I Thought About Just Completely Boycotting The Convention…
…but I wanted to see Teddy Kennedy. I’m no fan of his policies, but I was very affected by his illness, as he is undeniably an American political icon. His speech wasn’t particularly great – lots of liberal buzzwords, some strange syntax, and no real meat…but he looked surprisingly well, and his voice was certainly strong.
My favorite part was when he pledged to be on the floor of the Senate come January…and I hope he will be – just not for the candidate he’s thinking of…
UPDATE 9:50 p.m.: Well, I’d like to be charitable to Michelle Obama, as I know this was her big moment…but I’m giving up on this speech. She’s not a good speaker – she has a certain pleading inflection that reminds me of Sally Struthers in those old tear-jerker commercials about starving children. It’s just not a very good speech – it’s long on platitudes, and on imagery of struggling Americans…why are Americans always struggling in Democratic conventions? Yes, we all struggle…but lord, I feel like I’m listening to the travails of Russians in the Stalin days, instead of the citizens of the world’s most prosperous consumer economy.
Well, to each his own…this is weak stuff, though…and wow, there it ended! I’ll give her this much, it was short…
Interesting article in the Times about three families: the Kennedys, the Clintons, and the Obamas.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/26/us/politics/26assess.html?hp
You know, what’s interesting and a bit infuriating is how the Clintons keep acting like Obama owes them some sort of ‘terms of surrender’. The article you referenced opened this way:
Neither family wanted it this way, neither the Kennedys nor the Clintons. But the opening of the Democratic convention on Monday brought a stark contrast: a bittersweet public celebration of the life of Senator Edward M. Kennedy, who is suffering from brain cancer, and an embittered private drama about the terms on which the Clintons would yield the party to Senator Barack Obama.
Now, I know Obama has to tread carefully, because Hillary had 18 million votes in the primaries (she’s no Joe Biden!). But this dictating of terms stuff is getting a bit old.
I don’t think there’s any question that the Clintons have tarnished their legacy with their lack of grace concerning Hillary’s defeat…
I completely agree.
I am curious, what is it about Kennedy that appeals to you?
Oh, he’s just a fixture on the scene by now…he doesn’t really appeal to me, but I was saddened by his diagnosis and I wish him well…
Ah, the Cal Ripken affect, eh? Did you have similar feelings about Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, and Robert Byrd?
I feel nothing but disgust and animosity toward Kennedy – politically – but, like you wish him well in his cancer fight.
I found Teddy’s speech generally effective although certainly without a lot of the fire he had in his youth. He looked good, though, and the tribute video was awe-inspiring. The other two Kennedy brothers get a lot more credit, I think, which is unfortunate. Teddy is a giant, and I think the country is tangibly and indisputably better off because of him. There are very few men in politics about whom that can be said.
I’ll stay away from the rest of this post because it’s only liable to get me into a fight I don’t want.
Wow, such a different, and interesting, perspective.
Doesn’t the victor dictate terms?
It is likely that there is not a harder working person in the Senate, from either party. And that has been true for quite a few years.
I also admire him for his apparent success in his battle with alcoholism (btw, he often credits John McCain for helping him with that).
He often represents the best of old-school Senatorial politics, someone who’s willing to do whatever it takes, talk to whoever it takes, to get things done. Interestingly, I could say this also about both Biden and McCain.
Those are the good things I can say about him. Out of respect for his current battles and years of service, I will skip over the bad things I can say about him.
Back on topic, I’m going to say that I’m tired of the speeches by candidates spouses at conventions. This isn’t because I feel they give advantages to Democrats (I don’t), but just because they all say the same thing. “He’s such a good family man. He has such passion, such vision. Here’s this little anecdote about him you probably don’t know, but tomorrow morning will be being dissected by thousands of political analysts from all over the globe. He’s a good man. He’s just like you. He wants what’s best for our country.”
yada, yada, yada……zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
I didn’t watch Michelle’s speech. I won’t watch Cindy’s. Maybe neither of them have the standard speech, but I doubt it. If I had to guess, I’d guess that this election cycle, Michelle’s will be better. She has a better story to tell. Sometimes it’s the Democrat that does, sometimes the Republican. The absolute best spouse speech ever was Elizabeth Dole in 1996. That may have been the best ever convention speech of any kind. But I still don’t want them.
I think it’s a direct result of our inane quest to find a candidate who is JUST LIKE US. Not that any of us are that much alike, but we all “know” what the average American looks like, and by God do we want a President whose family is exactly like that average American. We definitely don’t want a guy with too many houses, especially if he likes arugula.
FDR was about as far removed from the common man as could be. He was elected without having to profess a love of pork rinds or NASCAR. Things change.
Re Teddy: I once drove a cab in Martha’s Vineyard, and got frequent requests to drive to Chappaquiddick. (A blast from the past: the National Lampoon fake ad “if Kennedy were driving a Volkswagen, he’d be President today”). However, I’ve grown to like him the same way I like Orren Hatch. You may or may not disagree with him, but you know where he stands. Both men do what they think is best for the country, and they fight the good fight. We need more of them.
To quote a phrase, Mary Jo K. was unavailable to comment on fat Teddy’s speech.
There is nothing admirable about Kennedy at all. Nothing. He is a blight on America.
We certainly need fewer of his kind.
I should say for the record that the reaction to Michelle Obama’s speech was almost universally positive, so perhaps I am (nearly) alone in my assessment. I just detected what I thought was a false sincerity in passages that felt coached…but perhaps I am projecting…
Oh, I don’t know, Bob, that’s a bit harsh…yes, Chappaquiddick was a major, major deal, and nothing will bring back the young lady whose death he caused. But a lot of water has passed under the bridge (pun assuredly not intended), and I guess as I get older and reflect on my own failings, I am a bit less judgmental than I used to be.
To be clear: there is no excuse for Chappaquiddick…but a man’s life is made up of more than one moment, no matter how horrific that moment may be.
But I understand your sentiment, and I also understand fully that Kennedy robbed a young lady of every moment, good and bad, she would ever know…just trying to explain why I don’t share the sentiment, at least not entirely, despite the enormity of the mistake…
From a moral perspective, there is little difference between Chappaquiddick and Dick Cheney’s firing a shotgun at Harry Whittington. Both incidents were accidental; both involved alcohol; both men waited 24 hours or so before reporting the events to the authorities (and presumably for the same reason: to sober up).
Of course, Mary Jo died and Harry did not. However, both events could have gone the other way. Neither man intended to cause harm. Both were negligent in their acts.
This is not to excuse Teddy or to cast blame at Cheney: only to place the events in context.
Whittington was not left in a ditch to die. That is the moral difference.
Nor was Mary Jo. Kennedy made several attempts to rescue her from the car, first by himself and then with several others.
You’re kidding yourself.
Ted Kennedy “left Mary Jo Kopechne to die under circumstances where, if he had not given priority to preserving his political career, she might well have been saved. He passed by one house after another where he might have called the emergency rescue squad, and instead sought out his cousin Joe Gargan, whom he implored to take the fall for him. When Gargan refused, he divided the remainder of the night between phone calls to the family lawyer and attempts to establish an alibi by repeatedly wandering down to the lobby of the hotel where he was staying and engaging the hotel clerk in a conversation about the time of night. Never, apparently, did he give a thought to the young woman whom he left dying in his submerged car.”
He has done a lot since that is laudable in intent (the aforementioned commitment to doing what he believes best for Massachusetts and the United States), but you can’t convince me that he did anything but protect himself while Mary Jo drowned.
too many steves, you’re apparently quoting from a book or article, but you left out the source…not disputing the source, but it would be nice to know what it is…
Back on topic for the moment – Richard Cohen (who I have had occasion to ridicule before) agreed with me that Michelle Obama sounded insincere:
Steve: you may be correct — the Kennedy story (which only he knows to be true or not) is that he tried to save her, failed to do so, and then got the others to help — however the facts are murky and I wouldn’t entirely trust the testimony of a panicked and (probably) drunk man. I’m also disinclined to be painted into a corner trying to defend his actions that night: they’re indefensible.
My bad, quoted from Powerline.
Peter: yes the facts are murky and the situation is unrelated to his performance as a Senator and my personal assessment of that performance. I’m most offended that he never paid a price for what he did (not counting any anguish and regret he may have or does feel).
Basically what he did was vehicular manslaughter and leaving the scene of an accident, and got a two month suspended sentence for the latter. I’m not sure if a first offender (who is not a Kennedy) who did the same thing would have received a different punishment. Maybe so, but hard to say.
He did pay a price insofar as it was an albatross which prevented him from ever becoming President. No guarantee he would have been President, of course, but this was a deal killer.