http://www.wikio.co.uk/blog/search/Jonah Goldberg Wikio Blogs - search: Jonah Goldberg wikio wikio http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=69409290 The worst economy since... 2005? Jonah Goldberg wonders why the Democrats think we're headed for the next Great Depression. The US economy — yes, that economy — grew at a 3.3 percent annual rate last quarter. This no doubt caused consternation at the highest levels of the Democratic Party, perhaps forcing some to consider a new convention film at the last minute: “Dude, Where's My Recession'” Fri, 29 Aug 2008 12:14:00 GMT http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=69409290 Greg 2008-08-29T12:14:00Z http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=69281632 Jonah Goldberg comments on the Biden speech: Biden's doing a great job, just as I expected. But come on: To listen to the Democrats you'd think the Great Depression was a day at the beach. There are economic challenges out there, hardships etc, sure. But you'd think we're all living off of puddle water and grub larvae from the way they talk about life in America today. I think at some point the disconnect between the country these people are describing and the country we actually live in is going to undermine the Democrats' credibility. Gee – I listened to Biden’s speech and he did not say things are worse today than they were in 1932. But then how would Momma’s Boy Goldberg know what transpired way back then – since he loves to argue when someone else is recounting a historical period, Momma’s Boy wasn’t even out of diapers – he had not been born yet. If the folks at the National Review want this campaign to turn on whether folks are really suffering versus whether we are all a bunch of whiners – be my guest. If this is the GOP tone, Barack Obama will win in a landslide. Thu, 28 Aug 2008 13:54:00 GMT http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=69281632 PGL 2008-08-28T13:54:00Z http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=69430344 Jonah Goldberg: THE US economy - yes, that economy - grew at a 3.3 percent annual rate last quarter. This no doubt caused consternation at the highest levels of the Democratic Party, perhaps forcing some to consider a new convention film at the last minute: "Dude, Where's My Recession?" To hear the Democrats at their convention this week, you'd get the sense that a recession is merely a technical term for the worst human misery ever visited upon a once-great people. You'd think Americans were listening to the Democratic speeches as they huddled around their kitchen tables (if they hadn't already been used for firewood), deciding which of their children to pack off to the orphanage and how much tree bark they can afford to eat next week. Last night, Baracl Obama proclaimed: "Our economy is in turmoil, and the American promise has been threatened once more." He went on to describe an America reminiscent of the Grapes of Wrath (if not Mad Max). But this was a weeklong theme. Over and over again, Democrats insisted that the "American dream" is being snuffed out, crushed, beaten, stabbed and quite possibly dismembered in President Bush's West Wing bathtub, where Bush and Dick "The Cleaner" Cheney can dissolve the remains in sulfuric acid. On Wednesday, Joe Biden reminded the world that he rides Amtrak home to Delaware from Washington. (Apparently not since Gunga Din has there been a more heroic commute.) He told us that when he gazes out the window of his barreling locomotive, he can "almost hear" the conversations in the houses he sees whizzing by. He "almost hears" things with an awful lot of specificity: "Should Mom move in with us now that Dad's gone? Fifty, 60, 70 dollars just to fill up the gas tank? How in God's name, with winter coming, how are we gonna heat the home? Another year, no raise? Did you hear - did you hear they may be cutting our health care at the company?" Super Joe even hears people asking him, "How are we gonna retire, Joe?" ... But while Americans don't like the direction in which the country is heading, and hate high gas prices, they're pretty satisfied with their lives. Some 94 percent of Americans polled by Harris Interactive this month said they were satisfied with the lives they lead. Gallup reports that only 9 percent of Americans are dissatisfied with their jobs and only 13 percent are dissatisfied with their job security. The unemployment rate is at a five-year high of 5.7 percent, but it wasn't long ago when that was considered close to full employment. "Ladies and gentlemen," mourned Sen. Biden, the "American dream feels like it's slowly slipping away . . . I've never seen a time when Washington has watched so many people get knocked down without doing anything to help them get back up." Quick question: Was this the same Washington that oversaw the largest expansion of entitlements (a k a the prescription-drug benefit) since the Great Society? Was this the Washington that recently started doling out $168 billion in stimulus checks? ... Only when Democrats are handing out the goodies are people not miserable I guess. That wrong track index has always bothered me. When 80 percent of the country says we are on the wrong track the media and especially the Democrats