James McPherson's Media & Politics Blog

Observations of a patriotic progressive historian, media critic & former journalist

  • By the author of The Conservative Resurgence and the Press: The Media’s Role in the Rise of the Right and of Journalism at the End of the American Century, 1965-Present. A former journalist with a Ph.D. in journalism, history and political science, McPherson is a past president of the American Journalism Historians Association and a board member for the Northwest Alliance for Responsible Media.

  • Archives

  • August 2012
    S M T W T F S
  • Categories

  • Subscribe

Republican platform: gallows for GOP suicide?

Posted by James McPherson on August 25, 2012

It has seemed for some time as if the Republican Party is suicidal, and determined to make sure that Barack Obama wins re-election. Maybe Republicans just want to prove that a couple of professors who forecast a Mitt Romney win aren’t so smart. Because the schedule proposed platform for next week’s GOP national convention provide new evidence that Republicans either cluelessly think that they will win easily–perhaps by voter suppression in key states–or have simply decided that they can’t win and so might as well be entertaining as they go down in flames.

A positive sign for Romney is the fact that various media are now helping him do what he and his campaign have generally been unable to do–look more human. Though he was unfairly bashed for a ride on a personal watercraft, yesterday two major media sources–the New York Times and MSNBC–have produced largely flattering portrayals of the GOP nominee. OK, it may be stretching it to call MSNBC a major media source, but it is a generally liberal-leaning cable network that could help portray Romney as more moderate than his campaign has been. Both stories include what Times writer Sheryl Gay Stolberg calls a “crisis” narrative, details about Ann Romney’s multiple sclerosis and Mitt Romney’s auto accident in France (a head-on collision apparently caused by a priest who may have been drunk, killing a passenger in Romney’s car).

There also are signs that Romney is ready to reveal more about his faith (even if he won’t say the “M-word”), as demonstrated by a laudatory Bloomberg piece on Thursday, a Tuesday Seattle Times story picked up via the Associated Press by newspapers around the country, and the fact that the invocation for one night of the GOP convention will be given by a fellow Mormon. MSNBC has also taken advantage of Romney’s religion to do a “Rock Center” program about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints on Thursday. Not that the religious aspects may matter much. As I’ve mentioned previously (demonstrating the decreasing influence of the Religious Right) it seems a bit ironic that if the Christian Right gets its way in November, for the first time ever there won’t be a single Protestant among the president, vice president and entire Supreme Court. But anyone on the far right will be voting against Obama, even if not for Romney–or, as some fruitcakes might phrase it, will favor the Mormon over the Muslim.

Bigger problems than religion come from the fact that Romney has run to the right to represent a party that is already “akin‘,” with controversies about”legitimate rape” (more evidence of the need for better science education) and a judge who suggests that Obama’s re-election could lead to “civil unrest, civil disobedience, civil war” (considering that he’s a Texan, though, his stupidity may not be particularly surprising). Still, it might be moderately surprising that Republicans will apparently repeat their Sharron Angle/Christine O’Donnell/Joe Miller/Ken Buck Tea Party debacle of two years ago with a new round of questionable candidates–Todd Akin, Ted Cruz, Richard Mourdock, Deb Fischer and  Josh Mandel–who (along with repeat loser Linda McMahon) will likely keep them from gaining control of the Senate.

Still, it would be nice if voters would cast ballots based on the actual positions of the candidates. So while party platforms rarely matter much, I would recommend that everyone check out this year’s GOP draft version (thanks Politico)–just to affirm how thoroughly the party has given up on attracting the number of women, gays and people of color that it needs to win the presidential election in November. Some of the key points of the platform would:

Admittedly, all we have so far is a draft document. But it is a draft that the New York Times accurately depicts as “more aggressive in its opposition to women’s reproductive rights and to gay rights than any in memory.” Not a good sign, for a party scrambling to come from behind. A blogger for the Guardian compares it to a useless body part: “Like party platforms, the appendix’s role is a mystery to most people: it may be a useful harbour for bacteria but can also rupture, causing pain and misery.”

