OFFICIAL DNC thread

[Duke]

So I watched day 1 or whatever it was of the Democratic National Convention today.

I know it's difficult to believe, but for those who missed it, they really did bring out the retards. Playing baseball.

Either I was supposed to think that John Kerry singlehandedly makes it possible for mentally impaired kids to play baseball, or I'm supposed to think that he thinks it wise to give a tard a bat.

Note: Yes, I think that mental handicaps are the saddest thing in the world too.

~D

[Ulysses]

Not being retarded!!!!!!!!!

Oh, man. That's a good one.

[natedogg]

Lay heavy money on Kerry right now. I think the lines are -105 on Kerry.

Then wait a few days. Like the morons they are, the public will react to the convention and Kerry will climb. Bet heavily on Bush, you'll probably get +115 or so.

Ideally, the GOP convention will have the same effect on the morons and you can dump more money on Kerry if he drops to +115 after the scintillating Dick Cheney swings millions of voters to the right.

natedogg

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

The weirdest aspect of this convention is the horde of annoying Falun Gong people hanging out around Faneuil Hall distributing literature.

[ThaSaltCracka]

Clintons speech was on point.

[adios]

With all the hand wringing about Bush protest zones I thought that those that condemned Bush would show the same outrage at the protest areas set up at the DNC. Not a peep though, am I surprised? Nope.

from the article:

Woodlock said he had initially assumed that activists were exaggerating when they likened the protest zone near Canal Street to an internment camp. But he said that after touring the area for 90 minutes Wednesday, he concluded that comparison was "an understatement."


They're friggen cages for cyring out loud.

Judge deplores but OK's site for protesters (http://www.saveourcivilliberties.org/en/2004/07/449.shtml)

Judge deplores but OK's site for protesters

author: Jonathan Saltzman, Globe Staff
A federal judge yesterday upheld a fenced "free speech zone" for protesters near the FleetCenter during next week's Democratic convention, even though he said he agreed with critics who likened the cramped space to an internment camp.
A federal judge yesterday upheld a fenced "free speech zone" for protesters near the FleetCenter during next week's Democratic convention, even though he said he agreed with critics who likened the cramped space to an internment camp.

US District Judge Douglas P. Woodlock ruled that the controversial protest zone wedged under abandoned Green Line elevated tracks could not be expanded or relocated because of limited space near the arena and security concerns.

"There really isn't any other place to go," Woodlock told several antiwar activists who gathered with their lawyers and government officials in his courtroom. "You're stuck under the tracks."

Though he ruled against the protesters, Woodlock called it "irretrievably sad" that post-Sept. 11 security threats and raucous antiglobalization protests in recent years have made tight restrictions necessary.

After the judge raised concerns about whether the protest zone met building codes, city officials agreed to create a third exit from the space and said police will allow only 1,000 people, not the 4,000 originally proposed, gather inside at one time. But several activists insisted that they are so disgusted with the designated protest zone that they have no intention of using it.

In a partial victory for activists, however, Woodlock ordered the city to allow protesters to march past the FleetCenter on Causeway Street on Sunday at 2 p.m. The city wanted to divert the marchers when they got within a block of the center.

The city's refusal to let protesters march on Causeway Street and the setup of the designated protest zone had prompted two lawsuits, filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Lawyers Guild. The protesters range from a city bus drivers' union to a pro-Palestinan organization.

Jonathan Shapiro, one of the lawyers for activists challenging the protest zone, said he was outraged by the judge's refusal to open it up or move it, but said his clients have no time to appeal. Earlier, he told the judge that the enclosed area will convey that occupants are "wild people who need to be confined in what looks like a maximum-security prison, Guantanamo Bay, or a zoo."

Mary Jo Harris -- legal counsel for the Boston Police Department, which oversaw the design of the protest area -- said Woodlock recognized that the city had a difficult job balancing the free speech rights of protesters and the problems of limited space and potential violence.

"It's a pity that we're hosting a Democratic National Convention where, because of the actions of a minority of people [at past political events], we have to plan for acts of violence that put both delegates and law-abiding demonstrators at risk," she said. "That is sad. But we're a police department, and we have a duty to protect."