all assume that 80 percent of the country think the Democrats have the answer to get us on the right track. That just is not only not true it is impossible. The same polls show the election in a virtual dead heat, which suggest to me that at least half of the people who think we are on the wrong track think so because of what the Democrats are trying to do. Certainly on energy 75 percent of the country think the Democrats are wrong in not drilling and using other resources to provide energy. Over 60 percent of voters think the Democrats are wrong on taxes and national security issues. The only way the Democrats can survive such sentiment is to foll voters into thinking they are on their side. Fri, 29 Aug 2008 14:08:00 GMT http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=69430344 Merv 2008-08-29T14:08:00Z http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=69317882 Jonah Goldberg at National Review Online:I was in the car listening on XM when Obama was officially nominated. But I didn’t want to let it pass without saying that it is a wonderful thing that a black man can gain the nomination of a major American political party. The Democratic Party, which didn’t admit black delegates to one of its conventions until 1936 (the GOP did nearly a half-century earlier) has done a great and historic thing. It's another example of America's greatness many fail to appreciate: We are better at racial and ethnic reconciliation and assimilation than pretty much all of these countries that are supposed to be more enlightened than we are. I sincerely doubt the French, British, Germans et al. will be considering a candidate of African descent like this for quite a while. Well, first off, it's interesting that a conservative such as Goldberg can't even dwell on a splendid example of American success without feeling the need to sneer at other countries. Then again, proclamations of virtue, especially unique virtue ain't much more than a pissing contest. Secondly, I'm not sure, given the party's recent history, it's altogether wise for a Republican to include a... Thu, 28 Aug 2008 18:28:11 GMT http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=69317882 alex massie 2008-08-28T18:28:11Z http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=68916955 He hasn't always despised "bon mots from Balzac." From a 2002 Jonah Goldberg article titled "In Defense Of Elitism: We Need It": In America, "elitist," "snobbish," and "aristocratic" have become largely synonymous. That's a shame. "Elite" derives from the Latin... Mon, 25 Aug 2008 16:59:00 GMT http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=68916955 Andrew Sullivan 2008-08-25T16:59:00Z http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=68757197 This is kind of awesome. Jonah Goldberg, 12:15 PM: All I have to say is that if it was deliberate — and I really, really doubt it was — then that is the most substantive proof so far that Obama’s youthful arrogance is getting the better of him. The text message ploy on its own [...] Sat, 23 Aug 2008 23:36:33 GMT http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=68757197 John Cole 2008-08-23T23:36:33Z http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=68741716 Jonah Goldberg wrote at the Corner : I think it is an outright terrible decision on Obama's part to pick Biden. Yes, he helps balance Obama's inexperience on foreign policy, but he also reminds people of it. Yes, Biden could conceivably be effective as an attack dog. But Biden is such a gasbag he makes the Hindenburg look like a sack of rocks. Well said Jonah. Sat, 23 Aug 2008 18:29:00 GMT http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=68741716 Stogie 2008-08-23T18:29:00Z http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=68739218 GOLDBERG YESTERDAY : Psephologist and columnist Michael Barone noticed during the primaries that, with the exception of the black vote, Obama’s support within the Democratic party is comprised almost entirely of cultural liberals. He dubbed this intra-Democratic split a divide between “academics and Jacksonians.” The Jacksonians are working-class, culturally conservative whites. The academics are the same people who formed the base for Howard Dean, Bill Bradley, Michael Dukakis, Gary Hart, George McGovern, and other successful presidents in the anti-matter universe where Spock has a goatee. In this universe, however, you need Jacksonians more than you need academics to win a general election, which is one reason why no non-southern Democrat has won the presidency in nearly a half-century. It’s not that voters love southerners, either. Rather, southern Democrats simply seem more Jacksonian (even so, only Jimmy Carter won with a majority of the popular vote). TAB ON 11/28/07: We American's want tour president to be an American hero, of sorts. Someone who embodies what makes this nation great. Given the choice between an intellectual egghead and a man with common sense, we always choose the man with common sense. We choose them man who we think is tougher in fight - and will probably win one, rather than someone who might talk his way out of one. We prefer Andrew Jackson's stature to John Quincy Adams' weightiness. [NOTE: EVEN IN 1824, JACKSON WON A PLURALITY IN BOTH THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE AND THE POPULAR VOTE.] We prefer Ike's leadership to Adlai's erudition - his wonkiness. Truman's plain talking to Dewey's East Coast Republican urbanity. JFK's vim and vigor and bellicosity was preferred over Nixon's seeming weakness & sickliness - (because of their appearance on the first Presidential TV debate). Dubya was more likable, authentic, raw and rumpled than either Gore or Kerry. LBJ - a deal-making cowboy - was liked more than Goldwater, an ideologue. FDR was a cripple whose ability to surmount his handicap with a smile inspired a crippled America. Clinton felt our pain and knew the price of a gallon of milk. GHW Bush was a blue-blood at sea. Lincoln was born in a log cabin and chopped wood. And so on. Nearly every single race has been one by the more natural man. The man of the people. The more common man. So what does this tell us about 2008? Well, obviously McCain, Fred and Huckabee are the most Jacksonian on the GOP side. Rudy's okay, too. Mitt's big problem is that he seems too slick, too smooth, too smart. He can win the nomination, but - unless he can loosen up - he could lose the general election. AND ON THE DEMOCRAT SIDE? I don't see one single solitary Jacksonian. Maybe Biden or Richardson - only it's difficult to seem Jacksonian when you've calling for retreat from Iraq for the past couple of years... I guess I'm saying that right now - based on who is in the race right now - I'd bet that the race is in the bag for the GOP. If they frame the race as Jackson versus Adams, and can cast their candidate as Jackson. MORE FROM TAB ON THIS HERE (FEBRUARY '08) AND HERE (8/13/08). ANY WAY YOU SLICE WE KICKED JONAH'S BUT ON THIS. REGULAR READERS KNOW THAT THIS HAPPENS A LOT AT TAB - BECAUSE WE DON;T JUST FOLLOW THE PACK; WE LEAD. SPREAD THE WORD. BLOGROLL US. Sat, 23 Aug 2008 18:06:00 GMT http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=68739218 noreply@blogger.com (Reliapundit) 2008-08-23T18:06:00Z http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=68658654 Stating the obvious, cultural Liberals don't win American Presidential elections. And dogs generally don't like grapes. Fri, 22 Aug 2008 17:41:00 GMT http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=68658654 Kent 2008-08-22T17:41:00Z http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=68652986 From Jonah Goldberg on Barack Obama, noting that the Democrat should be way ahead of John McCain -- but isn't: Ask the typical Obama supporter why this should be so and you’ll get a range of answers. Some just stare at the poll numbers the way my late basset hound would look at me when I tried to feed him a grape: with pure unblinking incomprehension. Others act like the guy who sits alone with his shopping bags at the public library, muttering about Fox News conspiracies and how Karl Rove-like aliens are doing terrible things with probes of proctological exactitude. Still others just shake their heads at the racism of anyone who could possibly have a problem with a very left-wing politician with almost no experience, who often sounds like his campaign slogan is: “People of Earth! Stop Your Bickering. I Am From Harvard, And I’m Here To Help.” I especially liked Goldberg's observation -- via Michael Barone -- that "with the exception of the black vote, Obama’s support within the Democratic party is comprised almost entirely of cultural liberals. [Barone] dubbed this intra-Democratic split a divide between “academics and Jacksonians.” The Jacksonians are working-class, culturally conservative whites. The academics are the same people who formed the base for Howard Dean, Bill Bradley, Michael Dukakis, Gary Hart, George McGovern, and other successful presidents in the anti-matter universe where Spock has a goatee ." Fri, 22 Aug 2008 17:15:00 GMT http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=68652986 noreply@blogger.com (Ken) 2008-08-22T17:15:00Z http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=69427409 If true, this would be fantastic. This is true Change — and a great choice. Others: Larry Kudlow. Mark Levin (keep in mind that few have been more critical of John McCain). Jonah Goldberg. And this: She is everything Obama is not. A real reformer who took on her own party’s corrupt establishment and won, defeating an incumbent governor, 80-20. Don’t forget [...] Fri, 29 Aug 2008 15:10:40 GMT http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=69427409 Sierra 2008-08-29T15:10:40Z http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=69437993 The husband logged in to chat to talk about Palin! So exciting to get to share that with him. He kept inserting Jonah Goldberg quotes into the chat. It was fun. And here's how we ended: Sarah says: I love... Fri, 29 Aug 2008 16:40:10 GMT http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=69437993 Sarah 2008-08-29T16:40:10Z http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=69469512 McCain vp pick Sarah Palin "was not, as Jonah Goldberg recently wrote, Miss Alaska, but she was Miss Wasilla."