Speaking of misery, in fact, Republicans may want to start praying that Hurricane Isaac will reduce Americans’ exposure to official GOP ideas, just as Hurricane Gustov disrupted the GOP convention four years ago. If that does happen, perhaps Pat Robertson and other loonies will point out that Republicans must have offended God in some way (maybe, considering the male names of the hurricanes, with the party’s official anti-gay stance). On the other hand, if this election does drive off enough Americans to lead to the death of the Republican Party–or at least to generate a future GOP “crisis narrative”–perhaps Romney can baptize it after its demise.

P.S.: Just after I posted this, the GOP announced that Isaac will indeed cancel the first day of the convention.

45 Responses to “Republican platform: gallows for GOP suicide?”

  1. Does that Texas judge in Lubbock Texas really only have a high school degree? An article I read on that story seemed to imply it.

  2. melfamy said

    It may be that colleges in Texas ‘socially promote’ the mentally-challenged. That sort of mercy would help to explain their choice of governor as well.

  3. G., don’t be so sore about the last hobo hunt!

    SBJ, no offense but I kinda puked in my mouth when I saw that you read the Frump. What the hello did she say again…..hold on…“Abortions should be easy to obtain early in a pregnancy and progressively harder to get as time goes on. … those who say a day-old embryo is as much a person as a 3-year-old must explain why we freeze embryos and not toddlers.” Um, didn’t we freeze Disney? I could swear that Mouseketeer was well over the age of three.

    Honestly, I don’t think most people give a fat rat’s tidely-boomp about these other issues. I believe this election will boil down to the economy; and it will be the givers voting against the takers.

  4. James McPherson said

    So Kells, does that mean you think life begins at conception and that a fertilized egg is the equivalent of, say, one of your kids? And we may have frozen Disney, but no one has figured out how to thaw him out (as they do with embryos for in vitro fertilization.

    I do agree with you that for many the election will boil down to the economy, but I think folks do care a lot about those other issues, particularly immigrants, old folks, gays and many women.

    Greg, you may be right about Texas. It’s probably the state I most hope never to spend much time in.

  5. augger said

    Kells – I find myself in an odd position of agreeing with you. The socialist in this election cycle will do everything humanly possible to avoid the real issues facing this nation. If you would all remember Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, I challenge most Americans feel they are at the level of physiological needs. Everything above is immaterial at this point. Survival mode rules the day.

    Libs like those found here we be wise to focus on that, and cater to it.

  6. Reuel said

    Yes kellsbells, my exact thought after reading this. I havenot read the links yet but will during lunch, except any that link to MSNBC, New York Times or Harvard. A few real fair a balances sources there. (Sarcasm) I did find it interesting how the prediction out of Colorado University that has been correct, as I recall all the way back to Reagan was not forthcoming or maybe in one of the links. As for gay marriage, as I have stated many times, I say let them have cake and eat it to, but in 2009 they had 58 Democrats and to like minded independents in the Senate and control of the House. Then all Barry would of had to do is sign it and make a victory lap. But they had to wait until he “Evolved” and if they did pass that then they would of not had that as a wedge issue to distract from their record. Sometimes you wonder if they really are doing that community any good or are they just waving a false flag every year to increase donations and free help for the campaign. 71 days and it is a long way from being called, Reagan and Carter were at “To close to call at this point also”, but so was the recall in Wisconsin that drained the Democratic coffers. We all know how those two turned out. Last thought, we can question Mormonism, but not Black theology be taught in Rev. Wright church in Chicago? Interesting, I thought we were a country of practicing freedom of religion.

  7. Yes, James, I believe conception is the inception of life for an individual. The right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness is thus unconstitutionally denied to this individual through the act of abortion. The SCOTUS says it’s okay, though, so it must be…..or is it?

    Reuel, you make an interesting point about Obama’s “coming out of the closet” moment. He knows very well that the homosexual numbers aren’t there in the majority, and I really believe his last move was to nab any homosexuals who were unsure (as they should be) of his stance. (Hey, he’s a politician!)

    As far as the Republicans not going after the Black Panther Party or Black theology, it is because they are too afraid to be deemed racists or politically incorrect. I’m not afraid: Rev. Wright is an a$$aholic socialist preachin politics in church instead of the Gospel! Um, I kinda don’t have a problem with callin a spade a spade.

  8. James McPherson said

    “except any that link to MSNBC, New York Times or Harvard”

    That’s your choice, but unfortunate, reuel. All of them offer good information at times. I sometimes look to Fox News for info, and get as much as I can from a variety of sources to make a fully informed choice. The studyresults from the Colorado profs are the third link in the first paragraph.

