By Matt Maul
Now that the RNC is over, my feelings about the Republican’s chances in November remain unchanged. While I’m still a John McCain man, it’s hard to see him overcoming the Obama juggernaut.
Sure, the Sarah Palin selection has jolted many Republicans back to life. Instead of slamming McCain, as they have been for months (hell, years), Conservative talk radio types like Rush Limbaugh and Laura Ingraham are now singing his praises. One could argue that this was bound to happen anyway. But, trust me, there was a good chance that without the "Palin effect," many of those in the GOP intelligentsia were poised to throw McCain under the bus after November and then say "I told you so."The current vibe among the elated hardcore is that Palin will excite the general public and present the Obama campaign with a challenge they were unprepared for.
But, I’d just advise my fellow McCain supporters to heed the advice of Winston Wolfe and "not start sucking each other's dicks quite yet."Ben Stein (of Ferris Bueller fame) was present at the RNC, and still dumbfounded by the Palin pick. He said to CNN that she will have to get up to speed on important issues like the economy very quickly. He hilariously suggested that Palin might need to seclude herself in a spaceship like baby Kal-El (Superman) listening to hours and hours of training tapes (see below).
Speaking of CNN, I bounced around quite a bit between the big three cable news networks (CNN, MSNBC, Fox) and, for pure news analysis, CNN did the best job. They pack their high tech set with a dozen or so talking heads that are equally divided between party lines, each armed with their own laptop. The discourse is civil and informative. My only complaint is that sometimes the set gets so crowded that it looks like the stateroom scene from A Night At the Opera. Wolf Blizter does his best to stay in control, but much of time he ends up herding cats.
My main problem with MSNBC is Keith Olbermann. I know he has a large following, but I’ve never quite understood his appeal. And this isn't about his politics. I thought Olbermann was an overrated mediocrity YEARS AGO when he was doing his bits on ESPN. Chris Matthews tries too hard, but I just can’t help but be attracted by his sincerity. Who else would admit to having a "thrill" run down his leg after an Obama speech? Tom Brokaw again brought a seasoned professional’s touch to the dais that was much needed after the loss of Tim Russert.
Of course, I readily admit that Fox News leans to the right (duh). In fact that’s their raison d'être. That said, Fox is no worse in their partisanship for Conservatives than MSNBC is toward Liberals. Brit Hume and Chris Wallace are solid newsmen and the thought-provoking give and take between the regulars flows nicely. However, Fox tends to run regular programming such as The Factor and Hannity and Colmes over the less important floor proceedings. So you end up missing a lot. I guess they assume that’s what C-Span is for.The RNC festivities put military veterans front and center. I'm sure it plays well with the base, but I get a bit cynical whenever that card is played too strongly. It brought back memories for me of John Kerry’s failed "Reporting for Duty" approach from 2004.
When Lindsey Graham proclaimed that the "Barack Obama campaign is built around losing in Iraq," I was taken aback. Egads man. It’s fair to question Obama’s qualifications (I certainly do), but I cringe when Republicans go into "wear da ribbon" mode. As Graham finished by telling the audience that it was okay to utter the word "Victory at THIS convention," I was mentally queuing up the anthem from 1984 (okay, we all get ONE Orwell moment).Given the criticism rightfully leveled at Obama’s Greek columns in Denver, I found the staging of McCain’s entrance a bit ironic. In fact, much of the aesthetics of McCain’s acceptance speech left something to be desired.
Before McCain came out, the voice of Fred Thompson boomed eerily across the hall saying "When you live in a box, you spend your life trying to make sure that other people don't have to."
The big screen was all black save for the sunburst of white light from which McCain emerged. He could have been "The Rock" making his way into a WWF event.
