Fred Thompson Attacks Barack Obama

This is the most boring convention ever. I'm just waiting for Big Brother 10 to start.

Just now, former Law and Order Actor Fred Thompson said of Obama: What has he done besides give "a teleprompter speech designed to appeal to America's critics abroad?" It brought the greatest applause and some stood.

Thompson said Obama was the most inexperienced candidate ever, or something like that.

Obama is refusing to fight back on the inexperience ground. He needs to get out there and hit hard. They are not just the radical right and wrong on the issues, 1/2 of their ticket, by any standard, lacks even a modicum of the skills and experience necessary to lead the country if need be.

Since Obama's unlikely to do that, the MSM and blogs will have to do it for him.

Clueless Donna Brazile said Thompson "gave a great speech." Huh? What side is she on?

< Palin on the Issues | Joe Lieberman Shills for McCain >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    It was a pretty good speech... (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Exeter on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:39:47 PM EST
    but geez, the stage craft is HORRIBLE.  What's with all the empty seats?!?

    All the states being hit by storms (none / 0) (#11)
    by JavaCityPal on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:50:41 PM EST
    Gave their delegates the option to stay home. At least I heard that yesterday morning.

    I love the simplicity of the stage, and really like it when they have the screen filled with that huge waving flag.


    I didn't watch all that much, took a few looks--I (none / 0) (#65)
    by jawbone on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 10:06:07 AM EST
    also like the simplicity of the stage and it seemed that the crowd was much closer to the speakers than at the Dem Convention.

    Was that camera angle, a trick of perspective?

    And was it bcz the Repubs have less money to spend this year and the Dems maybe had too much?


    Delegates from Gulf Coast returned home (none / 0) (#17)
    by skuld1 on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:55:50 PM EST
    Fred's best line (5.00 / 3) (#2)
    by TimNCGuy on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:43:48 PM EST
    was the one given to him by Obama about "above my paygrade"

    Joe, if McCain is so bipartisan (5.00 / 0) (#6)
    by domerdem on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:46:45 PM EST
    why didn't he pick you for VP instead of that neophyte?

    it was a good line (5.00 / 0) (#13)
    by TimNCGuy on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:52:07 PM EST
    it got thunderous applause. It's a repug convention. what would you expect? I didn't say I agree with the sentiment. Personally, the pay grade thing didn't really bother me when Obama said it. Although, he probably could have said it better. But, he was trying to serve two masters with that statement without offending either one. Not an easy task. Personally, I don't think when life begins has anythign to do with whether a woman should have choice or not. A woman should have a choice even if someone decides life begins at ejaculation. None of this negates the fact that it was a good line for a repug convention. period. And Obama handed it to them on a silver platter.

    Thompson twisted Obama's 'pay grade' remark (5.00 / 2) (#34)
    by Don in Seattle on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:28:46 PM EST
    When asked "At what point does a baby get human rights, in your view?," John McCain answered, simply, "At the moment of conception."

    Barack Obama's answer was characteristically more nuanced, thoughtful, and wordy. Basically, what he said was, "I don't know":

    "Whether you are looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity is, you know, above my pay grade."

    You can object that Obama's answer comes off as a bit flip, but it is theologically quite correct in Protestant Christianity. Obama demonstrates a Christian humility that is utterly missing in McCain's doctrinaire response.

    McCain's answer is incompatible with all abortions, including those in cases of rape or incest, except for the rare abortions necessary to save the life of the mother. McCain's answer is also incompatible with the legality of many popular forms of birth control, including the IUD and the morning-after pill.


    Just IMHO (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 11:42:12 PM EST
    the rape and incest exception has always seemed to me the height of hypocrisy.  If a human life is innocent at conception, how it was conceived shouldn't matter.  I can respect, although heartily disagree with, a consistent view like that.  The folks who make exceptions for rape and incest, seems to me, have as their main agenda controlling women's own expression of sexuality, not reverence for "life."

    'paygrade' is governmentalese (5.00 / 0) (#67)
    by andrys on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 10:18:18 AM EST
    Not only flip but talking from the viewpoint of a government worker...

    It's wry but wouldn't work with that crowd...

    The question is so silly.  None of us can pretend to know but some do anyway.


    if you have quoted (none / 0) (#38)
    by TimNCGuy on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:41:53 PM EST
    the question accurately, that makes all the difference in the world. I had been led to believe up until now that the question was "when does life begin" and not when does a baby get human rights. You just can't count on the media to report anything accurately...