* Looking at the old photo I am reminded of a recent comment by a Jotman reader: VEEP Debates Q&A QUESTION: How will Sarah Palin do in a debate with Joe Biden? ANSWER: How many men watching will be aware that Biden is in the room? The commenter's joke rests purely on political-strategy assumptions: that her cuteness makes her more electable. But the commenter's cute joke came in response to a serious question. I asked whether Palin had the foreign policy knowledge required of someone who would lead the most powerful country in the world. She does not. John McCain is not only the oldest presidential candidate in US history, he is quite possibly the most irresponsible. * Beldar Photo: Miss Wasilla Fri, 29 Aug 2008 17:42:00 GMT http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=69469512 Jotman 2008-08-29T17:42:00Z http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=69468112 Even the far right GOP propagandists are having a hard time swallowing this one. Jonah Goldberg (might as well start at the bottom of the barrel): "She may not be ready for primetime. The heartbeat-from-the-presidency issue is a real one." Yeah, might be . Sharing the bottom of that barrel with Jonah is Ramesh Ponnuru , also writing for National Review . He's trying to play down what a terrible choice she is but he's clearly very worried: Inexperience . Palin has been governor for about two minutes. Thanks to McCain’s decision, Palin could be commander-in-chief next year. That may strike people as a reckless choice; it strikes me that way. And McCain's age raised the stakes on this issue. As a political matter, it undercuts the case against Obama. Conservatives are pointing out that it is tricky for the Obama campaign to raise the issue of her inexperience given his own, and note that the presidency matters more than the vice-presidency. But that gets things backward. To the extent the experience, qualifications, and national-security arguments are taken off the table, Obama wins. And it’s not just foreign policy. Palin has no experience dealing with national domestic issues, either. (On the other hand, as Kate O’Beirne just told me, we know that Palin will be ready for that 3 a.m. phone call: She’ll already be up with her baby.) Tokenism . Can anyone say with a straight face that Palin would have gotten picked if she were a man? Compatibility . It doesn’t seem as though McCain knows Palin well. Do we have much reason to think they would work well together? Debates . Maybe, as Jonah said the other day, Biden will look like a bully going up against her-- and maybe she’ll shine. But I can think of a lot of other picks who would have been lower-risk. I am not even sure that the pick will have quite the galvanizing effect on conservatives that it seems to be having now as it sinks in. The concerns I’ve mentioned here-- about her readiness and her credentials-- are the kind of thing that many conservative voters take seriously. Also over at National Review Katherine Jean Lopez was harsh : As much as I loathe Obama-Biden, I can't in good conscience vote for a McCain-Palin ticket. Palin has absolutely no experience in foreign affairs. Considering both McCain's advanced age and the state of the world today, it is essential that the veep be exceedingly qualified to assume the office of president. I simply don't have any confidence in Palin's ability to deal effectively with Iran, Russia, China, etc. I certainly will not cast a vote for Obama-Biden, but nor will I vote for McCain-Palin. Looks like I'll either sit this one out or vote for Bob Barr. Why, o, why, didn't McCain listen to Rove and just pick Romney? The worst of the McCain shills-- well not counting staffer David Broder-- in the legitimate media, A.P.'s resident rightist loon Ron Fournier, tries minimizing Palin's lack of credentials by comparing her to Obama. He writes what many Americans are saying, that "it's a recognition of how vulnerable McCain is despite polls showing it's close." People recognize that this important decision-- especially important-- was frivolous and made not with the good of America in mind but strictly in terms of superficial political considerations. McCain really comes across as a crass, grasping hack... which makes sense, since that's exactly what he is. He just doesn't always come across that way, thanks to his media pals like Fournier and Broder. The only people who seem overjoyed by this awful choice are the religious extremists, who seem especially excited that Palin is a notorious homophobe . ...[W]hen conservative leaders heard the news this morning at a meeting at the Council for National Policy, one attendee told me that there is "nothing but elation. People are giddy. They are energized and they now believe that in fact this campaign has the ability to win this election." My comments are below but first some more reaction. This from Tony Perkins, President of the Family Research Council: Senator McCain made an outstanding pick from the choices that were on the table. Sarah Palin clearly addresses the issues so many conservatives are concerned about. It balances out the ticket. She's also really a checkmate for the Democratic Party because folks who were looking to make history for Barack Obama can make history by voting for John McCain in seeing the first woman elected to the vice-presidency. It was a very strategic move by John McCain. This from one of the key Evangelical leaders out