The stages at nominating conventions are now lower to the ground and more integrated into the audience then the older style podiums that were set up higher and separated from the delegates by a thick bench. This played into McCain’s strength as a speaker. He’s always better at townhalls than more static, scripted events. It’s worth mentioning that one of the factors Jay Leno cites as a reason for his success in the late night wars with David Letterman was having his Tonight Show set redesigned to be more intimate after seeing the stage layout on SNL.In "It’s Wonk-a Vision," I talked about the problems inherent in packaging a message for two types of audiences (one in the hall and the other on television).
This resulted in a "green screen" moment. At the start of McCain’s speech, the screen behind him began projecting a slide show of random Americana (families at play, people at work, cityscapes, etc). While delegates on the convention floor could appreciate the images, the television audience could only see that part of the photo visible in the head and shoulder shot of McCain. 
This sometimes resulted in a color scheme that, for the home viewer, seemed less than perfect. At one point, a big screen photo of a lush lawn created a television image of McCain standing in front of an unappealing green background. It’s amazing to me that no one noticed this during rehearsal. The dry run for McCain's speech might have gone like that classic Bob Newhart routine where he played a frustrated television director talking to his camera people during a practice staging of Nikita Khrushchev’s visit to the United States in September of 1959:Okay Charlie, have the plane taxi forward…I’m getting a lot of glare of the plane…make a note Charlie, we’re going to have to spray the plan. Now have Khrushchev come out…make a note…we’re going to have to spray his head…
When Barry Goldwater, McCain’s mentor, gave his acceptance speech at the 1964 RNC and uttered the famous phrase "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue," his panicky aids exclaimed, "Oh my god, he’s running as Goldwater."Likewise, there was nothing phony about McCain's demeanor during the powerful description of his "Hanoi Hilton" experience. It’s not often you hear a political candidate speak so movingly about such a low point in their life. I’m familiar with the details of his captivity and was somewhat surprised to hear him candidly admit that he had been "broken" into signing a "confession." I was even more surprised to hear him loosely refer to his later suicide attempt brought on by signing that confession. We seem to have come a long way since Ed Muske cried.
There were a couple of sporadic interruptions by protesters in the audience. I don't have much to say on that except I thought McCain handled it well and I'm not sure what, if anything, gets accomplished by that sort of thing. It only preaches to the choir and puts off those you're trying to reach.
For all its flaws, McCain's speech had a strong closing. His repeated urgings to the crowd to "stand up," over the sound of their cheers
, was certainly a very theatrical, but nevertheless dramatic finish.The RNC concluded with the prerequisite dropping of the balloons as the prospective first couples came on stage. The Palin element was again stressed by having the song "Barracuda" (Palin's nickname) playing in the background.
It’s worth mentioning that the rock group Heart has since sent a message to the McCain campaign asking them to quit using their 1977 hit.
And away we go...
Stein’s reaction to Sarah Palin:
Matt Maul is author of the blog Maul of America.
Posts
19 comments:
Great post - not sure why it's on The House Next Door but I'm glad it was as I wouldn't have seen it otherwise (to be fair, you did throw in some media criticism).
MSNBC has definitely decided to market itself as the liberal alternative to Fox, but it's worth noting that Fox came first (and 5 years ago, MSNBC was very much split down the middle - whereas nowadays, even Joe Scarborough snipes at the GOP).
I concur with your admiration of Chris Matthews - and would add that he has the best observations after each speech. He noted after Palin's that her pick and her image was NOT a grab for Hillary voters, but a dig at public discomfort with Obama's family. And he was one of the few pundits to seem genuinely moved and impressed by McCain's speech which, for all its missteps and weaknesses, had an emotional core which made Palin seem glib by comparison. The crowd's tepid response to his speech only reinforced the fact that his conservatism is out of fashion with the me-first, narrow-minded political culture of today's Right.
"Oh my God, he's going to run as John McCain." This may be a matter of concern for the conservative base but, unlike Goldwater, it's a smart political move on McCain's part. He will only win by reaching the middle and after three days of pure red meat for the base - which probably alienated a lot of independents - McCain presented himself as running not so much against Obama, but against Bush, the past 8 years, and a mangled notion of conservatism.