    “we can question Mormonism, but not Black theology”

    We can question any of it, and none of it should matter much–there’s no religious test for holding office. But there’s no doubt that conservative Christians have been unduly influential in presidential politics.

    Kells, I admire the consistency of your stand, but the vast majority of Americans disagree with you. (I’d be interested to find out where Reuel and Augger stand on the issue.) Your view would essentially outlaw in vitro fertilization, for example, and would prohibit abortion even to save the life of a woman who already has kids to raise at home,.

    Augger, welcome. I hope you keep coming back. Having a variety of voices in the comments, both “libs” and conservatives, makes for a much more interesting and thoughtful conversation–and makes it harder to put people in boxes. After all, people at the RNL keep referring to Kells as a liberal, but her stance on abortion is very conservative. Having grown up as an Idaho hunter, I’m more conservative on gun control than my Southern Baptist buddy. Reuel and I strongly (and generally respectfully) disagree about Bush’s Iraq War, but agree on some other things.

    Thanks, all.

  9. Reuel said

    Well there I go again, I got to straighten a couple things out first. I don’t attend any church and have not for 20 years. I evolved let say. I was a Midwestern Presbyterian at the time and it hit me one day while sitting there in service that I was read a book that was edited pretty much by “Kings James”. I had just got back from parking a bunch of equipment in bunkers just south of Iraq. This was not my first time in the middle-east, I have been to Egypt, Israel, Turkey and others I am sure i wasn’t suppose to be in. So I just decided to study all the different beliefs to see what is with these three and why have they been at war with each other for so long and not the biblical version because how can someone follow a religion written by men and approved by men that makes a women a second class citizen. But James a Southern Baptist, do I really sound like that ? I guess my grandmother on my father side can be blamed for that.

    I believe there is a God and that religion is tainted in it writing by a bunch of opium induced men. Then subject to the jurisdiction on which parts were except-able to there purpose.

    OK so suspect you want to know where I am on Abortion. When I was a practicing Presbyterian I pretty much didn’t believe in zero, for no reason, what so ever. But like Obama, I evolve to a stands right in the middle, which either side want these days. Yes if it for the reason that it is endangering a mothers life, that is a choice. If it is becuase of rape or insist, yes who in there right mind would want to be make that girl or woman have a child that was the results of possibly the worst day of their life. I don’t not support the use of abortion as a means of birth control. I would support the use of my tax dollars to help the ones that don’t have the money to and in only the cases mother life, rape and insist. That is it, the rest that are have this done for birth control purposes is on their own and God help them if there is a gate.Late term is just bizarre for me to comprehend and if it is used to end a life and no other reason is MURDER. The problem is that less than one percent are for viable reasons and the other 99 percent are ending a life because of a mistake they made. Thou shall not kill.

  10. melfamy said

    Kells how would you handle a miscarriage, which can be deliberately induced. Would you make every woman who gets pregnant inform the government, so that she could be monitored, and arrested if it is thought that she might harm her fetus? Would you treat every miscarriage as a police matter?

  11. augger said

    James, having been a troop who has been deployed to operate overseas (one hitch was 6 years), I can tell you that I am never a fan of sending our boys to the Middle East to solve problems that will never be solved … until they solve them themselves. However, I find it a bit hard to castigate what I call “the knee-jerk reaction” of GBII. We’ll all debate the goals of that war for decades to come, but in the end … one fabulous side effect of that decision was that no further terrorist attacks happened here under his watch (it’s much better for the Hatfields to fight on McCoy land and destroy it, than to destroy their own).

    On abortion. Complex debate, even for medical folks. A lot of medical ethics involved, and not an easy subject to dive right in to, but I will attempt a short version.

    I would say that the termination of a pregnancy has it’s place, and would also not be appropriate (the great conundrum);

    – Abortion in my mind would never be warranted for the sake of birth control. Invasive procedures (surgeries if you will) come with risks, but women with histories of abortions are known to have a greater risk of preterm births should they ever decide to keep one. (there are many, many more … just trying to keep it short)

    – Abortion would be warranted in a situation where the mother is at risk for death (would like to see more than one physician collaborate findings on this).

    – Abortion would be warranted if the female has been raped, and became pregnant.

