"Never Been a Bad Girl" - Sabrina Chap
A totally fun song and video. I had the pleasure of meeting Sabrina Chap at Roy and Kia's wedding. I am looking forward to seeing her perform next time she comes to D.C.
So I thought the DNC got off to a terrific start last night. Some very good speeches, including a barn burner by Deval Patrick, a pretty credible effort by Julian Castro, and a superb performance by Michelle Obama. I am looking forward to hearing both Elizabeth Warren (Sully's absurd and nasty sniping notwithstanding) and Bill Clinton.
(They just had a female autoworker who works in the plant that builds the Chevy Cruze -- earlier Rich Trumka spoke and now Bob King, President of the UAW is on the stage. Cecile Richards, President of Planned Parenthood, also spoke earlier as did one of the Dream Act beneficiaries. The Democrats are making an all points pitch to everyone who has a stake in Obama's victory. It is a dramatically different party than the GOP -- that much is clear.)
I enjoyed watching the Bain victims, especially the last one, the former steelworker. (I am sure Sully will not approve -- everytime I start to like him, he reminds me of his essential doucheiness when it comes to matters economic.)
Is Al Franken drunk? Or is it just that nasally Minnesota accent?
Sandra Fluke is up there now. She's a very telegenic presence. I think she's got a bright future.
A very nice speech by Fluke, one that I would think would resonate particularly with young women.
And now Elizabeth Warren, who is doing a really fine job. She even cites a little scripture and doesn't seem like it's the first time that she's read those words. Really nice job by Warren, a very solid speech.
Bill Clinton -- a man who knows about burning on the inside for America. Or at least a certain portion of its citizenry. (He probably wouldn't ask for papers either.)
He is one folksy sonofabitch, isn't he? And smart -- really smart about how to construct a narrative. (This speech, unlike Warren's, seems tailor-made for Sully.)
This guy is a master story teller. As Josh Marshall notes, the way that the Republicans have built him up is a mystery, because he is going to stick the shiv in them like nobody's business.
Clinton is just killing it. He is making the case for Obama in a way that is going to resonate powerfully with all of those people -- and they appear to be legion -- who admire him.
He is just demolishing falsehood after falsehood leveled at Obama. And he's explaining so many things so well, especially the Medicare robbery canard.
God he loves being didactic about policy while also being political. And he is so damn good at it. He just gutted the Republicans on Medicaid. And now he is dealing with the "Welfare Reform" waiver calumny.
He's going on a little too long I think -- it is diluting the punch of an otherwise great speech.
But make no mistake about it, this was a powerful speech, one which will resonate with a whole lot of people (as well as pundits).
Oh, he gets a few more great punches in on voter suppression and the Dream Act. And a powerful close on the promise of America.
And now joined by Obama. Nice.
Quote of the night by Josh Marshall about Clinton:
"Hard for me even to fathom how much Clinton is relishing this. Like a caged animal let back out for a brief run in the wild."
Join with me in watching, won't you.
sister simone!
i loved that steelworker.
Posted by: big bad wolf | September 05, 2012 at 09:58 PM
I thought he was quite effective.
And I loved Sister Simone.
I think Sandra Fluke is doing a pretty impressive job as well.
Posted by: Sir Charles | September 05, 2012 at 10:07 PM
Is it just me, or does it seem like Sullivan has a problem with women who take up leadership roles ? He really hated Hillary Clinton for no reason I can figure out. He also had a hard on for Sarah Palin in a way most people wouldn't. Now I don't like Sarah Palin much at all, but the way he went after her (and, in her way, Palin was no more ignorant than George W Bush) suggested something personal.
Posted by: Joe S | September 05, 2012 at 10:15 PM
Joe,
Yes.
I think Sullivan has a misogynistic streak.
I also think he really has no regard whatsoever for working people. They are expendable and should accept that.