Also, you noted something that I haven't heard many people discuss yet - but which definitely struck me. After every speaker hyped up McCain's POW time as if it made him Rambo, the candidate himself chose to focus on his lowest moments in prison, on the ways in which it broke him and made him see that we're all dependent on one another (hardly a conservative theme these days). His use of his war record actually demonstrated genuine humility - something in short order at this convention.
Fox is no worse in their partisanship for Conservatives than MSNBC is toward Liberals.
Seriously?
MSNBC has Joe Scarborough hosting three solid hours of Obama hatred each and every morning. The closest Fox comes to that kind of ideological counterprogramming is letting Alan Colmes sit meekly by as Sean Hannity beats up on him.
Setting aside the personality shows, though the "straight up" broadcasts on MSNBC are genuinely neutral, while the ones on Fox still amount to little more than Republican Party propaganda. MSNBC may lean left, but it's nowhere close to that. Please.
I have to disagree.
I've had a long, tough and inner struggle with my feelings about Obama - is it racist to vote for him because he is African-American, or is it racist to vote against him because of it?
I think McCain has a chance to pull it off - and choosing Palin is a first step to getting Obama off of his path to victory. I've heard it said many times that this is Obama's race to lose. It still may happen. People are getting turned off by the MSMedia's love affair with the Dems, and their vulture-like frenzy attacking Gov. Palin.
But, we'll see.
What has gone widely (and inexplicably) unreported is that John McCain had fantastic afternoon sex with a hot bodybuilder before he delivered his speech Thursday night. Stunned that more people aren't talking about this.
MSNBC has Joe Scarborough hosting three solid hours of Obama hatred each and every morning. The closest Fox comes to that kind of ideological counterprogramming is letting Alan Colmes sit meekly by as Sean Hannity beats up on him.
I watch Joe every morning. I can't stand Fox and Friends, unless Ernest Borgnine is on talking about jerking off. Scarborough hardly oversees 3 hours of "obama hatred each and every morning." In fact, he has been critical of the Bush admin since he got the gig from Imus. As far as Obama, Joe may not have a "thrill running down his leg," but he's had many good things to say about him. AND Scarborough has been making fun of McCain for months.
Setting aside the personality shows
You mean eliminate all the shows from 7pm - 11 (prime time)? Well that's a little like saying, "other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how'd you like the play?" :)
the "straight up" broadcasts on MSNBC are genuinely neutral, while the ones on Fox still amount to little more than Republican Party propaganda. MSNBC may lean left, but it's nowhere close to that. Please.
To the extent that I watch either network's straight newscasts (which really only leaves weekends), I honestly don't see a difference in the degree of the editorial slant between FOX and MSNBC. Frankly, I'd have to sit in watch both all day with a clipboard to make my own conclusive assessment. That might be a fun project.
Would love to know where I can find the transcript to Fred Thompson's "When you live in a box" intro to McCain's acceptance speech.
As long as the RNC pays ASCAP their dues, there is nothing that Heart can do to force the McCain/Palin campaign to quit using the song "Barracuda". I remember a time when rock-n-roll used to mean rebellion against everything political, but now that rockers have sold-out --mostly to the left --I've lost all respect in them. So, campaigns can use the songs with impuenity afaiac.
bonk!
As long as the RNC pays ASCAP their dues, there is nothing that Heart can do to force the McCain/Palin campaign to quit using the song "Barracuda". I remember a time when rock-n-roll used to mean rebellion against everything political, but now that rockers have sold-out --mostly to the left --I've lost all respect in them. So, campaigns can use the songs with impuenity afaiac.
I can't tell whether this is more insulting to politics or rock and roll. There is a question of integrity in using a band's song after they ask you not to as they don't support your views. But when you distort the positions of other politicians and missuse pictures of schools repeatedly I guess that isn't so far out of the norm. Also, the co-writer of the song has now said he's donating all his royalties from the song's lowbrow use to the Obama campaign. oops.