    – Abortion would be warranted if the child was clinically dead, or found clinically to have an ailment that would render it void of a quality of life.

    And now for my controversial comments on abortion …

    – In the case of consensual sex, I believe the would-be father should have an option to plea for parental rights should he desire to raise the child, and have his day in court to decide. Now I know this goes against a “woman’s choice”, but dammit, men can be good fathers despite what you ladies think. 🙂

    And to put a little Darwinist humor in to it …

    – Democrats should be able to terminate pregnancies at liberty. After all, they are marginalizing their own future!

    Now let the Augger beatings begin. 🙂

  12. James McPherson said

    Sorry, Reuel, my sentence order confused things. I didn’t mean you were a Southern Baptist–my conservative buddy here, with whom I’ve co-hosted a radio show arguing opposite perspectives of many topics, is the Baptist.

    Augger, it sounds like you and I have similar views on abortion, though you might be more protective of a “father’s rights” than I am. I disagree with you about the effect of the Iraq War. True, “no further terrorist attacks happened here under his watch,” but the same was true under Clinton after the first WTC bombing. And the fact is, 3,000 Americans died here during Bush’s watch, in attacks that Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with–and the Iraq War has killed more than 100,000 people who also had nothing to do with 9/11.

    Focusing on where the 9/11 attacks DID come from would also have prevented further attacks, while making us economically more sound in the long run.

  13. “Your view would essentially outlaw in vitro fertilization, for example, and would prohibit abortion even to save the life of a woman who already has kids to raise at home.”

    I do not understand how my view would outlaw in vitro fertilization, for that is not the taking of a life. In the case of a mother whose own life is in jeopardy; I feel that she must decide who lives.

    “Kells how would you handle a miscarriage, which can be deliberately induced. Would you make every woman who gets pregnant inform the government, so that she could be monitored, and arrested if it is thought that she might harm her fetus? Would you treat every miscarriage as a police matter?”

    G., if the fetus is not alive, it must be removed. The govt. should have nothing to do with healthcare, but since they do; it will prove to be the govt. panel’s opinion, or the SCOTUS’ opinion……..but not mine.

  14. melfamy said

    Augger, I would add any woman who wanted an abortion where the fetus is under three months, and at any time if the mother already has four or more children, or is on the dole. Women who don’t want the darn kid in the first place tend not to make the best parents, and the anti-abortion crowd is not stepping up to the plate, adoption-wise. This leads to state-raised kids, and we all know how good the government is at everything it does. 🙂

  15. Reuel said

    Augger; Ditto. The only thing I must add is that Iraq was a military action from 1991 to 2010. Four Presidents, and majority of the congress approved this and were saying the same things President Bush was saying about Iraq. 19 years and the problem is solved no thanks to the Useless UN. Any bets we find some of that WMD in Syria? There was a article written in the fall of 2003 in a Chicago Paper by a NYT writer that it was taken to Syria. The only thing that I don’t understand is the staying behind after the other Amries are defeated. Just tell them on the way out, sorry, good luck and don’t mess with us again. Most of our killed and wounded heroes were after the war and during the nation building. Let them build a new nation themselves and provide them all the rebuilding equipment they can buy from us, especially Iraq. The war was not for oil, but the price of their freedom should of been a gift of oil to repay us for riding them of a tyrant. No country can clean completely the middle east of a culture that does not like us and quite honestly believe we must follow their beliefs or die.

  16. Reuel said

    Found it, But it won’t matter the WMD chanters would not believe it no matter what, cause that is all they heard and is not all the only reasons we went in.


  17. augger said

    ” and the anti-abortion crowd is not stepping up to the plate, adoption-wise.” <—- false premise. Those that wish to become parents, make the best parents. Nothing about an anti-abortion stance places an onus on anyone who does not want to be a parent to condemn them to parenthood just because someone irresponsible wants to use abortion as a form of birth control.

    To James — nothing in your post explains why a following president would not only extend that war, but in fact spread war throughout the region. Maybe more of your thoughts are needed to finishing framing your position?

    Reuel, precisely. In fact, I served in some of what you describe. As far as WMD in Syria, or even Iran for that matter … I tend to agree, and maybe even the liberal base agrees … by choosing to stay out of those two countries.