Posted by: Sir Charles | September 05, 2012 at 10:19 PM
wisdom of an 11-year old: my daughter said, listening to warren, "nothing grows from the top down."
sullivan has one very important principle---what affects andrew sullivan. if it touches andrew (even if it is lawbreaking like smoking marijuana (which i favor)) andrew cares. if it doesn't touch andrew, he believes folks should just tough it out and embrace tory tough love.
Posted by: big bad wolf | September 05, 2012 at 10:30 PM
Whew. Comments are back up.
bbw,
Yeah, I think you pretty much nailed the solipsism of Sully.
Posted by: Sir Charles | September 05, 2012 at 10:35 PM
Well, I liked Warren's speech quite a bit. I thought she hit the right notes and connected it up to the Obama reelection effort.
Posted by: Joe S | September 05, 2012 at 10:36 PM
Joe,
I thought she did a very good job as well. It was punchy and well delivered.
Posted by: Sir Charles | September 05, 2012 at 10:40 PM
It's not just you Joe. Leadership or no, I get the feeling Andrew doesn't know very many women nor have a particular interest in changing that -- very unlike many of my male gay pals who love to yak over the "back fence" on a regular basis.
Also. Love Elizabeth, but she's got a nice smile. She should use it.
Bill -- what a guy. He's unleashed. "Arithmatic." Oh best. Staccato man. He's gonna need a voice gargle again, bless him.
Posted by: nancy | September 05, 2012 at 11:24 PM
Arrgh! Just got out of work. I'll watch it when I get home and get the girls to sleep.
Posted by: Eric Wilde | September 05, 2012 at 11:30 PM
Eric,
It's long, but well worth watching.
Once you take care of the most important business.
Posted by: Sir Charles | September 05, 2012 at 11:32 PM
Democracy is not a blood sport-----Bill C.
Posted by: paula | September 05, 2012 at 11:38 PM
nancy,
I thought Warren was quite polished. My only fear is that Clinton may have completely swallowed any story about her.
paula,
It was an amazingly well crafted centrist critique of Republican unreasonableness -- and filled with substance to boot.
Posted by: Sir Charles | September 05, 2012 at 11:52 PM
the best line i ever heard about clinton was that he'd stick in the knife as he patted you on the back.
that was a very good, if overlong, speech. not that anyone seemed to care. he's got the touch. i wish we had someone that good that could push the envelope a bit. i thought deval patrick was great on monday, but patrick, like clinton, is a logrolling, corporate trip, personal luxury loving socially liberal pol. right now, i'll take that.
Posted by: big bad wolf | September 06, 2012 at 01:20 AM
if this josh marshall statement is accurate it makes me happy:
"10:53 PM: Folks with a hard copy of the speech tell me it bears little resemblance to what Clinton’s actually saying."
nice. i am so tired of scripted and vetted, even in our side's favor. i am so tired of leaks, even if they are as minor as what player will tomorrow announce his retirement. i liked it when the world occurred in real time, not ahead of time. i like it that someone may say something that wasn't scrubbed and approved. does this make me old or worse?
Posted by: big bad wolf | September 06, 2012 at 01:29 AM
clinton's speech. i'm only a few minutes in, but hell of a speech.
Posted by: kathy a. | September 06, 2012 at 01:54 AM
about the RNC: "we left him a total mess; he didn't clean it up fast enough; so put us back in." HA!
Posted by: kathy a. | September 06, 2012 at 02:03 AM
sister simone -- a nun on the bus. in bad times, you really want a good nun in your corner. (the vatican is nervous about the good nuns. they should be.)
Posted by: kathy a. | September 06, 2012 at 02:48 AM
elizabeth warren -- wearing my favorite team colors, black and blue. ;)
she is great.
Posted by: kathy a. | September 06, 2012 at 03:16 AM
Like a caged animal let back out for a brief run in the wild.
It most certainly did seem that way, didn't it?
Posted by: oddjob | September 06, 2012 at 09:13 AM
I thought Warren was quite polished. My only fear is that Clinton may have completely swallowed any story about her.
Bill Clinton's speech is covered on the front page of today's Boston Globe; Warren's speech is covered on page 13 (back with the rest of the coverage on the convention).