As per R'n'R, do you really buy this rebellion "against everything political" narrative that has either been foisted upon you or you've made up? Shall one mention the numerous moments of R'n'R not being rebellion against all politics? Or the bs of that rebelling narrative?
"memphis, egypt"
destroy your safe and happy lives before it is too late,
the battles we fought were long and hard,
just not to be consumed by rock n' roll...
capitalismos, favorite boy child, we must apologise,
up in the rafters a rope is danglin',
spots before the eyes of rock n' roll...
we know the devil and we have shaken him by the hand,
embraced him and thought his foul (stinking) breath was fine perfume
just like rock n' roll...
east berlin can't buy a thing, there's nothing they can sell me,
walk through the wall no pain at all
i'm born inside the belly of rock n' roll...
it's something to sell your labor for when hair sprouts out below,
i'm a microscope on that secret place where
we all want to go, it's rock n' roll.
-The Mekons
Fox News = Propaganda Machine for the Republicans that is willing to repeat every lie they dish out to the public as "fact."
MSNBC = Occasionally willing to point out all the lies of the Republicans so that means they're "shills" for the Democrats.
There's a world of difference between the two and it's a shame that you can't see that.
And lastly to whoever wrote:
I remember a time when rock-n-roll used to mean rebellion against everything political, but now that rockers have sold-out --mostly to the left --I've lost all respect in them.
What in the world are you talking about? When was rock-n-roll ever "against everything political." By it's very nature rock-n-roll is "rebellious" music that has been railing against the establishment (including political powers) for decades. You might also want to educate yourself about what it means to be "on the left" and "on the right" side of issues. Here's some facts for you:
Left Wing = Radical; wants sweeping changes.
Right Wing= Resists change or wants a return to earlier policies.
Liberal = Wants change for progress or social improvement.
Conservative=Status Quo
That's the very nature of the two parties and for almost 60 years rock-n-roll has been seen as "radical" and often railing against the "status quo."
Wow, Anonymous refutes herself (or himself) by saying:
"What in the world are you talking about? When was rock-n-roll ever 'against everything political.' By it's very nature rock-n-roll is 'rebellious'".
Huh? If rock-n-roll is rebellious, then it should be rebellious against politics and politicians. But since so many rockers now endorse politicians (Springstein, Bon Jovi, et al, raising money for Obama), the era of rebellious RNR seems to be over! And that's a shame. I liked it better when they railed against all politicians...
News Organization Donations to 2008 Presidential Campaign Favors Dems 100-1:
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=301702713742569
bonk!
Anonymous,
You are buying into too many mythologies. MSNBC, which I love by the way, is unarguably slanted to the Left - mostly because Keith Olbermann has become its de facto anchor, and makes no effort to hide his slant.
Also, rock music originally had a subversive appeal - it was different and abrasive, and what's more it was affiliated with black culture - but rock is no longer rebellious "by its very nature." I can think of any number of rock bands - the vast majority in fact - who are as safe, unthreatening, and bland in their own way as Ozzie and Harriet.
And your delineations between liberal and conservative, while correct in the purely technical sense, don't really do justice to the terms as their used in American political discourse. I mean was Reagan sticking with the "status quo" when he cut taxes by 30% or overthrew detente? Arguably reactionary (though some would dispute that characterization) but hardly "status quo." In fact one could argue that Reagan was more radical than 80s (and certainly 00s) rock and roll - which is not to be taken as a justification of his policies, but rather a classification of them.