  18. James McPherson said

    The best military and intelligence in the world, and we didn’t know WMD were being shipped from Iraq to Syria and couldn’t stop it? Sure. Regardless, I’ve seen nothing to justify 100,000 deaths and hundreds of billions of U.S. dollars.

    “nothing in your post explains why a following president would not only extend that war, but in fact spread war throughout the region”

    Nothing in this post, but I have explained it elsewhere, repeatedly. You might start here: https://jmcpherson.wordpress.com/2009/12/01/%e2%80%98oh-bomb-a-nation%e2%80%99-another-chickenhawk-president-%e2%80%98extenze%e2%80%99-a-war/

  19. James McPherson said

    “Nothing about an anti-abortion stance places an onus on anyone who does not want to be a parent to condemn them to parenthood just because someone irresponsible wants to use abortion as a form of birth control.”

    False premise. No one here is promoting abortion as a form of birth control. And especially in a world where health care costs are as screwed up as they are now, nothing should condemn a family to suffer forever financially and emotionally because they were forced to bring a severely disabled and unwanted child into the world.

    A more complicated issue–as someone who has volunteered for decades with homeless folks (and who has a social worker sister and a former community counselor for a wife), I’ve seen what happens to too many kids of ignorant impoverished parents whose birth control (if they practiced any) failed.

  20. augger said

    There is no false premise in that statement. The reference is to Planned Parenthood James. I am sure that you understood that, but next time I suppose I will have to state the obvious to get you to acknowledge it.

    Are you proposing that we spay, and neuter the ignorant and impoverished? After all, you might as well state that liberal movement in Planned Parenthood fails them. But heck, that really isn’t the liberal agenda … to help the ignorant, and impoverished, but rather only to garner their vote in the next election, right?

  21. augger said

    “American commanders-in-chief apparently tend to have extremely small penises.” <— that was awesome. 🙂

  22. James McPherson said

    No, I didn’t know you were talking about Planned Parenthood, because PP had never been part of this thread–though I don’t see why it’s relevant here (especially since most everyone seems to agree on the issue), sorry I missed that.

    “Are you proposing that we spay, and neuter the ignorant and impoverished?”

    Of course not. But I’m also reticent to keep them from having abortions (which is what we were discussing).

    Your last sentence is simply hyperbolic generalization of the type common at the the RNL, but which I consider unworthy of further answer here.

  23. James McPherson said

    “that was awesome”

    Thanks. 🙂

  24. augger said

    I disagree … Planned Parenthood is deeply involved in abortions, as well as contraception, and other women’s issues.

  25. augger said

    “Of course not. But I’m also reticent to keep them from having abortions (which is what we were discussing).”

    Why would you hide your feelings on this? The purpose of my “hyperblolic” sentence was to prompt you to discussing this very thing (which is why it was not given in the spirit of hyperbole), but rather a prompt.

    Speak your mind James. I’ve spoken mine. I have absolutely no problem stating that abortion is not warranted neither medically, nor in my view morally for the purposes of birth control. Is that what you are afraid to say?

  26. James McPherson said

    “Why would you hide your feelings on this?”

    That certainly wasn’t my intent. I agreed with Harrop that “Abortions should be easy to obtain early in a pregnancy and progressively harder to get as time goes on,” and with Bill Clinton, who said abortion should be “safe, legal and rare.” I’d make it legal for any reason during at least the first couple of months, and then have the decision resolved by a woman and her doctor after that. I think doctors are more qualified to make health decisions than legislators are.

    That doesn’t mean I’m condoning abortion as birth control (I don’t) any more than I condone the use of alcohol, drugs or prostitution (all of which I think should be legal, none of which I participate in).

  27. augger said

    Thanks for clearing that up. One problem with Clinton’s logic … abortions are not safe. No invasive procedure is really safe, abortions are no different. Even worse is to stack them up. A big history of abortions is a big problem for the patient.

  28. James McPherson said

    You’d know far more about the safety issue than I, but it makes perfect sense. My dad had a friend recently die from complications of a knee replacement.

    You raised an interesting question that never occurred to me before (and it’s not a trick question, because I really don’t know): What’s more dangerous–an early-term abortion or carrying a child to term and giving birth? Thanks.