Woodlock said he had initially assumed that activists were exaggerating when they likened the protest zone near Canal Street to an internment camp. But he said that after touring the area for 90 minutes Wednesday, he concluded that comparison was "an understatement."

The zone covers 25,800 square feet, according to the city's latest measurements, smaller than officials previously said. It is a rectangle bordered by cement barriers, a double row of chain-line fencing, heavy black netting, and tightly woven plastic mesh. Coils of razor wire line the train tracks, which slope downward to 5 feet, 9 inches above the ground.

"One cannot conceive of other elements [that could be] put in place to create a space that's more of an affront to the idea of free expression than the designated demonstration zone," Woodlock said.

Nonetheless, Woodlock said that unruly demonstrators at other political events have made the precautions necessary to foil protesters who might hurl objects at delegates arriving on buses.

Boston Police Superintendent Robert Dunford has pointed out that violent protesters used slingshots to fire ball bearings at police and conventioneers during the 2000 Democratic convention in Los Angeles.

Assistant US Attorney George Henderson told Woodlock in a private conference that Secret Service agents had gathered intelligence about similar possible threats by protesters at this convention, which begins Monday. But Woodlock said the information did not affect his decision. The allegation was briefly disclosed in open court yesterday, but federal officials refused to elaborate.

The judge at one point dangled the possibility of widening the zone by about 20 feet into an adjacent parking lot where dozens of buses carrying delegates will arrive. But city officials said the buses will need 36 berths to unload passengers, and that would make expanding the protest area impossible.

More than once, Woodlock called the dispute over the enclosed protest area a "festering boil" and indicated his sympathies for the activists.

But the activists later dismissed his laments.

"We don't need tears," he said Steven Kirschbaum, a member of the Coalition to Protest the DNC, which prevailed in its effort to march on Causeway Street on Sunday. "We need justice. We challenge the very notion of a protest pen."

Tania Vamont -- a 24-year-old graphic designer from Cambridge and a leader of the Bl(a)ck Tea Society, a group that calls itself antiauthoritarian -- said: "I'm deeply saddened that [the judge] acknowledged that it's worse than an internment camp, but `that's OK because that's what our world is like today.' "

Her organization was one of three that obtained city permits to use the protest zone and sued after the barriers went up this week. The other two groups were United for Justice with Peace and the Boston Coalition for Palestinian Rights.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

Awesome speech. The best convention keynote I've heard in a long, long time.

[ThaSaltCracka]

His contrast between his admin(and the democratic party) and Bush's(and the republican party) was especially effective IMO. Plus his line "When I was in office the Republicans hated me, but as soon as I got out of office and started making a lot of money, they did everything to keep me happy(tax cut)". Then when he started saying what programs were cut so that he could have his tax cut, was priceless. I always liked Clinton, and that speech just reaffirmed that for me.

I also thought Gore had a good speech too, very positive(for the most part) and unifying. Def one of his best speeches in a long long time. I was also glad they let Carter do all the Bush bashing. Hilary's speech was weak though.... she yells entirely to much.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

The difference is, you're voting for Kerry and I'm not. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[ThaSaltCracka]

to be honest with you, I am leaning torwards Kerry, but ultimately I am undecided. You never know.... I plan on watching both conventions to see what they both have to say.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

Oh I plan to listen to them both, too. Then I'll go out and vote for Michael Badnarik (http://www.badnarik.org)

[ThaSaltCracka]

interesting, why are you all set on this guy?

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

Because I am a supporter of limited government, and the Libertarian Party most closely represents what I feel is the proper direction government should take. If my choice were between the Republicans and Democrats I would not be 100% comfortable voting for either, as both parties take stands on given issues which I strongly oppose.

[swimfan]

[ QUOTE ]
"Hilary's speech was weak though.... she yells entirely to much"

[/ QUOTE ]

There was a good line in Slate that in part (somewhat) refers to this...something along the lines of the difference in the speech delivery between the two Clintons is the difference between reciting and singing. Very apt.

[andyfox]

I agree that's she's a weak speaker. But I think there may be some prejudice involved here: perhaps we tend to see forceful speech from a woman as more strident or discordant than we do from a man. Maybe the higher pitched voice perhaps has something to do with it?