    Transcript of above my pay grade (none / 0) (#56)
    by jrterrier on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 04:08:19 AM EST
    WARREN: That was a freebie. That was a gimme. That was a gimme, OK? Now, let's deal with abortion; 40 million abortions since Roe v. Wade. As a pastor, I have to deal with this all of the time, all of the pain and all of the conflicts. I know this is a very complex issue. Forty million abortions, at what point does a baby get human rights, in your view?

    OBAMA: Well, you know, I think that whether you're looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade.


    What should Obama hit back with (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by oculus on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:44:07 PM EST
    regarding his experience?

    McCain's Record (5.00 / 0) (#50)
    by FreakyBeaky on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 01:04:13 AM EST
    And that of his party.

    Jeraly (5.00 / 3) (#4)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:44:24 PM EST
    does anything that comes out of Brazille's mouth surprise you anymore. Obama really needs to figure a way to get her off TV. I think she creates pumas daily.

    Obama's inexperience (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by koshembos on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:51:37 PM EST
    Obama has to rise above the need to prove his experience or even address it. Clinton and JFK didn't have any experience especially in foreign policy. Arkansas is not that different from Alaska.

    We have to stop jumping all over Palin and understand that Obama is responsible to convince the voters. Blaming Palin isn't going to help.

    JFK grew up in a family steeped in governing, (none / 0) (#66)
    by jawbone on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 10:15:13 AM EST
    policy discussion, politics. His father was the ambassador to England and made some offputting comments concerning whether England could win (said could not), but, the family lived in England for quite awhile prewar.

    I've read descriptions of the kids being required to have a topic prepared to present, then discuss, and defend their take on the situation. At the supper table--every night.

    Then, JFK did have experience as an officer (think there's a book about that), which may or may not have been somwhat hyped--but he was in the war, he did have command responsibility.

    He also had more time in Federal elected office--altho' I've read some criticisms of his approach to the seriousness of his duties as a representative.

    Were I to be forced to make a comparison of JFK's and BHO's experience with foreign affairs, I would have to give the nod to JFK.

    Your mileage may vary. But I'm looking at their experineces and factoring it in to what I call their foreign affairs experience.


    Liebertoad on now (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by litigatormom on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:52:38 PM EST
    McCain is more bipartisan than Obama! It shouldn't take a natural disaster to make Democrats and Republicans work together!

    McCain is not like Bush! He is not a partisan Republican! Democrats are lying when they say that!  (Was McCain lying when he said that?) God only made one John McCain and he is his own man. If John McCain is a partisan Republican, then Liebertoad is Michael Moore's favorite Republican.

    So he's not just supporting McCain on national security. And keeps calling himself a Democrat.

    On Obama: talented but too young. Times too perilous for someone lacking accomplishment.  Obama has not reached across party lines to accomplish anything significant.  Contrast to McCain's record  of bipartisan accomplishment. Contrast Obama's record to Clinton, who got important things done like welfare reform, balanced budget!  {The crowd gives muted applause; Liebertoad does not address the fact that McCain wants to ape Bush economic policies.)

    Now Liebertoad talks about Palin as a leader who can help McCain shake up Washington.  Real ticket for change is McCain-Palin ticket.

    Can we throw him out of the Democratic caucus now?

    I just (5.00 / 0) (#25)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:03:14 PM EST
    have to laugh at the fact that after spending tons of time and money trashing Hillary and Bill, the GOP has now decided that they are in love with both of them.

    Of course, the need for voters is an amazing thing isn't it?


    Lieberman is not in the GOP (2.00 / 0) (#31)
    by SueBonnetSue on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:15:19 PM EST
    And very few people clapped when Lieberman was praising Clinton.

    My republican friends say that while they didn't much like Clinton, he was better than Obama because the Clintons are more moderate.  Many said they trusted the Clintons more than Obama to protect the US.  I can't disagree with that.  


    Clinton remarks were for the viewing audience-- (5.00 / 0) (#69)
    by jawbone on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:08:13 AM EST
    he's rubbing salt in the wounds of the Dems (self-inflicted about the Clintons--well, Obama campaign inflicted, perhaps) AND going after disaffected Dems.

    Twofer. If it works. Coming from Lieberman? Not great messenger.

    Also, going after Jewish vote, but not pushing the Israel thing?


    Oh, no, they're (none / 0) (#27)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:10:43 PM EST
    just rubbing as much salt in the wounds of the Dem. Party as they can manage.

    No, wooing me and other Hillary voters (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Prabhata on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 11:21:23 PM EST
    According to Gallup, when the DNC convention was over, only 65 percent of Hillary voters are certain to vote for Obama. Gallup

    McCain knows it that this time we won't be taken for granted.


    Yeah, but (5.00 / 0) (#45)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 11:35:31 PM EST
    in all honestly, their phony invocations of Hillary Clinton only make me less likely to even consider voting for them.

    I won't vote for them, but every once in a while I get so mad, I'm tempted to.


    IMO (none / 0) (#61)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 05:54:57 AM EST
    it doesn't come across as rubbing salt in the wounds. The press, though, that's another story. They are Obama's worst enemy.

    I didn't listen to Lieber's Dem VP speech in 2000 (none / 0) (#54)
    by bridget on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 02:55:38 AM EST
    and I didn't listen to his GOP support speech in 2008 (didn't even know he was on - cause I don't watch the Rep convention).

    But after reading the post above I would like a little conversation with Barbara Boxer. Again. She has a lot of explaining to do IMO. Was it really worth it, Ms. Boxer?

    P.S. I will set my tape for the speeches of McCain and his VP, however. Thought I should just in case.


    Lieberman (none / 0) (#57)
    by jrterrier on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 04:10:02 AM EST
    If you throw Lieberman out of the DEM caucus, Reid becomes the minority leader.  

    How is Obama going to fight back (5.00 / 4) (#19)
    by SueBonnetSue on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:57:12 PM EST
    On inexperience when the facts are that he IS inexperienced?  

    He cannot win that battle.  It's better that Obama speak about what he WILL do, not what he has done because, in all honesty, it's precious little.  

    Radio (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:24:55 PM EST
    Heard it on the radio and, I have to say, Thompson's speech was very compelling in that format.  I didn't agree with the ideological sentiment, but the entire tone was very folksy and down-to-earth, very "just talking on my front porch."

    Man has a career in voiceovers since his elected career is OVER.

    Maybe Brazille was just being honest (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by Roz on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 12:25:55 AM EST
    Does being on a particular side mean you can't express an honest thought? Is thought and opinion only about who's side you're on?

    It was a pretty good speech. That is, it was effective.

    Fred was great (5.00 / 0) (#62)
    by Jlvngstn on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 08:21:42 AM EST
    I disagree with most of his politics but he is entertaining and speaks to middle america better than most.  I thought Laura Bush was excellent as well and is a true ambassador.  It is too bad they are both on the wrong side of the issues...

    Obama/Palin experience (2.00 / 0) (#59)
    by jrterrier on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 04:15:28 AM EST
    I do not understand how any DEM can claim that Palin is too inexperienced to be a 'heartbeat' away from the presidency when DEMS have just nominated Obama to be the president.  i know i shouldn't ask an open ended question, but truly i am happy to be persuaded that obama has any experience whatsoever to be president.

    Apparently Brazille is on any side (none / 0) (#5)
    by Jjc2008 on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:44:28 PM EST
    as long as there is no Clinton on the ticket.  Considering she was offended by the Clintons implying Obama was not ready, her "Thompson gave a great speech" speaks volumes about her worldview.

    oh come on (5.00 / 0) (#7)
    by TimNCGuy on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:47:38 PM EST
    Brazile said it was a good red meat speech for the kind of crowd that was there. she went on to explain why the dems were offering the people a better choice. let's have some context here for accuracy. I'm no fan of hers. But, she wasn't offering up any compliments to the repugs.

    her first words were (none / 0) (#9)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:49:23 PM EST
    "great speech."

    and then you (none / 0) (#15)
    by TimNCGuy on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:53:06 PM EST
    turned off the sound?

    Brazile's GOP buddies (none / 0) (#18)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:56:41 PM EST
    Somebody at another blog posted a link to this several year-old NYTimes article about Brazile and who she started cozying up to after Gore lost that I'd never seen before and found eye-opening.  She apparently has lotsa BFFs in the GOP, including Karl Rove.

    Hmmmm.  Was about to try posting a link, but the option doesn't seem to exist here in "reply" comment mode.  I'll see if I can post it in a fresh comment.


    Gyrfalcon, please try the LINK again. (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:12:11 PM EST
    Maybe you know how to do this already, if not here goes: go to the NYTimes article and copy the URL

    Then, when you're back in the comment box, type something in like "NYTimes" and highlight it; click on the chain link icon above the comment box; a window will flip down above your tool bar; paste the url in there - and voila, you're good to go. Looking forward to the article.


    Fred Thompson... (none / 0) (#8)
    by Don in Seattle on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:48:43 PM EST
    was quite visibly reading from a teleprompter himself.

    Lieberman is up now. G-d, his voice is just like Ben Stein's -- so annoying, it must be intentional. Oh, the Joenotony!

    new thread up on Lieberman (none / 0) (#10)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:49:43 PM EST
    What is it (none / 0) (#60)
    by Wile ECoyote on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 05:40:25 AM EST
    about progressives and spelling G-d?  Never quite figured it out.  

    G-d (none / 0) (#63)
    by Don in Seattle on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 08:46:39 AM EST
    It's not a progressive thing as such. It's a Jewish thing, a way of avoiding using the Deity's name in vain.

    Not that I'm Jewish. But Lieberman is, as is Ben Stein. (And Gilbert Gottfried, and Joan Rivers, and Fran Drescher. Can any other religious group claim as many notably annoying celebrity voices?) I used G-d here half ironically, and half out of respect.


    It's an old-fashioned tradition, I think. (none / 0) (#64)
    by EL seattle on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 08:49:49 AM EST
    You saw it in the major papers during the Rev. Wright brouhaha.  

    It's sort of like the literary habit (way back in the day of Poe and Austen) of using initials followed by blank underscores for proper names of real people and places.  

    It seems quaint in this post-web era, but is still probably good manners.


    The experience issue may be... (none / 0) (#16)
    by EL seattle on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:53:51 PM EST
    ...the hammering point that the Republicans will use over the next few weeks.  So many of the criticisms of personality can be counter-attacked (often to great effect) as being petty race-based, sex-based, or age-based attacks.  But an attack on experience is a lot tougher to counter, I think.

    Obama should probably come up with lots of something, quickly, to counter these attacks.  Maybe starting with testimonials from colleagues who can be convinced to actively act as surrogates?

    What can his colleagues say (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by SueBonnetSue on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:00:22 PM EST
    About his inexperience?  They can't make up stuff that he's done.  They need to focus on the future and what he WILL do in the White House.  

    Let's face it, Obama doesn't have a record of having done much.  He hasn't brought change to the Senate.   He has brought the Senate together.  He doesn't have a string of bills he's gotten through the Senate.  He just hasn't been around long enough to have much experience.  


    And (none / 0) (#51)
    by Mr Natural on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 01:11:15 AM EST
    That's not a problem for you?

    Yes, it is a problem (none / 0) (#53)
    by SueBonnetSue on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 02:32:00 AM EST
    Accomplishment (none / 0) (#55)
    by Cairo Faulkner on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 03:28:23 AM EST
    I expect the Republicans will carefully turn the experience argument into an accomplishment one, ie. it' not about how much time you've been in politics, but what you've achieved there. They'll use McCain's bipartisanship and independence of mind, and Palin's taking on the GOP establishment and fighting corruption. Such an accomplishment argument would incubate Palin from criticism of her experience, while opening Obama up to his claims of unity and reaching across the aisle.

    Friends of Brazile article (none / 0) (#20)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:57:33 PM EST
    OK, let's see if I can do this right...

    Nope, won't work for me (none / 0) (#21)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:59:16 PM EST
    I'm supposed to just click on the "chainlink" box, fill in the URL and click "OK," right?  How come nothing shows up?

    Try this: (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by oculus on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:02:06 PM EST
    1. copy url,
    2. paste in comment box,
    3. enclose url in brackets [  ],
    4. put the word(s) of your link just to the right of the first bracket,
    5. highlight the word(s), and
    6. hit "preview."

    OK, trying this... (none / 0) (#26)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:08:57 PM EST
    Brazile's GOP friends

    That seems to work.  Thanks!  (Hope I can remember how that goes in future.)

    The little "link" box you get with the chainlink thingy doesn't work?


    See my link directions above... (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:14:21 PM EST
    it always works for me.

    Wow, this expalins a lot about '04 and '08... (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:31:50 PM EST
    From the NYTimes article cited by gyrfalcon: Frustrated Democrat Makes Friends in G.O.P. (Feb. 21/03)

    Donna Brazille: ''I call Republicans because I can talk outside the box with them...I can talk with Democrats, but when I talk with Republicans, I learn a lot more.''

    Citing Democratic Party figures, she said her party was more preoccupied with appealing to white men, 37 percent of whom vote Democratic, than to black women, 95 percent of whom vote Democratic. And yet, she said, the party counts on black women to show up on Election Day.

    Ms. Brazile's frustration has led her to advocate a political strategy that some in her party view as heresy. She is encouraging black office-holders to run as ''favorite son or favorite daughter'' delegates to the 2004 Democratic Convention without committing themselves in advance to a particular presidential candidate.

