|
|
|
|
Wednesday, September 5, 2012 - Volume 3, Number 6
– Updated: September 10, 2012 © Copyright 2012, The Ultrapolis Project – All Rights Reserved DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION WATCH Democratic National Convention Review Briefs – Updates Through
Convention IN THIS ISSUE: ·
DNC First Night Conventionally
Strident, First Lady a Hit – Review and Readers’ Comments ·
DNC Second Night Strident
Again, Clinton Soars – Review and
Readers’ Comments ·
DNC Third Night Ends in Doubt – Review and Readers; Comments |
|
Saturday, September 8,
2012 - Volume 3, Number 6 – Edition 3 © Copyright 2012, The Ultrapolis Project. All Rights Reserved.
Democratic Convention Ends In Doubt President Obama in 2012 a Faded Version of 2004 The
third night of the Democratic convention is now so yesterdays’ news –
literally and in the new 21st century sense of the phrase, so we
won’t bore you with a repetition of the amply repeated details of Thursday
night. Yet, there is something to
learn from this most watched night (36 million TV viewers) of both major
parties’ conventions. While the
UWF&R was having its own little convention Thursday night
(coincidentally- yet quite inadvertently, and inconveniently, scheduled for
the same night as the last day of the national party conventions), the
president of the United States, Barak Hussein Obama, made his modestly
anticipated pitch for his re-election.
(We say modestly because Bill Clinton’s speech the night before set
the bar so high, it was hard to imagine even Barack Obama reaching it, let
alone clearing it.) Before
our own little UWF&R ‘town hall’ was over, the president’s speech was,
and set a new record on Twitter for the number of what are called ‘tweets’
per minute. “Tweets.” Rarely does a word sound and read so much
like what it is; in this case, usually a superfluous, reactionary blurt. Would the president be proud he provoked so
much of it? A media scholar (yet
another new term) was quoted to say that President Obama “spoke in segments that are perfect for
YouTube." If this was a way of
saying that Mr. Obama’s speech was mostly a string of insubstantial snippets
of his vision, we would have to agree.
One after another the president rolled them out, often nothing but
aspirations that seemed more like pie in the sky dreams than inspiring views
of the future: We're offering a better path- a
future where we keep investing in wind and solar and clean coal; where
farmers and scientists harness new biofuels to power
our cars and trucks; where construction workers build homes and factories
that waste less energy; where we develop a hundred year supply of natural gas
that's right beneath our feet. If you choose this path, we can cut our oil
imports in half by 2020 and support more than 600,000 new jobs in natural gas
alone. It
sounded too reminiscent of ‘I will close Gitmo
within a year, and cut the deficit in half in four years, and the stimulus
will create 3.5 million jobs…’ and so on. The speech simply rang empty, and
the man before us was far away from the one who had people jumping to their
feet when he impressed the whole country at his national debut at the
Democratic convention in 2004. Now,
the president did have legitimate claims of success that he could tout, and
he did tout them. In one of the
stronger parts of his speech, he made the case for his national security
credentials: Four years ago, I promised to end the
war in Iraq. We did. I promised to refocus on the terrorists who actually
attacked us on 9/11. We have. We've blunted the Taliban's momentum in
Afghanistan, and in 2014, our longest war will be over. A new tower rises
above the New York skyline, al-Qaida is on the path to defeat, and Osama bin
Laden is dead. Yet,
even here, where he could point to a moment of golden success, when the
inflection of his voice should have made his words come down like a HAMMER
(!), it instead allowed them to be merely be set down like a carefully-placed
paperweight. In that moment, a moment
of lost opportunity, the sense of the whole speech was captured, and perhaps
in turn, the sense of the lost opportunities of his first four years in
office. We think it was this that was weighing down
the president Thursday night. Many in
the last 36 hours have used the expression “he mailed it in” to describe the
president’s speech. In fact, this
phrase is more apt than even many of its employers may realize. Often referring to the perfunctory performance
of someone known to be capable of much more (and clearly, Obama has shown
himself to be capable of much more), this expression also has another, lesser
known meaning that may even be more true to what happened. “Mailing it in” is sometimes used to also
refer to an effort where the minimal was done so as to avoid facing accountability
or a harsh truth, as in “mailing it in” rather than facing someone in
person. It may very well be that
Barack Obama, a man known for his enormous self-assurance, and at the same
time an able, rational thinker, could not come face to face with the truth of
his real failures - with the wide gap between his impossibly optimistic fuzzy
promises and the crystal clear reality of his broken ones. And so, he “mailed it in.” He kept himself apart from his words when
these had to say things he knew he could no longer be sure of. He kept himself apart from the cognitive
dissonance that must come from being a man who was swept into the White House
on one of the lightest political resumes in history, was breezily ordained
the national expiator of racial sin, and was awarded the Noble Peace prize
simply for being himself; and then found that out that not only could he not
part the seas after all, this time the people are still waiting for him to
deliver.
