Jon Stewart Skewers Fox News Analysts Karl Rove, Bill O'Reilly, and Sean Hannity - Hilliarious and Another View On the Presidential Election
A reader of this post sent in another perspective on Sarah Palin's Speech, John McCain and the Presidential election.
I saw the Palin speech and it was terrific - kudos to the writers - and she's quite a performer as well. Aside from the abortion and gay rights issues, which most Northeasterners, including Republicans, can't stomach, their policies are solid. Because people can't see past the social issues(and they concern me deeply as well), many tune out the rest of the message. How good is it that even McCain the following night scolded his own party for their actions over the past several years? Perhaps the party did not stay true to its principles, and must be punished. But politicians never learn, and the Dems' big gov't approach is bankrupt, IMHO, and much of the country continues to agree. That is why every election, regardless of the scoundrels running, is so close.Here is the text and video of Senator John McCain's Acceptance Speech to be the Republican Party Nominee for President of the United States from Real Clear Politics.
2 comments :
I do have to respectfully disagree with the comments above. Palin's speech is getting a lot of kudos because she set such low expectations. As long as there was no stumbling, no complete ineptness and now total gaffes, the speech was going to be a hit. Mrs. Palin did not come across with any solid policy initiatives, and only produced some untruths and some nasty attacks. The social issues are scary, sure, but the fact remains that other than the wedge issues that the party tries to use to lure voters, I still don't know what Palin brings to the ticket. She's a pandering by McCain to women and to the religious extremes.
McCain, while gentler, he let the others do his attacking, also was light on policy. He "scolded" his own party because that's what people expected. If he was really so concerned, why did he vote along with party lines some 90% of the time this past year? If he disagrees with his party, why does he agree with them more times than not? The "maverick" image is a crafty one, considering he's been in Washington, D.C. over 20 years. He's had the time to affect some the "real change" he speaks of. Under the past six years of Mr. McCain's party rule, government has gotten bigger and bigger. Not only that, it's gotten more and more intrusive. Seeing as how Mr. McCain fought for a country that values freedom, and, as he and everyone on his team are quick to point out, sent time in a POW camp for that freedom, you'd think he'd see the dangers of such folly and such tyranny.
I don't understand how people are so taken with slogans and the rhetoric which cloud their rational thinking. The truth is John McCain and the Republican Party have been in complete control of the presidency, congress and have had enormous effect on the Judiciary for most of the last eight years. If you truly think they have done a good job, you should vote for them. If you argue John McCain was not one of them- a so called "maverick", what makes you think he can affect any significant changes when the democrats will be in control of congress?.(this is conceded by republicans) When he had the power, he sure didn't use it then. What makes you think he could do it now, even with the most noblest intentions (and I personally don't think he noble). So much for his "Change" rhetoric!
Post a Comment