "Bill Clinton" (in which case you should say "a D", not "the Ds") and (b) aren't aware that spending and taxation are determined by Congress, not the President.
I bet you could swing a dead giraffe and not find a conservative speaking at the R convention.
Sarah Palin, Fred Thompson, Dick Cheney, Michael Steele, Bobby Jindal, Sam Brownback, Mel Martinez... notorious liberals, every last one.
Simon,
I don't hate the unions like you do.
PS
But, back in the day I went to great lengths to evade my required union membership when I was working my way through college. I never joined--thanks to the help of management and a lot of trickery involving "quitting"/"rehiring." As I look back I now think that the management was using me--no breaks, working off the clock, terrible schedule, etc. But I didn't care, I was a proud anti-union conservative. And, I have no regrets, I still think that I'm lazy if I take breaks--but, I do like folks working for me to have these, and other, rights.
Revenant,
The federal government needs to make the budget balance. Tax cuts for the rich isn't working. Entitlements are not going to ever disappear, interest payments are only going up (especially after the government can't steal the excess SS money, because there is none), and the discretionary budget is not a relatively huge and target rich source of spending cuts.
The president sends the first budget, and they have a veto. Move the rates back to WJC levels.
Hate to say it, but Dr Kill is right. We've been handed a blessing this year: the real possibility of snatching victory from the jaws of catstrophe. This seems obvious, but let's not blow it by kidding ourselves about the electorate.
Rev, Mel Martinez doesn't belong on that list if you're being sarcastic as one assumes you are.
I say let Ghouliani speak. The more he talks the less people like him.
1jpb, with the possible exception of the teachers' union, I don't hate the unions. I just said that a party that's in hoc to one special interest is in no position to criticize anyone else's party for being in hoc to another special interest. And I think that unions tend to subtract more from the overall efficiency of the economy than they add. I'd say that our special interests contribute a whole lot more to America than your special interests, because unlike labor, innovation isn't fungible. But that doesn't mean I hate them.
Quick question: what do you think of the bill in Congress to introduce what I think's called "card check" - more-or-less the equivalent of the credit card bill a couple of years ago in terms of shamelesl promotion of the interests of special interests backing the party?
It's because.
(I don't have an answer but my two year old is busy using that answer. When I ask because why, she says, because because.)
Because because because because, of all the wonderful things he does!
Rudy's speech at Bush's convention was one of the things that turned the tide against Kerry, or at least wiped out his convention bounce. At least that's how it felt to me.
Also, Lowry doesn't know what Rudy's gonna say. Doesn't McCain already have a good idea? So maybe it's a strong speech. Or, do they choose a keynote speaker before they know what he's gonna say?
When the most memorable moment in a conversation is a surreptious cookie munch, it puts one in mind of a previous post about the joys of solitude.
They wanted to get Bernard Kerik, but he was unavailable
Giuliani is an "American hero." Yeah, right. He screwed up the emergency response years in advance by putting the HQ near the towers (better to use as his love nest) and goofing the radio procurement so responders couldn't talk to each other.
Prediction: He will lay off of saying "911" and will intersperse "P.O.W." Like this:
911 911 P.O.W.
911 911 P.O.W.
911 911 P.O.W.
911 911 P.O.W.
911 911 P.O.W.
It's all they've got.
Sounds good to me. Giuliani is about the only likeable Republican in the bunch.
McCain and the GOP continue their blunders and still Obama cannot put him away.
Not a good sign for Obama.
Rudy? Time to head for Blockbuster.
rev wrote: "Sarah Palin, Fred Thompson, Dick Cheney, Michael Steele, Bobby Jindal, Sam Brownback, Mel Martinez... notorious liberals, every last one."
See what I mean! LOL. Well, rev, when you are right you are right, and you are right! I stand corrected, and corrected with flair.
Trey
Simon,
I'm not worried about card check.
Employers would need to be more concerned about their non-union workers' well being if they knew that in drips and drabs these folks could choose to unionize. The employers would need to constantly be concerned that they weren't screwing the employees. They would need to constantly be sending the message that they are concerned about the employees. They would need to constantly take steps to make the employees feel like management and workers are a united team such that a union would only act as an unnecessary, divisive, and expensive wedge to the team.
The (far and few between) single day votes set up a high stakes one time campaign event. But the card check sets up an adjusted balance of power such that workers have collective leverage without unionizing.
Post a Comment