there, Mat Staver, Founder of Liberty Counsel: "Absolutely brilliant choice. John McCain could not have chosen a better vice-presidential nominee that Gov. Palin. She is attractive, articulate, conservative, pro-family, pro-life, and pro-marriage. John McCain hit this one out of the ballpark." Many observers feel that Palin's selection will strengthen Obama's bounce from the convention. The new Gallup poll numbers show a steady climb from a 45-45% tie before the Convention to a 49-41% Obama v McCain split... before Obama made his incredible acceptance speech last night at the highest rated ( TV viewer-wise ) convention in history. Over at Time Mark Halperin wonders aloud if McCain's pick was bold or disastrous . And desperate. Since she's already being referred to as "Dan Quayle with a pony tail," Halperin remarks that "those who point out that George H.W. Bush was able to win despite Dan Quayle's presence on the ticket forget that the country was much more solidly Republican at the presidential level back then than in today's 50-50 America." And last but not least, is the fractured GOP hierarchy. It will take a few days-- or at least hours-- before we find out how angry Rove is about this choice and how vulnerable GOP members of Congress think it could impact their own races. But already, the Washington Post claims that the Pawlenty and Romney camps are fuming , feeling like they were made to look foolish and then humiliated as props in McCain's self-centered and irresponsible media hype. "Two senior Republican officials close to Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty said they had both been rudely strung along and now 'feel manipulated.'" "They now know that they were used as decoys, well after McCain had decided not to pick them," one Republican involved in the process said. Fri, 29 Aug 2008 21:00:00 GMT http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=69468112 DownWithTyranny 2008-08-29T21:00:00Z http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=69446476 McCain’s done a good job of deflecting attention from Obama’s speech by his VP pick . It’s hard to focus on Obama while giggling incredulously. And—though many are puzzled, a few are happy. Indeed, Jonah Goldberg over at The Corne r is so excited he is ” having some flop sweats at the idea it’s actually happening.” But though I must pause again to scrub out my brain, I refuse to be deflected. I was a Hillary supporter and very resistant all along to Obama’s rhetoric. But this speech seemed nearly pitch-perfect to me: a mixture of gravitas, eloquence, wit, and well-tempered righteous indignation at the thought of rewarding the GOP with another four years. I think of Winston Churchill whose speeches had such an impact on his people at such a crucial time. And then I think of W. “We’re gonna get those folks.” Not to mention all this . I think all of us to whom the speech was directed—the true constituents of the Democratic party and all those who see McCain for what he is, the successor to the policies that have put us where we are—must have reacted the same way. But as Andy Barr reports at The Hill , members of the media who were present loved it as well. Even Pat Buchanan loved it. Here are some responses. Via Taylor Marsh : “It was a genuinely outstanding speech. It was magnificent. It is the finest – and I saw Cuomo’s speech, I saw Kennedy in ‘80, I even saw Douglas MacArthur, I saw Martin Luther King – this is the greatest convention speech, and probably the most important because unlike Cuomo and the others this is an acceptance speech. This came out of the heart of America and he went right at the heart of America…” - Patrick J. Buchanan And my fellow former Hillary supporter Taylor Marsh perfectly expressed my own response to this speech: Soaring rhetoric met specific ideas and goals, coupled with a slashing critique of his opponent that we have not heard to date. Barack Obama transformed his famous rhetoric into a lethal blade that not only eviscerated the Republican policies that have brought this country to the edge of financial ruin, but also has made the U.S. less safe in a world made more dangerous by diplomatic neglect, ruinous hubris, and misguided arrogance. He elevated his candidacy above where it’s been before. There has been no other political event in U.S. history to match what Barack Obama achieved tonight. Never before has a political candidate reached so high and achieved such fireworks in front of tens of thousands. An African American man next to me just shook his head, saying “Lord have mercy. After all these years…” Then his voice trailed off. Political centrist Joe Gandelman commented: [The speech] had witty or blunt replies to key anti-Obama themes used in the campaign of GOP certain nominee Senator John McCain in political ju-jitsu form with quotable one-liners that were memorable. It was rich in contrast as he compared Americans lives under Clinton and under 8 years of George Bush. It was packed with a virtual dare for McCain to make national security an issue and offered promises for specific reforms to counter McCain and argue that McCain’s record is at worst weak, and at best ineffectual. It defended the Democrats as having been proven capable of defending America — reminding voters of FDR and JFK. And it had that one word that he can turn into a campaign slogan since it has indeed been uttered by many Americans who are unhappy and alarmed over the direction of the country: “”…Enough!” Conservative Obama supporter Andrew Sullivan called it “deeply substantive.” As he says, its very substantiveness rebutted the whole “glitzy celebrity” image the Republicans have been attempting to impose on Obama. It was a liberal speech, more unabashedly, unashamedly liberal than any Democratic acceptance speech since the great era of American liberalism. But it made the case for that liberalism - in the context of the decline of the American dream, and the rise of cynicism and the collapse of cultural unity. His ability to portray that liberalism as a patriotic, unifying, ennobling tradition makes him the most lethal and remarkable Democratic figure since John F Kennedy…. He took every assault on him and turned them around. He showed not just that he understood the experience of many middle class Americans, but that he understood how the Republicans have succeeded in smearing him. And he didn’t shrink from the personal charges; he rebutted them. Whoever else this was, it was not Adlai Stevenson. It was not Jimmy Carter. And it was less afraid and less calculating than Bill Clinton. Above all, he took on national security - face on, full-throttle, enraged, as we should all be, at how disastrously American power has been handled these past eight years. He owned this issue in a way that no Democrat has owned it since Kennedy. That’s a transformative event. ( The Daily Dish ) One of the things I’ve always liked Sullivan for, despite ideological differences, is his humility. Would that more pundits shared this valuable trait. He acknowledges his own bias here. I’m one of those people, deeply distressed at what has happened to America, deeply ashamed of my own misjudgments, who has shifted out of my ideological comfort zone because this man seems different to me, and this moment in history seems different to me. I’m not sure we have many more chances to get off the addiction to foreign oil, to prevent a calamitous terrorist attack, to restore constitutional balance in the hurricane of a terror war.( The Daily Dish ) And he calls Obama “a remarkable man at a vital moment.” I want to believe this to be true. Last night went a long way towards persuading me. On this point, Cernig writes, and also speaks for me: This was a “fanfare for the common man”. I’ve been more than a liitle sceptical of his rhetoric turning into reality when the rubber meets the road until now, but tonight I’m more inclined to believe Obama means what he says than I’ve ever been. ( Newshoggers ) As does DWT : I want so much for him to rise to the challenge of the catastrophic mess we’re being left. I want him so much to be Franklin Roosevelt. And what I heard tonight allows me to believe that that’s more than just a hopeless dream. Chris Cillizza wrote at The Washington Post : Obama’s speech was more substance than style; more specifics than rhetorical flourish. The Illinois senator even directly rebutted the idea — advanced by John McCain ’s campaign — that he is more celebrity than politician…. And when Obama went on to dress down McCain and the Republican party over their stances on taxes and healthcare, he roared: “That is not the judgment we need. That won’t keep America safe. We need a president who can face the threats of the future, not keep grasping at the ideas of the past.” Josh Marshall at TPM made an excellent and crucial point about his method of attack: He made the case for himself; he laid out clear policy goals; and he aggressively set forth the stakes of the campaign. He made the case against John McCain while not attacking his character – which makes a clear contrast with McCain’s aggressively personal, denigrating campaign strategy… ‘ve said myself that Obama’s campaign needs to be more aggressive. They need to hold the initiative, and attack, attack, attack . But attacking doesn’t mean bludgeoning — at least not necessarily. It means making the case and defining the argument. Not running a campaign by reacting — well or not — to your opponent’s attacks….[I]t’s not about rapid response but rapid attack. Personally I might prefer an even more aggressive tack from Obama’s surrogates. But I think here Obama himself had the balance just right. ( TPM ; emphasis added) I personally would like to see Obama continue with the completely above-the-belt attacks. Forget the knee to the gonads; go for the heart, go for the gut. Like this: Now let there be no doubt. The Republican nominee, John McCain, has worn the uniform of our country with bravery and distinction, and for that we owe him our gratitude and respect. And next week, we’ll also hear about those occasions when he’s broken with his party as evidence that he can deliver the change that we need. But the record’s clear: John McCain has voted with George Bush ninety percent of the time. Senator McCain likes to talk about judgment, but really, what does it say about your judgment when you think George Bush has been right more than ninety percent of the time? I don’t know about you, but I’m not ready to take a ten percent chance on change. It’s McCain’s policies that matter, not McCain himself. He’s just a vessel for Bush’s legacy at this point. ( NYT ) There were so many parts that resonated with me, but here is one that really stood out: For over two decades, he’s subscribed to that old, discredited Republican philosophy – give more and more to those with the most and hope that prosperity trickles down to everyone else. In Washington, they call this the Ownership Society, but what it really means is – you’re on your own. Out of work? Tough luck. No health care? The market will fix it. Born into poverty? Pull yourself up by your own bootstraps – even if you don’t have boots. You’re on your own. You see, we Democrats have a very different measure of what constitutes progress in this country. We measure progress by how many people can find a job that pays the mortgage; whether you can put a little extra money away at the end of each month so you can someday watch your child receive her college diploma. We measure progress in the 23 million new jobs that were created when Bill Clinton was President – when the average American family saw its income go up $7,500 instead of down $2,000 like it has under George Bush. We measure the strength of our economy not by the number of billionaires we have or the profits of the Fortune 500, but by whether someone with a good idea can take a risk and start a new business, or whether the waitress who lives on tips can take a day off to look after a sick kid without losing her job – an economy that honors the dignity of work. The fundamentals we use to measure economic strength are whether we are living up to that fundamental promise that has made this country great – a promise that is the only reason I am standing here tonight. ( NYT ) skippy identifies Obama’s best one-liners: great line: “america, we are better than these last 8 years.” wow, out of the park w/that one! also nice: next week in minnesota, the party that brought you the last two terms will ask you for a third. tag of the night: 8 is enough! Canadian political blogger Michael Stickings wrote: David Gergen just called it a “symphony,” a “masterpiece,” and I agree completely. Obama told his story, and talked about change, but he also took the fight to McCain….And the ending, which drew on Martin Luther King’s “I have a dream” speech from 45 years ago today, was deeply moving and profoundly inspiring…. Indeed, it is because I love America so much, because of my American ancestry (I am one-quarter American, to be precise), because of my deep and profound connections to the country, that I call myself a Democrat and pay such close attention to American politics…. And tonight… tonight is about America, about a new America. We are indeed witnessing history . And what a privilege it is. Let us savour it, and let us move forward with confidence and determination, with a sense of purpose but also with humility.There is much to be done. At MoJo, Kevin Drum writes: That was a helluva speech, wasn’t it? Damn….. This is an iron fist in a velvet glove. Or is it a velvet fist in an iron glove? Whichever it is, he’s calling out McCain in plain language not just for running a nasty, Rovian campaign, but for running a fundamentally unserious campaign. By tackling this head on, Obama has put a serious dent in McCain’s ability to continue campaigning with dumb soundbites and too-cute-by-half innuendo. This isn’t a teenager’s campaign for junior high school student council, he was saying, it’s a campaign for president of the United States and you’re old enough to know that you should damn well treat it that way. And then, there was the conclusion. I’ve always been pretty immune to that kind of soaring, but relatively content-free, oratory, but I was just spellbound. I honestly can’t remember the last time that’s happened. And I don’t care what the talking heads insisted on jabbering about all day, the setting was perfect, the stage was perfect, Obama’s cadences were perfect, and it was just about as good a political rallying cry as I’ve ever heard. John McCain looks very, very small right about now. John Cole said the same thing, only even more bluntly: The McCain campaign has no idea what hit them. Here is their response: “Tonight, Americans witnessed a misleading speech that was so fundamentally at odds with the meager record of Barack Obama,” spokesman Tucker Bounds said. “When the temple comes down, the fireworks end, and the words are over, the facts remain: Senator Obama still has no record of bipartisanship, still opposes offshore drilling, still voted to raise taxes on those making just $42,000 per year, and still voted against funds for American troops in harm’s way. The fact remains: Barack Obama is still not ready to be President.” Brokaw openly mocked them. The best thing about the night- as the press is dissecting Obama’s masterful performance, I flipped to a panel on PBS about the speech. Dolores Kearns Goodwin was talking at length, in the shadow of the Obama speech, that McCain needs to show he can use a teleprompter. They are so well and truly f******, and they deserve it. Jed Lewison said, “ I’m still awestruck .” Me too. Fri, 29 Aug 2008 17:56:32 GMT http://www.wikio.co.uk/info?id=69446476 DAMOZEL 2008-08-29T17:56:32Z