Posted by: oddjob | September 06, 2012 at 09:17 AM
Once again, I'll have to catch it later. Yesterday evening was squeezed by the kid's soccer practice - barely had time to eat supper before the kid's bath time and bedtime. Fell asleep well before Clinton started talking.
Intrade still has Obama's chances of re-election at only 58.7%. I think I may have to put a bet down on Obama before the needle starts moving, because I think the Presidential race is all but over.
What I really need right now is a website like MyDD was, once upon a time, that could help me sort out what House races might be worth my while to send some money to. It's pretty easy to find out which Senate races are on the bubble, since there's only ~33 of them to begin with, but House races are a much more confusing universe. And I'd really like to see us take back the House in November, as well as hold the White House and Senate.
Posted by: low-tech cyclist | September 06, 2012 at 09:20 AM
LTC, as Daily Kos Elections noted, there are 5 competitive seats in Illinois. We kept Democratic control of the governorship and both houses of the legislature- so Dems put in a wicked gerrymander. If we win the House, it's going to be because of big wins in Illinois (and California too, is my understanding).
Posted by: Joe S | September 06, 2012 at 10:08 AM
Thanks, Joe, I appreciate the tip. But I'm willing to open my wallet to more races than that, and it would be nice to see a global view somewhere of "here are the 30, or 40, or 60 closest races, and here are the ones with Dem candidates we really like."
Posted by: low-tech cyclist | September 06, 2012 at 11:55 AM
Sarah Kliff, a word, please:
You did a fact-check on Clinton's speech last night, and I hate to say it, but your TNR roots are showing.
You say: TRUE: “There were no cuts to benefits at all. None.”
But that follows:
FALSE: “Both Governor Romney and Congressman Ryan attacked the president for allegedly robbing Medicare of $716 billion. That’s the same attack they leveled against the Congress in 2010, and they got a lot of votes on it. But it’s not true.”
Medicare is a defined-benefit plan, not a defined-contribution plan. (At least, as long as we can keep Romney's and Ryan's hands off the program.) If you can provide the fixed benefits for less money, the savings go back to the Treasury, where they will be used for other things.
In no way can that be called 'robbing Medicare' because it's a defined-benefit program, and the defined benefits are intact.
Which is exactly what Obama did.
Now he used those savings to help fund Obamacare, but that's neither here nor there. The basic point is that being able to provide the same benefit package for less money isn't 'robbing Medicare.'
Posted by: low-tech cyclist | September 06, 2012 at 12:09 PM
off topic, but this is completely hilarious. via balloon juice.
Posted by: kathy a. | September 06, 2012 at 01:45 PM
it's not that far off topic, come to think of it.
Posted by: kathy a. | September 06, 2012 at 01:45 PM
kathy, That is a true unintentional hilarity classic.
This quoted AP piece graces the front page of the Seattle Times today. ?? That means it surely made it to the front pages in red-state places everywhere. Like truthiness, now we've 'fact-checking, well sort of' -- 'cause the phrase has gotten lots of hits lately. Any journalists left standing?
Posted by: nancy | September 06, 2012 at 02:56 PM
According to comments at several places, some of the anchors at CNN were talking over parts of Elizabeth Warren's speech. That would tend to get her message "swallowed" even without Bill. Dave Neiwert believes her remarks were more substantively important than Bill's only-Bill-can-do-this address . I listened to her again and have to agree. She seems to be getting some short shrift press treatment and one wonders why. Page 13 in the Globe?
Posted by: nancy | September 06, 2012 at 07:30 PM
That was a pretty strong cup of Joe.
Posted by: low-tech cyclist | September 06, 2012 at 10:09 PM
More on the above mentioned AP *fact-checking* story that went out over the wire after Clinton's speech. There's a new twitter hashtag in its honor -- #futureapfactchecks. :^) Priceless. Rather imagine another young career path has been slightly altered through industry-inflicted wounding.
Posted by: nancy | September 07, 2012 at 08:20 PM