The GOP Convention - NYC 2004

Tiassa

Tiassa

Let us not launch the boat ...
Valued Senior Member
Source: Washington Post
Link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46593-2004Aug6.html
Title: "GOP Star to Skip Convention"
Date: August 7, 2004

In keeping with tradition, Secretary of State Colin Powell, dubbed "the most popular Republican in the country," will skip the Republican National Convention in New York. Though Powell outshines his comrades in the executive administration by as much as twenty points in public opinion polls, Cabinet officials do not attend conventions or other political events. A prominent and bright presence at the 2000 get-together, Powell told a journalism convention on Thursday, "As secretary of state, I am obliged not to participate in any way, shape, fashion, or form in parochial, political debates. I have to take no sides in the matter."

As secretary of state, Powell continues to promote the GOP -- and he recently reflected on whether his centrist views fit with the current right-leaning trends among Republicans.

"Some people think that if you're a Republican you cannot have moderate views. I have moderate views in a number of issues, moderate by normal political definition, with respect to affirmative action and things of that nature, and I find that there are many, many Republicans like me who feel that way," he said last month in an interview with radio host Armstrong Williams.

The Democratic Party has traditionally drawn more minorities than the GOP has. But Powell said the Republicans deserve more credit for action. "If you look at where affirmative action really started, I mean, who really started to put this in the law, you will find that it has a Republican origin," Powell, the party's most prominent African American, told Williams, a black conservative commentator and protege of the late Sen. Strom Thurmond (R-S.C.).

"You will find that President Nixon got a lot of these programs started," he said.

Source: Washington Post
Click to expand...

Comment:

This same tradition will keep Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and national security adviser Condoleeza Rice on the sidelines, as well. In the case of Rumsfeld, that might be a good thing. While I joke that he reminds me of everything we don't like in a stereotypical used-car salesman, I think it is more reasonable to say that the aura of mystery he deliberately infuses his speech with is not necessarily something the Party would wish to show off at a time when it is attempting to appeal to simpler American virtues° such as "freedom, faith, families, and sacrifice".

The loss of Rice's presence is a wash. Respected as an ethnic minority, female college professor, business mind, and friend of petroleum companies everywhere, Rice is nearly vilified by American and international photo editors who simply can't seem to make the woman look pleasant. Additionally, she has damaged her own reputation a little, I think; she was not nearly as adept as Rumsfeld or Powell in delivering the sales pitch. Flip a coin: would she be a desirable presence to the GOP if her work at NSA was not on her resumé?

But for the GOP, which needs to connect with minority voters across the country, the absence of Powell will be a difficult void to fill. I don't see much about Alan Keyes in terms of the convention, but now that he has decided to move to Illinois and challenge Barack Obama°, perhaps he will be scheduled to bring his brand of family values to the convention and pitch Bush's simpler American virtues to minorities.

An RNC news release gives us a general overview. The Governator, Rudy Giuliani, Democrat Zell Miller (GA), First Lady Laura Bush; in an effort to bring out the black face°of the Party, Secretary of Education Rod Paige, a Cabinet member, is included in the lineup. Additionally, Lt. Gov. Michael Steele (R-MD) will speak; he serves on the African-Americans for Bush National Steering Committee. Will the first African-American to be elected statewide in Maryland and a controversial Cabinet member be enough of a highlight to make up for Powell's absence?

Secretary Paige's presence may prove to be a liability; in addition to bucking tradition and also casting doubt on Secretary Powell's reason for avoiding the convention, he might unsettle moderate voters concerned about his characterizing a teachers' union as terrorists.

But ethnic diversity is not the only challenge facing the GOP. As they did with the Democratic convention, MTV has sponsored an essay contest. And the Convention is offering some hip icons and a bouncy screensaver, as well. Bloggers will be in attendance ... and ... uh ....

Hey, did I mention they're bringing out Secretary of Education Paige and Lt. Gov. Michael Steele?

Better analysis than mine is available elsewhere on the web, I'm sure.

In the meantime, just for kicks, President Bush on terrorism:

Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.

Source: WhiteHouse.gov
Click to expand...
____________________

Notes:

° simpler American virtues - Regarding "faith, freedom, families, and sacrifice," see the television spots "Changing World", and "Together"; video links to both can be found here.

° move to Illinois to challenge Barack Obama - See also, "Two letters: Why Keyes?"

° black face - Zing! (I wouldn't have taken such a disgraceful swipe were it not for this very "tradition" of Cabinet members skipping conventions. Absolute shinola!)

Reference Links:

• Wright, Robin. "GOP Star to Skip Convention." Washington Post, August 7, 2004; page A07. See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46593-2004Aug6.html
• Dryer, Alexander Barnes. "Could You Run for Senate in Illinois?" Slate, August 6, 2004. See http://slate.msn.com/id/2104815/
• Republican National Committee. "Additional Program Speakers Announced for the 2004 Republican National Convention." U. S. Newswire July 20, 2004. See http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=157-07202004
• CNN.com. "Education chief's 'terrorist' remark ignites fury." February 24, 2004. See http://www.cnn.com/2004/EDUCATION/02/24/paige.terrorist.nea/
• 2004 Republican National Convention - NYC. See http://gopconvention.com/
• Bush/Cheney '04. See http://www.georgewbush.com/
• Khamis, Marcia A., and Joan Ellis. "Two Letters: Why Keyes?" The Illinois Leader, August 6, 2004. See http://www.illinoisleader.com/letters/lettersview.asp?c=18317
 
Last edited:
Honestly after four years of this administration's rein of terror I don't know if I can handle watching NeoCon2004. It's bound to be a parade of depressingly stupid rhetoric, and infuriating incitements to hate and brash and irrational action, not the least of which will be “Vote Bush”.

I'm heading to New York City on a little vacation to meet a good friend of mine, and will be arriving the day after the convention ends. I hope they manage to clean out the republican stink before I get there. It's kind of a shame that I'm not booked on an earlier flight. Sure New York would be no fun with everything locked down as I'm sure it will be, but it might just be worth it to turn the TV on and have naughty gay sex while watching the convention. There would be something satisfying on a very primal and base level in doing so (oddly enough that's not so far from the way the GOP appeals to the public, either), and it would be in keeping with a rather embarrassing incident where a pal o' mine and I were just too far along to stop when suddenly the music playing from his MP3 play list on his PC suddenly switched to a downloaded sermon from reverend Fred Phelps. I'm actually inclined to think he planned it that way. I know these things are wrong, but really it does show a sort of solidarity and commitment to keep going in spite of oppression. . . these are our equivalent of African American slave songs!

Anyhow, best if I just head off to bed before I go any farther off on a tangent.
 
Comedy central will last from August 30th-September 6th, no doubt there will be some memorable moments in that convention. I don’t know but the GOP is not a united as the democrats are this year round with many real conservatives not going to the convention, and many republicans are planning not to vote for anyone because of the Bush administrations idiotic policies in which both left and right can agree on. I don’t expect Bush to get a boost out of the convention (a boost only matters in swing states), and I very highly doubt that the GOP can match the almost flawless performance of the democrats. I also doubt that Bush can make a good speech, Kerry is the man to beat and I don’t think Bush can do it. Bush will be hammered in the debates as well…it’s only a matter of time. Hey you never know NYC ’04 could be Chicago ’68 all over again.
 
I wish I could have your optimism, but if Bush wins the elections this time, at least I can be happy in I never got my hopes up.

I think this conventions the conservatives are going to say how great they are and what great things their doing and what a great president bush is :rolleyes: that and do a lot of democrat bashing, in the end Bush will get a poll jump to.
 
If Bush gets a poll jump after the RNC, on top of the one he got after the DNC, Kerry may as well fold up his tent and go home.
 
I don't envy the RNC speechwriters. Everything "terrific" they write is going to be dripping with surrealism, irony, and political liability. It will be extremely risky for Busheviks to make a grandiose public spectacle of patting each other on the backs, or to gush optimistic, while each of their grand agendas and deceptions are poised to come falling down around their ears well before November. The USA is still not quite a one-party system, and if the GOP pushes turgid Soviet-style surrealism too far down the surprisingly deep throats of their most loyal base, there will be a gag reflex.
 
It's interesting to see all this board's self-proclaimed "independent" thinkers hyping the DNC and deriding the RNC.
 
Pangloss said:
It's interesting to see all this board's self-proclaimed "independent" thinkers hyping the DNC and deriding the RNC.
Click to expand...

Ok, the jig is up, we're not just independent, we're also very rational and reasonable, too!

Anyhow, what self proclaimed independence are you talking about? None of us here have got anything to do with running this site, we just post here :p
 
"It's interesting to see all this board's self-proclaimed "independent" thinkers hyping the DNC and deriding the RNC."

Well, watch and learn: It's the art of intelligent compromise. The neoconservative cabal infecting Republican leadership is far more dangerous to America's future at this juncture, than Democrat spinelessness, ambiguity and prevarication.
 
Pangloss

You shouldn’t even be uttering a word about “independents”, coming from you it’s about as honest as “fair and balanced”. Many conservatives are just as angry at this administration as liberals, and oddly enough about the same things mostly.
 
What's right would be listening to BOTH sides with an open mind, and/or not hypocritically nit-picking one side (ONLY) while putting on a face of bipartisanship and independence.
 
What's right would be listening to BOTH sides with an open mind, and/or not hypocritically nit-picking one side (ONLY) while putting on a face of bipartisanship and independence.

Well we have lived four years of the other side, and most people in this world never mind the US want a change. The Democrats have their problems no doubt, but their problems are miniscule compared to the problems that will be present with a second Bush administration. It’s a level of severity that transcends subjectivism.
 
Well we have lived four years of the other side, and most people in this world never mind the US want a change..... It’s a level of severity that transcends subjectivism.
Click to expand...

Well that's a nice lesson in Rush Limbaugh-esque demogoguery, but that's about it.
 
It was you who edited my words and took it out of context, that was Limbaugh. Most Americans seem to agree with me on this one...
 
Last edited:
It's no less demogogic in the full quotation. (shrug) It's not a criticism so much as an observation. For all you and hype and tiassa talk about common sense and popular values you come across sounding sometimes like the religious right. It's not enough that you have a point of view, it has to be everyone else's point of view who has a modicum of intelligence.

Combined with an inability to see good ideas from the right as good ideas (they have to be spun as bad ideas because they're from the right) this really puts the kybosh on intelligent discourse with you guys sometimes. This thread is just another example: Now that you've oversold the DNC as the greatest meeting of minds in half a century, you've got to go on to oversell the RNC as the worst meeting of dangerous crackpots since the Nazis nominated Hitler.

Far be it for me to criticize someone else's opinion, I suppose. It's just... disappointing. I expect more... I don't know, I guess "objectivity" is what I'm looking for, especially from such intelligent people.
 
Pangloss said:

It's interesting to see all this board's self-proclaimed "independent" thinkers hyping the DNC and deriding the RNC.
Click to expand...

First I'll be happy to strip my partisan angle from one of the issues I've raised:

• Given that Secretary Powell, the most popular Republican in the U.S., is skipping the GOP convention in a nod to tradition, does the presence of Secretary Paige help or hurt the Republican cause?

Paige is a controversial character who personally lowered the bar for American civil discourse. Additionally, regardless of whether Massachusetts Democrats are out of touch with minorities (a deficit partly covered by Edwards' "fight for the little guy" image), minorities tend to vote Democratic, anyway. Furthermore, it is no secret that the GOP needs to build and maintain a better working relationship with minority communities before chipping away at such a Democratic stronghold. Without overstating, it can be fairly said that Secretary Powell's presence at the GOP convention certainly would bring the Party a certain appeal to minorities--he is, after all, a secure, intelligent minority outshining his white associates in public appreciation. He has cross-party appeal, to boot. Can Paige, who swung wildly at the National Education Association, bring the same sense of invitation? Does the fact that Paige is a Cabinet member affect our understanding or judgment of Powell's decision? Does the fact that Paige, a Cabinet member, is a black man have any significance on why he might choose to make an appearance at the convention that is apparently defiant of tradition?

And the tradition itself? I sincerely doubt Paige is the first Cabinet member to appear at a convention; hell, I so doubt he's the first I'm not even taking the time to check the Clinton administration, at least. Of course, he had a transitional cabinet, and no small supply of former cabinet members to trot out. (Hmm ... maybe I'll have to look it up just to satisfy my curiosity.)

So what is the actual significance of the most popular Republican in the U.S. bowing out of the convention in deference to a tradition easily bucked by a fellow Cabinet member?

I'm open to the argument that Paige's presence will be to energize and reaffirm the Party base, but I'm also willing to assert he holds a certain importance to the Party as a minority, as well as doubt that importance is enough to make up for the absence of Secretary Powell. Given the animosity brought by Paige's remarks about the teachers' unions, it's a fair question whether a Cabinet member of any ethnicity should buck tradition with that potential monkey on his back.

Now, secondly, as to "independent thinkers," I don't see what the problem is. Do you pretend that independent thinkers who have enough reason to distrust a sitting president with a record like Bush's are all sold to the Democratic Party line? The reality is that for those of us who consider the Democrats to be apostate liberals, and who assert there is no strong, coherent voice for proper liberalism or leftism in the United States, the Dems at least put on a strong show this year.

They said the right things, even rose to their proper form for a convention set in the heart of northeastern liberalism. The only downside was the paranoia of the party organization itself--I, for instance, demand the resignation, dismissal, or ouster of DNC chairman Terry McAuliffe, who is part of the reason for the lack of proper liberalism in the United States. It was nice watching Bill Maher try to defend Kerry's sweat, but even so we must demand that Kerry know when to tell the Party to stuff it. Short of the idea that Kerry somehow was obliged to rush through his speech and the lack of any useful platform--if only to stop handing the Hannitys and such of the world another rolled-up paper to whack the Democratic wiener-dog with--the Dems put on the kind of show they couldn't muster for Al Gore and Joe Lieberman. The Democratic Convention showed the kind of Joementum the 2000 ticket couldn't have begged, borrowed, bought, or stolen. Lots of folks are happy when the Dems put on a show because it gives us something worth holding the politicians to.

I mean, Kerry's promising a better way, that things don't have to be this way. It is my hope that he should win election and that the left can properly rake him over the coals when appropriate. Bush? Well, the GOP should hope he comes up with something snappy at the convention because America already knows what George W. Bush means by "freedom, faith, families, and sacrifice." And right now, that's what he's pitching.

The GOP can always dazzle us; stranger things have happened. In the meantime, Pangloss, you may be jumping the gun a little. Let's look at it again:

"It's interesting to see all this board's self-proclaimed "independent" thinkers hyping the DNC and deriding the RNC."​

The conflict between "independent thinkers" and praise for the DNC while deriding the RNC only comes if you deny independent thinkers the prerogative to draw functional conclusions. In other words, the conflict only arises if we apply the proverb, "If you do not know what to do, do not do anything."

Hell, the GOP could always surprise us. But they'll have to come up with a better idea than four more years of the same.

Which derision did you have in mind, Pangloss?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top