  29. augger said

    Gosh James, I am not certain. I think we’d have to nail down closer the quotients to get an accurate answer. So many variables such as location of abortion relative to the hospital (given that the birth occurred in a hospital setting), type of delivery, co-morbidity factors for both, etc, etc. etc. I’d have to defer that one to an OB/GYN or ask someone from that discipline before I could weigh in with an intelligent answer.

    But my instinct tells me abortions are likely more dangerous given that in most cases I am aware of, the performing physician is typically not from around the area that the abortions are happening. Helluva thing to have a post surgical complication such as hemorrhage or pulmonary embolism … and have your surgeon hundreds of miles away.

  30. James McPherson said

    Thanks, anyway. I think it would be interesting to see a comparison of the percentage of abortions resulting in serious injury or death vs. the percentage of births that do. Seems like someone should have done that, so I’ll look around a bit sometime.

  31. James McPherson said

    OK, I find contradictory and complicated info, some with obvious political overtones. But it seems to me that generally speaking, legal abortion is safer than childbirth. But you’re the doc, so maybe you read these better than I do:

  32. augger said

    Yes sir, that is one of the problems clouding the medical assessments of abortions. There are just so many ways to view and interpret data. One of these articles simply does not give enough data, another relies on someone else’s work, and the third just looks at the mental health considerations.

    Trust me, if medicine could settle the issue for everyone, it would have done so long ago.

  33. Reuel said

    I learned more in the last 5 minutes reading the back a forth banter,(links) you two should take this on the road. 🙂

  34. James McPherson said

    Thanks. Speaking of back-and-forth banter, yesterday my Southern Baptist buddy (whom I’ve mentioned previously) and I were invited to bring our radio program of a couple of years ago (titled “Civil Disagreement”) back to the campus radio station here, if we can make it work with our schedules. If that happens, I’ll do a post letting folks know when they can hear it on the web. 🙂

  35. augger said

    Reuel – banter is welcomed from time to time. But oh boy … James and I can toss the gloves off and throw some uppercuts though. 🙂

    I’ll admit, we are not as diametrically opposed as my initial assessment. I still do not agree with much of his positions (and sometimes his strategies), but I will freely admit, when the discourse is sincere, James as worthy insight to offer.

  36. Reuel said

    No matter who you support in November October 11th is going to be a long day for Joe Biden. Joe is another reason I do not support President Obama, I know Obama is young, but if anything happens to him I could not imagine Joe as President. Back to the subject of Abortion, I know that many couples can’t have children and that even some responsible like gender couples would love to raise a child, it just seems to me that there is alternatives to this. Thing is how many would see how special it is to have a child of there own after they went threw it all. My guess is very few would be given to others to raise. There has to been a answer that does not include talking points or calling it “reproductive right to protect a woman’s right to chose and medical procedure to end a life of something inside them that will be a human being. James as you say about war, there is no justification for the 100,000 that died. I say there is no justification for the millions killed without a chance for life.

  37. James McPherson said

    “October 11th is going to be a long day for Joe Biden.”

    Wishful thinking, I think, Reuel. 🙂 That might be true if these were real debates, rather than mostly canned repetitions of talking points. Besides, Joe has been doing this, and being underestimated, for a long time. And because Romey has to make up ground and because more people know Biden than Ryan there will be more pressure on Ryan to do well. For the record, I think he (Ryan) probably will do well, but that it won’t matter much–not many folks, other than Saturday Night Live, really care about VP debates.

  38. augger said

    SNL + Smokin Joe Biden = good comedy (only if SNL wasn’t so lefty slanted)

  39. James McPherson said

    With rare exceptions I find it mostly unwatchable. Frequently the opening sequence is good, and there might be one good sketch (two on a really good night) after that. Then you can ignore it until sometime between 12:10 and 12:20–immediately after the musical guest performs for the first time–and come back for “Weekend Update.” 🙂 The two episodes in recent years that I’ve found most entertaining may have been the ones hosted by Brian Williams (though as a news person I didn’t think he should have done it) and Payton Manning.