Reader Comments (In Order Received) I hate to admit it, but I have to agree
that wish Obama had been more effective in his speech. We need him. -Max Harding Marco, Excellent. I read every single
word and enjoyed it very much. And I enjoyed the conventions. I (truly) have
nothing to add. You said it all so eloquently, so completely.
-Joaquin
Arguelles Your reviews were an unexpected
bonus. Thanks. -Roberto Alvarez
Comments may be directed to contactproject@ultrapolisproject.com, or if you receive
the newsletter email, also via a reply to the email address from which you
receive it. © Copyright 2012, The Ultrapolis Project – All Rights Reserved.
|
|
Thursday, September 6,
2012 - Volume 3, Number 6 – Edition 2 © Copyright 2012, The Ultrapolis Project. All Rights Reserved.
Democratic Convention Tediously
Strident, Again Yet, Again Masterful Speech Caps Evening
as Bill Clinton Shows How It’s Done The
tropes of abortion rights, free birth control, and all the other fronts of
the so-called ‘war against women’ being allegedly waged by the Republicans,
got a good, full-throttled second run. However some of the claims were
a bit hard to swallow for even some in the charged, partisan crowd.
More than one woman feminist speaker talked about Republicans “redefining
rape.” Of course, even the folks in the audience knew this was nothing
more than a cheap and deceitful reference to the remarks made by Republican
candidate for U.S. Senator from Missouri, Todd Akin, distinguishing between
‘merely’ statutory rape and violent rape. Setting aside that his comments
about what was “legitimate” rape meant exactly the opposite of what the
convention speakers implied, practically the entire Republican party, to a
person, disavowed not only Congressman Akin’s other
ridiculous words on the biology of rape, but his candidacy as well. But,
none of this really mattered compared to the eagerly awaited highlight of the
night: the nominating speech by former President William Jefferson Clinton,
eagerly awaited even by Republicans anxious to know what this old master of
oratory would do – could possibly do - to help boost President Obama’s
re-election prospects. Well, to say that Bill Clinton delivered the
nomination speech is not a fair and just description of what happened: he
performed it – and he did it spectacularly. For the last few days, with
the Republican convention’s arguments rising up into and ricocheting within
the media sphere, and Mr. Obama’s poll numbers descending into historic lows,
more and more the question bantered in news and pundit shows on TV and radio
was over how could the Obama campaign answer the question “are you better off
now than four years ago?” Looking more fit and youthful than he had only a
few months back, President Clinton showed the electrified folks at the
convention, the weary Republicans, and the whole nation, how. When
Bill Clinton got done weaving his lengthy (and sometimes footloose) tapestry
of arguments on why Barack Obama should be re-elected, it was as if someone
had opened a door to a whole new horizon - a new way to look at the world
ahead of us. What up until this evening seemed to even Obama-friendly
Democrats an opaque and increasingly elusive argument to make, the former
president made brilliantly clear. And, not just on why Obama would be
the better choice, but why Obama is the obvious and only choice. It was
like watching the sand artist of America’s Got Talent fame, Joe Castillo, render his inspiring and poetic story-telling
series of images in real time, surprising us at every turn with the clarity,
even when we guess where he is headed, as each frame comes into full view. The
former president had many strong lines, but this excerpt captures his main
line of argument: In
Tampa, the Republican argument against the president’s re-election was
actually pretty simple — pretty snappy. It went something like this: We left
him a total mess. He hasn’t cleaned it up fast enough. So fire him and put us
back in. . . . they convinced me they were honorable people who believed what
they said and they’re going to keep every commitment they’ve made. We just
got to make sure the American people know what those commitments are —
because in order to look like an acceptable, reasonable, moderate alternative
to President Obama, they just didn’t say very much about the ideas they’ve
offered over the last two years. They
couldn’t because they want to [sic] the same old policies that got us in
trouble in the first place. They want to cut taxes for high-income Americans,
even more than President Bush did. They want to get rid of those pesky financial
regulations designed to prevent another crash and prohibit future bailouts.
They want to actually increase defense spending over a decade $2 trillion
more than the Pentagon has requested without saying what they’ll spend it on.
And they want to make enormous cuts in the rest of the budget, especially
programs that help the middle class and poor children. As
another president once said, there they go again. Now,
I like — I like — I like the argument for President Obama’s re-election a lot
better. Here it is. He inherited a deeply damaged economy. He put a floor
under the crash. He began the long, hard road to recovery and laid the
foundation for a modern, more well- balanced economy that will produce
millions of good new jobs, vibrant new businesses and lots of new wealth for
innovators. President
Clinton quoted and showcased Republican presidents in support of his case,
turning Republican arguments back on Republicans - always the mark of the
expert and the wise. Moreover, he rolled off statistics and facts as he wove
them into arguments in ways that were easy to grasp and exciting to hear,
essentially dishing out to Obama supporters in less than an hour a polemical
armament with which to defend the president, and attack his
challengers. Nothing was missing from this speech – not the great
words, not the high emotion, not the truly energized crowd (well, perhaps
complete accuracy was missing). The only danger here is President
Clinton eclipsing President Obama himself. Yesterday
everyone was asking ‘how can the Democrats make their case?’ Thanks to
Bill Clinton, today we know how.
