The Alan Grayson Page

The Anthony Weiner Page

Guest Contributors


  • BN-Politics' administrators respect, but do not necessarily endorse, views expressed by our contributors. Our goal is to get the ideas out there. After that, they're on their own.
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 05/2007

Blog Catalog

  • Liberalism Political Blogs - Blog Catalog Blog Directory



« University of Florida Anthropologists Discover Traces of Lost Citiesin the Amazon | Main | Hurricane Gustav Strikes Caymans, Heads for Cuba »

August 30, 2008



This is a reasonable way to look at things, I suppose. Even if you don't believe Obama, at least he's claiming to do the things you want, as oppose to McCain, who is claiming he will do things you don't want.

I don't think it's fair to say that this was Obama's first policy-heavy speech. Certainly, this was more policy-heavy than any of Obama's primary night speeches were. If those were your only exposure to Obama speeches, then I agree with your statement, "this is the first speech I've seen where Sen. Obama didn't overly focus on the rhetorical". But it was a whole lot more rhetoric-heavy and one-liner-laden than his speech on race in Philadelphia, or his speech on financial reforms in New York, or his foreign policy speech, to name three. Obama's made plenty of substantive speeches.


I'm glad to hear you're looking at it in this pragmatic way, Deb. I only wish all Americans were as pragmatic-- and as well-informed.

Deb Cupples


You should have quit at the first paragraph.

Can't you just be happy that I've decided to throw my money and vote Obama's way? Geeeez. :)

Deb Cupples


Thanks for the kindly intended words.

Note that I was every bit as "pragmatic" a week ago when I was considering staying home or voting for a third-party candidate.

I just had my zoom lens focused differently than you did.


The Denver speech was a real litany of specifics. I think his mission was to convince those who didn't think he could be specific on policy and it was quite successful on that level.

If it helped convince you, Deb, with all you've had to say about Obama, it must have been plenty specific.

On a policy level, you and Damozel are on-target that the difference in the Presidential election is also about all the policy wonks who will occupy Executive administrative positions for four years in areas from health to national security. Progressive legislation coming out of Congress will stand little chance of being enacted under a McCain Administration, while an Obama Administration will have the opposite effect of working with Congress to formulate law.

Deb Cupples


If I believed that Obama was truly progressive, I wouldn't have hesitated a bit in supporting him after Hillary lost the primaries. Evidence strongly suggests that he's been pretending.

At the same time, I don't believe that McCain is anywhere near as right wing as he's pretending.

To me, they're both major dice rolls -- and I think there's a slightly better CHANCE that Obama's reactions (as opposed to his actual initiatives) will produce less harmful results than McCain's.

Again, I'm just speculating. Time'll tell, I suppose.


Can't get enough of Palin. She has everything that Hillary lacks and more.

Deb Cupples


That depends on what one liked about Hillary.

The comments to this entry are closed.