[ThaSaltCracka]

nope, she just sucks at it.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

When I stepped out for lunch today there were the ubiquitous Falun Gong evangelists, then when i reached Faneuil Hall there was a big demonstration from a group called "Americans for a Better Party" (turns out it was a group pushing Captain Morgan), one lone guy with a sign saying "please don't make me vote for Nader" appealing to Kerry to adopt a more stringent anti-war stance, and of course, a whole bunch of Lyndon LaRouche supporters.

[MMMMMM]

"I agree that's she's a weak speaker. But I think there may be some prejudice involved here: perhaps we tend to see forceful speech from a woman as more strident or discordant than we do from a man. Maybe the higher pitched voice perhaps has something to do with it?"

Stretching.

I can discern a strident tone coming from anyone and I'm SURE you can too.

I haven't even heard sound bites from the DNC yet, but past performance IS an indication of future results;-)

[andyfox]

You don't think we men tend to see strong men as strong and strong women as . . . well, bitches?

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
You don't think we men tend to see strong men as strong and strong women as . . . well, bitches?

[/ QUOTE ] and your point is.....????

There is a right and a wrong way to come across as strong. Being firm, confident, but also in control, that is the correct way to come across strong. Hillary does not fit all of those. She rarely seems in control when she is being firm, she seems to just yell, and come across as pompous and in fact stubborn.

My 2 pennies.

[Sloats]

She quacks like the aliens in 'Mars Attacks'.

[Philuva]

Who do you feel is a great female public speaker?

[ThaSaltCracka]

I think Madeline Albright is a very good speaker.

[James Boston]

[ QUOTE ]
I am a supporter of limited government, and the Libertarian Party most closely represents what I feel is the proper direction government should take.

[/ QUOTE ]

Have you read "Perfectly Legal?" I heard it somewhat fits the Libertarian ethos. I just bought it, but have to finish SSHE first.

[Diplomat]

I will not pitch in here too much, simply because I'm Canadian, so who the heck cares what I think? /images/graemlins/wink.gif

I did find the 9/11 bit before Hillary's introduction of Bill pretty interesting. Comments?

-Diplomat

[GuyOnTilt]

Then I'll go out and vote for Michael Badnarik

How did I see this one coming from you, Kurn... /images/graemlins/wink.gif

BTW, I'm voting Badnarik too.

GoT

[GWB]

[ QUOTE ]
Then I'll go out and vote for Michael Badnarik

How did I see this one coming from you, Kurn... /images/graemlins/wink.gif

BTW, I'm voting Badnarik too.

GoT

[/ QUOTE ]

For those of you in swings states you might consider voting for the major party candidate that is less likely to run up spending as much. Half a loaf is better than none.

[Diplomat]

So they should vote Democrat?

-Diplomat

[GWB]

[ QUOTE ]
So they should vote Democrat?

-Diplomat

[/ QUOTE ]

If they feel that the Democrats are going to spend less, sure.

Once a potential voter has been deceived to that extent I doubt I can ever get them back. Fortunately most still understand that the GOP desires lower taxes and lower spending, although GOP follow through on this principle needs to be worked on.

[jdl22]

This breeds an interesting question. Do libertarians prefer a candidate that increases taxes and spending or one that decreases taxes but increases spending? I'm honestly not sure.

[GWB]

The rate of increase in spending and the desire to limit runaway spending increases are important factors. Your post almost makes it sound as if the rate of increase would just be the same under both parties, which is not the case.

[ThaSaltCracka]

Dean is on right now.... this should be interesting... he got quite an ovation..wow!!!
BTW, I hear Ron Reagan is speaking tonight as well.

Tune in!!!

[GWB]

[ QUOTE ]
Dean is on right now.... this should be interesting... he got quite an ovation..wow!!!
BTW, I hear Ron Reagan is speaking tonight as well.

Tune in!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

Dean makes Kerry look like a brick wall. Do you Democrats regret turning your backs on Dean?

[ThaSaltCracka]

I think Dean is an idiot. Dean makes Kerry looked refined and compossed.

[jdl22]

My post questioned whether libertarians would prefer a candidate who increased taxes and spending or decreased taxes and increased spending. If the Bush administration increases spending at a slower rate then that is still an increase in spending and hence bad in the eyes of a libertarian.