Reader Comments (In Order Received) IWow
Antonio! You never cease to amaze me!!. -Bonnie Vaults Yes,
I agree that the ‘how to’ was the real value in the speech. I told you I was looking forward to this, and
I expected something good from Clinton, but was I was still surprised. -Mark
Thompson
Comments may be directed to contactproject@ultrapolisproject.com, or if you receive the newsletter email, also via a reply
to the email address from which you receive it. © Copyright 2012, The Ultrapolis Project – All Rights Reserved.
|
|
Wednesday, September 5,
2012 - Volume 3, Number 6 – Edition 1 © Copyright 2012, The Ultrapolis Project. All Rights Reserved.
Democratic
Convention Conventionally Strident But Michelle Obama Rises to the Occasion
in Masterful Speech We
suppose it must be just the new normal of scripted conventions that the red
meat is amply dispensed on the first night of a national party
convention. If on their first night
the Republicans featured a parade of Tea Party women and minorities touting
the one core message: “small business über all,” the Democrats featured
another parade of women and minorities – plus gays – to shout three blunt
left-wing messages, two of them overstated charges: Romney and Ryan will
repeal abortion rights rights as they declare war
on women, will take away everyone’s safety nets and benefits, and gays should
be able to marry. The
claim about abortion was particularly exaggerated, and used as its key piece
of evidence the conservative objection to forcing all entities to provide,
totally free of charge to the beneficiary, birth control. To hear some of the speakers, free birth
control pills and condoms were at the base of all freedoms, human social
order is teetering on the verge of total collapse without it, and those bowl
of freebies found in sex clubs and Planned Parenthood clinics are actually
part of the U.S. Constitution, right up there between freedom of speech and
freedom of religion (emanating, of course). In one novel angle taken by one
smug speaker, requiring these benefits be provided was defining of conservative,
limited government. Early
on the crooked Senate Majority Leader, Sen. Harry Reid of New Mexico, was his
usual insipid self. Close to the end,
keynote speaker Julian Castro, the charismatic mayor of San Antonio, like
Chris Christie at the Republican Convention, did his job about as well. Actually, except for an occasional
meat-laden bone thrown to delegates in the hall to keep them riled up, Mayor
Castro spoke very much like a Republican, and the audience seemed to notice
when he did (err, are we suppose to clap for that?). In fact, one could say that Mr. Castro
really embodied the new Hispanic Democrat, a far more culturally and
economically conservative player that finds himself in the Democratic mostly
because of the issue of illegal immigration.
In one of the many ironies of history, the liberal Democrats’ embrace
of the Latin influx from the south may yet result in a party that soon
becomes less friendly to blanket abortion rights, gay marriage, and high
taxes, even as the Republican Party itself weakens. The
belle of the ball Tuesday night truly was First Lady Michelle Obama. After listening to her, it became clear why
she, and not the keynote speaker, closed the night. Ms. Obama laid a rhetorical foundation by
speaking eloquently, coherently, and beautifully, with effective and
appropriate invocations of her and her husband’s personal life together,
about the virtues and principles of the American dream; and then brilliantly
and masterfully brought it back to the virtues and principles of the
president, and what people had to do make American dreams become a reality
for more (i.e. vote). One of our
favorite lines: President Obama Barack knows the
American dream because he's lived it.
And he wants everyone in this country, everyone to have the same
opportunity no matter who we are or where we are from or what we look like or
who we love. And he believes that when
you work hard and done well and walk through that doorway of opportunity, you
do not slam it shut behind you. No,
you reach back and you give other folks the same chances that helped you
succeed. It is a
very difficult proposition to speak to a partisan convention crowd as well as
the nation as a whole, and connect to both. Ms. Obama managed it like a pro.
If any still-ambivalent but disappointed independent voters, or wavering
disillusioned Democrats, were looking for some reassurance, some believable
case, that there was still a reason to vote for the president’s re-election
even in the wake of these last three sputtering years, and that the Obama’s
do understand their main street lives, one Michelle LaVaughn Robinson Obama let them hear it.
Reader Comments (In Order Received) I was looking forward to receiving
the UWF&R. Great insight. -Joaquin Arguelles Michelle
Obama hit it out of the park! Woohoo! -Jennifer Robinson Thanks
for the note. Looking forward to your reactions to Clinton tomorrow. -Mark
Thompson
Comments may be directed to contactproject@ultrapolisproject.com, or if you receive the newsletter email, also via a
reply to the email address from which you receive it. |
|
Main Index of the Ultrapolis World Forecast & Review © Copyright 2012,
The Ultrapolis Project – All Rights Reserved.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