  40. Reuel said

    I was living in New York in the late 1970’s and went to one of the first shows of SNL. It was a completely different show and Gilda was my favorite, she was a very talented member and even got a autograph from her. Don’t know what ever happen to that piece of paper. It is defiantly a whole different show now.
    Paul Ryan is not a talking points person and may lose the reality show fans when discussing issues in detail. I hope the elder statesmen Joe, (I use that term loosely) does talk down to him as Quail was in 1988, or maybe that might be interesting. I don’t think Paul will get a red face and lose his concentration as Dan did and it may be just what the Romney team will prepare for.
    How come I don’t read or hear any of the good things I heard about Mitt Romney last night that I did not know? Well Fox is covering it, but it is pretty much nonexistent and the usual left steam media are spending a boat load of time on fact check dot org dot annenburg dot soros site finding the reporting they want to cover. I did watch on split screen both CNN and Fox. Was not surprised by the selective preexisting plans by both on what to focus on the whole night. Two completely different interests in play for both. So next week, I unlike most of the country will watch that convention too. The funnest segment I saw over the week and it humors me to no end, is when they get a bunch of “Undecided voters” together and talk to them before a speech and after. How did they find all of them in this very large country and put them in one room? Anyone not decided by this point is either lying to get attention or knows more about Jersey shore reality show than politics.

    Enjoy the long weekend, staying off the roads is the best way I have found to enjoy them.

  41. jm said

    >Professor McPherson

    Your comment: “Republicans either cluelessly think that they will win easily–perhaps by voter suppression in key states–or have simply decided that they can’t win and so might as well be entertaining as they go down in flames,” rings my bell.

    The idealogical factions of the GOP are too splintered. As hard as he tried, Mitt Romney could not bring them together. Without more unity and platform cohesiveness, it’s hard to imagine that Romney Ryan can initiate the momentum they need to cross over and win the support of Reagan Democrats, Independents and so-called disaffected voters. Without the cross over support, Romney Ryan cannot win.

    I also get the sense that the GOP has prepared itself for defeat.

    That’s why, in my view, Paul Ryan, Chris Christie, Condoleezza Rice and Mark Rubio were given latitude to go somewhat off script in their comments, and to showcase themselves in preparation for Campaign 2016.

    You may find interesting my commetary on the Clint Eastwood skit. LINK: http://janeymccullough.wordpress.com/2012/09/02/election-2012-gop-convention-clint-eastwoods-skit-juicy-for-online-and-social-media-a-public/

  42. James McPherson said

    You could be right about the acceptance of defeat, Janey–I even read one piece that suggested Romney had been encouraged to Ryan so that Tea Party types could be blamed for the loss. I enjoyed your post, and especially agreed with the lines:
    “A campaign, especially a Presidential campaign, must stay on message at all times and at all costs.
    “The candidate, and no one else, is always the star.
    “The candidate, and no one else, is always the brand.
    “The candidate’s message, and no other message, is always the message.”

    Sarah Palin should have taught folks that four years ago.

    I also found it interesting that Fox News cut away from Clint making the throat-slashing motion when talking about getting rid of Obama (watched it first on Fox video, since I got home too late that night to see it on TV)–maybe it looked too terroristic for them. 🙂 http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/video/clint-eastwoods-throat-slicing-rnc-moment-17121771

  43. I must agree with augger’s comment on the father’s right to plea for the life of a fetus he helped create. As it stands now, this is not even considered. Instead of a woman aborting a fetus she simply doesn’t want, it would give the child born a life by a family that wanted it. Is that forcing a woman to birth a child she doesn’t want thereby violating her personal rights to do with her body as she sees fit? Pehaps, but is that worse than aborting a viable fetus?

  44. Reuel said

    Talk about a platform of suicide, What was that I watched last night? They better end the DNC convention, or should I say they should of ended it right after Bill did his I saved the country in the late 1990’s all by myself speech. Oh that right the Republican House of Rep. changed for the first time in 40 years and he had to make a deal with them to balance the budget on paper only. Well at least he was a better actor then Clint Eastwood. Does anyone really believe he has kissed and made up with President Obama? I don’t and Bill is always in it for himself on all he does. I have to keep reminding myself that he had to compromise unlike another person who took a “Shellacking in 2010 decided to double down instead. I think that in no way is this thing over unless Accorn starts registering voters again, Oh they are and are just under a new name. But don’t check any ID’s at the door to the polling place. So God and the Jews are all lining up to vote Democrat this year. Right? Funny didn’t see any of this on the Left Steam Media. Not surprising.

  45. […] Convention platforms. Yes, I previously suggested that these might matter, and both the GOP platform and its Democratic counterpart drew attention during the conventions. […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: