Up late night/early morning, and reviewing McAint's speech here again, listening more carefully, studying the looks on the faces of the crowd. This speech is the grand finale. The send off and last great opportunity to tie together themes introduced throughout the convention. What I see in the crowd and what I felt watching the speech was just plain confusion.
We've heard two solid nights prior to this in which several former candidates and the celebrity phenom that is Sarah Palin thrash the 'democrat' party along with the usual demons: eastern elite media big-government tax spend establishment (or any combination of these words). I'm sure most everyone here expected hate-filled hypocrisy and we got that and more! Particular attention was paid to belittling and ridiculing those who would deign to perform community service, and those who lead these efforts.
Until the candidate himself spoke. Then at once, there was an attempt to wash away the most hate filled partisan blather I've heard in my admittedly short time of following these races.
Romney
Is a Supreme Court liberal or conservative that awards Guantanamo terrorists with Constitution rights? It's liberal! Is a government liberal or conservative that puts the interests of the teachers union ahead of the needs of our children? — It's liberal!
...I know why jobs come and why they go away. And I know that liberals don't have a clue.
Thompson
History-making in that [Obama] is the most liberal, most inexperienced nominee to ever run for president. [...] Together, [Obama and congress] would take on these urgent challenges with protectionism, higher taxes and an even bigger bureaucracy. And a Supreme Court that could be lost to liberalism for a generation.
Giuliani
On the other hand, you have a resume from a gifted man with an Ivy League education. He worked as a community organizer. What? He worked -- I said -- I said, OK, OK, maybe this is the first problem on the resume. He worked as a community organizer. He immersed himself in Chicago machine politics. Then he ran for -- then he ran for the state legislature and he got elected. And nearly 130 times, he couldn't make a decision. He couldn't figure out whether to vote "yes" or "no." It was too tough.
Palin
I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a "community organizer," except that you have actual responsibilities. [...] what exactly is our opponent's plan? What does he actually seek to accomplish, after he's done turning back the waters and healing the planet? The answer is to make government bigger ... take more of your money ... give you more orders from Washington ... and to reduce the strength of America in a dangerous world.
And last night we anticipate the dagger that will solidify the base (isn't that what Palin's selection is about?) and unify the bleating bovids. The speech that will send them off salivating; drunk with gleeful divisiveness with a hundred new reasons not to reach across the aisle.
And here's what we get. The sudden maverickocity speech, that seems to undermine the previous two nights of rancor and challenges those in and out of the party, delivered by an older, balding version of Carol Channing.
McAin't
...you [Obama] have my respect and admiration. Despite our differences, much more unites us than divides us. We are fellow Americans, an association that means more to me than any other. [...]And after we've won, we're going to reach out our hand to any willing patriot, make this government start working for you again. [...]I've fought corruption, and it didn't matter if the culprits were Democrats or Republicans. They violated their public trust and had to be held accountable. I've fought big spenders in both parties, who waste your money... [...]I've fought to get million-dollar checks out of our elections. I've fought lobbyists who stole from Indian tribes. I fought crooked deals in the Pentagon. I fought tobacco companies and trial lawyers, drug companies and union bosses...[...] The constant partisan rancor that stops us from solving these problems isn't a cause, it's a symptom. It's what happens when people go to Washington to work for themselves and not you.
Again and again, I've worked with members of both parties to fix problems that need to be fixed. That's how I will govern as president. I will reach out my hand to anyone to help me get this country moving again. [...]If you find faults with our country, make it a better one. If you're disappointed with the mistakes of government, join its ranks and work to correct them. Enlist in our armed forces. Become a teacher. Enter the ministry. Run for public office. Feed a hungry child. Teach an illiterate adult to read. Comfort the afflicted. Defend the rights of the oppressed. Our country will be the better, and you will be the happier. Because nothing brings greater happiness in life than to serve a cause greater than yourself.
I'd like to hear from the community thouhts about what strategy is being employed here and whether this seeming undisciplined scattershot of a sendoff speech serves to confuse or unite a constituency. I understand the use of attack dogs, but he seemingly invites internal party attacks. Is this supposed to be the broad-based appeal? And if so, why save until the end with no apparent setup?
And for the record, McAin't missed 407 or 64% of votes during the current congress.