    ''The idea is to re-energize the African-American electorate and revive the Democratic Party at the same time,'' she said. ''I want to revitalize the party from the grass roots up. We're losing voters.''

    Irony's dead. And Brazile killed it. n/t (5.00 / 2) (#40)
    by Valhalla on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 11:22:51 PM EST
    OT Tech (none / 0) (#29)
    by blogtopus on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:13:25 PM EST
    Just to make it clear to everyone, you have to have some text highlighted before you click the chain link symbol, otherwise you'll be attaching a link to nothing, so nothing will show up.

    It is an easy mistake to make, and made often. No big deal. :-)


    Huh. Thanks very much (none / 0) (#32)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:24:34 PM EST
    How strange.  The chainlink box invites you to just input a URL, nothing about it hints there's any other step to take.

    I appreciate your both taking the time to step me through it.  So much for intuitive GUI.


    I agree (none / 0) (#24)
    by sas on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:03:13 PM EST
    with the poster who said it was (is) boring.  

    Except for Hill and Bill , so was the Dem convention....

    My mother (none / 0) (#35)
    by Lil on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:28:46 PM EST
    a very partisan Dem said it was a pretty good speech. I didn't see it myself but I was surprised my mom said that.

    My dad (none / 0) (#41)
    by nell on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 11:23:43 PM EST
    who commented more than once that he thought Thompson was a fool during the primaries said that he was really impressed with his speech and that of course he knew McCain was a war hero, but he had never heard about it like that. He was moved and impressed. He thought Lieberman did a good job, but he didn't have the strong positive reaction he had to Thompson's speech.

    Dad is an undecided voter (independent, former Hillary supporter who is a centrist on foreign policy and economic policy and does not base votes on cultural issues). He thinks character is important). He is leaning McCain, but wants to see how Palin does before making a final decision.


    Wasn't Fred Thompson an actor? (none / 0) (#36)
    by Grace on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:29:18 PM EST
    You sure couldn't tell it with that speech...  

    Nixon on Fred: "Dumb but friendly" (5.00 / 0) (#42)
    by Prabhata on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 11:28:31 PM EST
    Say no more.

    Nixon on Fred (none / 0) (#58)
    by jrterrier on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 04:13:33 AM EST
    You cannot trust anything Nixon says on Fred Thompson, who was counsel to the House Republican Judiciary Committee during the Nixon impeachment.  I think Nixon would be biased.

    Not much of an actor (none / 0) (#49)
    by JavaCityPal on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 12:52:46 AM EST
    He is exactly the same in every role he plays. In fact, he's hardly acting 'cause he's exactly the same character in real life.

    Actors do better with directors. (none / 0) (#68)
    by andrys on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 10:22:41 AM EST
    Since Obama's unlikely to do that? (none / 0) (#43)
    by Chisoxy on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 11:28:36 PM EST
    Well jeez, someone tell the man being President might require a backbone now and then.

    I dont agree with the willful acceptance of what you just said. If that is truly how you feel, how could you support him?

    Democrats don't have backbone (5.00 / 3) (#44)
    by Prabhata on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 11:34:57 PM EST
    Clinton showed some backbone when he dared Gingrich with the budget and the Republicans with the impeachment. But for the most part, the Democrats slither.

    Brazile also praised some crappy GOP video that (none / 0) (#47)
    by Firewalker on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 12:06:52 AM EST
    happened to include Rosa Parks and MLK. She said the Republicans are showing how much they love their country and are showing a different side to the party than we've seen (something about the new Republican party). Ugh. Does she want the Democrats to win?!? Then stop talking up the GOP!

    I missed (none / 0) (#70)
    by Bluesage on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 01:57:43 PM EST
    Fred Thompson's speech last night but from all accounts it seems he did a pretty good job.  I will try to catch it later on C-Span. There is very little, if anything, that I agree with on the GOP platform but there really is little to like about the Democrats anymore either. It seems it's old fashioned now to be a real Progressive with convictions and still show respect and decency to others you might disagree with. Brazille, Pelosi, Dean, Clyburn - these are not progressives - these are nasty lefty's leaning right who have destroyed our Party.  

    I'm looking forward to hearing Palin tonight and beginning to think that maybe McCain/Palin in the White House and a strong Democratic Congress will be more beneficial for the country.  It may be the "strong" part of the Democratic Congress we will have to work on.  Obama and his experience and judgement seems more problematic if he has a bunch of Democratic sychophants following him around doing his bidding.  I have seen nothing that makes me think it would not be that way.