After watching the DNC last week and feeling inspired, empowered, hopeful and downright awesome, I felt it only fair to see what the RNC had as a counter offer. Could they up the ante? Could they match the energy, the enthusiasm of possibilities or confront the issues? No, no, no and no… and no. I allow myself to listen to the other side to make sure I’m being fair. Just as I was not surprised that the DNC would be powerful in its truthiness (thank you Mr. Colbert), I’m not surprised the RNC left me deflated. But even if I was a McCain supporter, I’d be deflated (and a true member of my immediate family).
After only 10 minutes of viewing, I had had enough. Here’s what I discovered:
1.) Laura Bush’s speech emulated that of a commercial for arthritis medicine. She would deliver a line, pause, wait for applause, smile and continue in a calculated manner with just a slight head tilt to indicate understanding. I mean, I was convinced. I would have bought that arthritis medicine even w/o feeling the effects of such ailments.
2.) She learned how to publicly speak from her husband.
3.) The RNC loves to use words that don’t really mean anything. When I wrote papers for school, I used a vocabulary that was fluffy and big but did nothing to get my point across. It’s because I didn’t do my research. I had no point to convey. Oops! I was sick of researching, I had been doing it for 8 years for every other class, so I was, well, done. Those teachers, I tell ya, they called me on it every time!
George W.’s speech tonight was a replica of one of my flaky papers. He used terms like, “killers” and “angry left” to describe what the RNC would protect us from. He also said that he was optimistic about, “freedom’s power to lift up all God’s children.” What does that mean?? We could use our imaginations, I’m sure, but as my honors English teacher would write, “examples, please!! D-”. Not once did he mention a name or a specific issue unless it was McCain and his experience as a POW. There are plenty of POWs out there that are not McCain. Where is their honorable mention? Although, if it were up to them, I’m sure they would forego the honorable mention and settle for a place to sleep and any kind of drug that would help them stop the tremors.
Vague terms prove nothing. “Killer” is an adjective that describes those who kill. Are our troops not killing people in Iraq and Afghanistan by order of their commander and cheif? Does that mean Mr. GW is protecting us from them? Are my fellow-Chicagoans not killing each other at a rapid rate? Is he implementing strict gun laws in Chicago then?
The “angry left”: Was there anything about the DNC that seemed, “angry?” Perhaps he was confused. (He did introduce his parents as people which much ‘tegrity’) Instead of “angry”, I think he meant strong, powerful, ready, honest, and righteous. Any of those terms would do.
George W. also addressed McCain’s concerns. He said that McCain would rather, “lose an election than lose a war.”
I accept that offer.