You are buying into too many mythologies...Also, rock music originally had a subversive appeal - it was different and abrasive, and what's more it was affiliated with black culture - but rock is no longer rebellious "by its very nature." I can think of any number of rock bands - the vast majority in fact - who are as safe, unthreatening, and bland in their own way as Ozzie and Harriet.
talk about buying into mytholgies. that concept of rock and roll is all mythology. the idea of r'n'r as all rebellion, all the time is a bullshit narrative and a load of crap. i'm done arguing politics on here but i'll at least fight the ridiculous, and offensive, characterizations of music i've seen on here...
club mekon:
when i was just seventeen sex no longer held a mystery
i saw it as a commodity, to be bought and sold like rock n' roll...
day by day i plunged deeper into a world of cheap sensation,
this held a great attraction for me and i dreamt of my own club
and when i danced and saw you dance i saw a gambling room in the back
with prostitutes skilled in the art of tango, lies, and exploitation
my club is open to all the brightest lights you ever saw
the darkest corners for having fun happy faces no questions asked
late one night the club was heaving, i saw a vampyre move across the floor
old and white with a silver cane lusting for youth through the mirror
and when i danced and saw you dance i saw a world where the dead are worshipped
this world belongs to them now they can keep it,
i live alone and i walk the dark edge of the shoplights shadow,
in each display a private hell, name your price you're up for sale
"talk about buying into mytholgies. that concept of rock and roll is all mythology. the idea of r'n'r as all rebellion, all the time is a bullshit narrative and a load of crap."
I'm confused, given that I agree with your latter formulation yet you seem to be trying to contradict me. Are you taking issue with my assertion that there was a time rock 'n' roll was subversive by its very nature? Given the initial reaction of an older generation and establishment, and the novelty of the medium (I'm talking about the very early days here) I think that's a no-brainer, not mythological but factual. Obviously those days didn't last very long (and weren't necessarily due to the artists themselves TRYING to be rebellious) but that's the point I was trying to make.
p.s. club mekon is by the mekons off, rock n' roll. listen to that and fear and whiskey and edge of the world and learn about the greatness, truth, lies and failures of rock and roll.
So .. . there are more than three right-of-center people who read this blog?
Party time.
I especially enjoyed the RNC use of the green screen when they showed--for no known reason--a photo of Walter Reed Middle School in N. Hollywood, CA when they presumably meant to show a photo of Walter Reed Medical Center?
For all their professed love of the military, you'd think someone could have figured that out before going live.
But then, like most everything else about the GOP, the fuck-up revealed the sham.
MSNBC, which I love by the way, is unarguably slanted to the Left
Oh really? I guess that's why they just removed Chris Matthews & Keith Olbermann from their co-anchor positions for the 2008 political season. Must be that "liberal media bias" (aka Speaking TRUTH to LIES) that got them demoted.
As for "buying into mytholgies." Only idiots are "buying into" what the Republicans have been selling for decades = lies. The Republican party has officially turned into a Reagan worshipping cult of epic proportions. "Blind, Deaf and Dumb" should be the parties motto.
Anonymous,
When did this happen? I hadn't heard about it yet...as of last week they were still dominating coverage of the convention. Perhaps the network did feel it was getting too much criticism and backed off.
As for mythologies, two wrongs don't make a right. Better not too respond to oversimplifications on the right with oversimplifications on the left.
kat,
It looked to me like an upscale home, which seemed like a disastrous image following McCain's "how many houses do I have?" gaffe and the subprime crisis.
I think the Right's pro-military facade has completely fallen by the wayside. Look at their ambivalence towards McCain. I remember the National Review getting all up in arms when McCain used the "I led for patriotism, not for profit" line against Romney. They've shown their cards: the businessman is their hero, not the soldier. I think the Democratic Party is on its way to cultivating the military vote...in 10 years time, it may be split 50/50 if they keep playing their cards right (and the GOP keeps betraying its preference for capitalists and distrust/unease with soldiers and veterans).
It looked to me like an upscale home, which seemed like a disastrous image following McCain's "how many houses do I have?" gaffe and the subprime crisis.
Movieman, I think it was both. They projected several images. One was of an ostentatious house--presumably in the mold of the several that John McCain owns. Another photo was of the school. In fact, the school's principal made a point of saying that John McCain certainly did not speak for their school.
Post a Comment