[ThaSaltCracka]

awesome speech..... god damn... what a fuckin speech...

[jdl22]

Wow. That speech completely blew me away. I hope this guy is eligible to be president. He was absolutely fantastic.

What a story too. His dad from Kenya got a scholarship to study in the US and he ended up studying at Harvard law and will win a virtually uncontested seat in the US Senate.

[GWB]

[ QUOTE ]
If the Bush administration increases spending at a slower rate then that is still an increase in spending and hence bad in the eyes of a libertarian.


[/ QUOTE ]

So all increases are equally bad?

Then I guess all earning rates are equally good, and there is little difference between 1 BB/100 and 2 BB/100.

[jdl22]

No, but if you want government to decrease then all increases are bad.

If you are a player losing 1bb/hr that's bad. Sure it could be worse you could be losing 2 but 1 still sucks.

Let me restate my question again. Like most conservatives you don't actually answer the question being asked but the wording of the question. It's a pretty good trick that even the real W uses.

Which would libertarians prefer a government that increases both spending and taxes or one that decreases taxes and increases spending albeit at a somewhat slower rate?

[ThaSaltCracka]

totally, he was so poised... his words were so powerful, but unifying as well. On CNN, the panel afterwards was commenting on his speech. Bob Dole simply said "I give it an A". I think he was speechless, as were most people. Simply amazing.... Then they followed up with Ron Reagan which was also really good too.

[Diplomat]

Just watched Edwards' speech. I'd give it about 7.5 or 8 out of 10, knocked back a bit by some cheesyness...He really went after Bush though, but I thought that part was pretty well-done.

-Diplomat

[ThaSaltCracka]

it was good in the regard that it started to lay out Kerry and Edwards plan for the U.S. I give it an 8.

[Ed Miller]

Crossfire is an inane show, and based on watching it I assumed Carlson was an Ann Coulter clone. But since I have seen him three nights now on CNN post-convention each night, he's clearly very intelligent.

I wonder why they have him behaving like a fruitcake on Crossfire.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
he's clearly very intelligent.

I wonder why they have him behaving like a fruitcake on Crossfire.

[/ QUOTE ] Your right about that...

[MMMMMM]

"We men" do not all think alike on such matters. I suggest you distance yourself from the common man when it comes to sexist views towards women.

I agree some men may hear stridency in women where none exists. I wouldn't think that the inclination you mention is paramount or even important in evaluating stridency in the case of the woman in question. And I've only heard her briefly on a couple of occasions.

Surely, Andy, you can tell when you are hearing something or not, or if it is just your imagination.

[ThaSaltCracka]

What did you guys think of Sharptons speech:

excerpt: [ QUOTE ]
Mr. President, as I close, Mr. President, I heard you say Friday that you had questions for voters, particularly African- American voters. And you asked the question: Did the Democratic Party take us for granted? Well, I have raised questions. But let me answer your question.

You said the Republican Party was the party of Lincoln and Frederick Douglass. It is true that Mr. Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation, after which there was a commitment to give 40 acres and a mule.

That's where the argument, to this day, of reparations starts. We never got the 40 acres. We went all the way to Herbert Hoover, and we never got the 40 acres.

We didn't get the mule. So we decided we'd ride this donkey as far as it would take us.

Mr. President, you said would we have more leverage if both parties got our votes, but we didn't come this far playing political games. It was those that earned our vote that got our vote. We got the Civil Rights Act under a Democrat. We got the Voting Rights Act under a Democrat. We got the right to organize under Democrats.

Mr. President, the reason we are fighting so hard, the reason we took Florida so seriously, is our right to vote wasn't gained because of our age. Our vote was soaked in the blood of martyrs, soaked in the blood of good men (inaudible) soaked in the blood of four little girls in Birmingham. This vote is sacred to us.

This vote can't be bargained away.

This vote can't be given away.

Mr. President, in all due respect, Mr. President, read my lips: Our vote is not for sale.


[/ QUOTE ]

His speech was bombastic, powerful, angry and partisan, IMO. But I think in many ways that embodies what the Rev clearly is. I have respect for the Rev, partly because he is so passionate, but I also approach him with a long stick too.

Thoughts.

[ThaSaltCracka]

no thoughts on the Rev? This is a first.....