I watched the speech while I was on the phone so I didn’t listen to any of it. But one thing I noticed is that his head is on a swivel. He swings between teleprompters so quickly it almost makes you dizzy.

McCain is not going to be able to top it.

Luckily, the election is far enough away that Obama can be torn down piece by piece.

Everything we expected-entirely rhetorical hogwash. Empty suit with fantastic writers and Soros money building stages. Here we come (with issues).

It was a thing of beauty for those who’ve already tasted the Kool Aid, but the reactions of Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews and Andy Sullivan are not what’s important.

I’m extremely confidant that this speech didn’t have a lasting impact where it matters… with people on the fence. Obama will likely come out of this convention with a bounce, but the angry, divisive, person we saw tonight is NOT the Obama we’ve been sold by the media and the Obama campaign.

You don’t really have to watch tonight because you already knew what he was going to say:

The economy sucks, the war sucks, McCain sucks, America sucks, and I’m the only solution to the problem. Hopechange, hopechange, puppies and sunshine, and pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!

I watched the Cowboys 3rd stringers vs. the Vikings 3rd stringers instead.

But he doesn’t have to. He has never attempted to match Saint Barry in rhetorical flourish or eloquence (i.e. adeptness with a teleprompter). Yes, it was a “good” speech in that it was moving and inspiring. But, so what? That is to be expected from him at this point; no one of any political stripe doubts that he can deliver moving and inspiring words. They doubt whether there is any substance behind it.

McCain does not have to top or even match this speech and if he tried it would probably backfire (come off as insincere and gimmicky). What he has to do is deliver a solid, grounded, and convincing response. One that reinforces his gravitas, something he has in abundance and Obama, for all his money, eloquence and showiness (and perhaps because of these things), lacks and will not possess any more on November 4.

Before the speech, it seemed to be his normal self. After the speech, he sounded somewhat hoarse…almost like he had just gotten done wearing his voice out screaming or something. Odd.

First thing I noticed–where did his gray hair go?? Did he run out of Liquid Paper?? Second thing I noticed–Does he think he’s Baracrotes? What’s with the ACRAPolis Temple getup?? I thought he was trying to distance himself from the “Greek” rumors, and now this??

Anyway, this “speech” will go down in history as one of the lamest, nastiest, most ridiculous (ok, Baracrotes, we believe you that homosexuals can’t visit their partners in the hospital—yeah, right!)

If he gets a “bounce” I’d be very surprised–if so, it will be very short lived.

I believe we can all agree that the country will vote for a black candidate for President–the question is really whether the country will put color before experience and qualification in an effort to prove its color-blindness.

I have to admit I listened, didn’t watch, so maybe it was better with visuals.

A long, boring stump speech, tedious and strangely angry delivery.

This speech will be quickly and mercifully forgotten.

showed me something and convinced me of something else.

First…it showed me that Sen. Obama believes he is in more trouble than his followers wish to acknowledge or admit. The themes being repeated the most are about the tax cuts, the capital gains, I noticed the comment about country music and American Flags. He understands he is in trouble and is having to move swiftly to the right if he has any chance of winning in November.

He, and his staff, understand now, clearly, that the country is not swallowing what he is serving for lunch and he better change the menu for dinner or we (American voting public) will look for a different place to eat (can someone say Continential/BBQ).

The problem with this strategy is that people will see through him. The 95% thing is number one. While most people will be like, wow! 95% only the rich guys are getting stuck, enough people, pundits and hopefully journalists will call him out on the fact that only 50% pay taxes and whoops there goes that point.

I think you can follow my logic. I dont think that the American people will be fooled by his words, though the lights that are still flashing in their eyes from the glitz may blind them for a few days (hence the polls for the next week)

Second…I have thought, at least hopefully, that McCain would eek out a win, but after tonight, I fully believe McCain will win, and possibly convincingly. He has shown, proven if you will, to be a person that outlasts his opponents, and quite convincingly wins in the end.

He did it in Vietnam with his captors. While they put the soldiers on show for the liberals and international media, he refused to play the game (not going home when offered). He outlasted them, and in doing so defeated them. He has done the same with the Republican field in the primaries. Who, 18 or even 12 months ago, would have thought he would have been our nominee, but, he proved us wrong, out lasting the other candidates and winning early, and convincingly.

He will do the same with the inexperienced Senator Obama. Maybe if the Democratic nominee had more experience he would be able to outfox and outplay and outlast McCain, but not now. McCain is building in momentum, he was and has been the last four weeks and even with this convention bump it will not be close to enough to erase that momentum.

McCain will continue to build, and as people take a look at him this fall, they will increasingly see that the choice is obvious. While McCain is not the favorite of Republicans (this one included) he is a solid choice, and now that he is onboard with SCOTUS nominees, I think he will be a solid President (sans the myth of Global Warming).

I just think that he will outlast Obama and in the end we will all scratch our heads and go, how on earth did this guy beat Obama. Moreso our friends on the other end of the political spectrum.

Barack Obama gave a great speech. So did Joe Biden. So did Bill Clinton. So did Hillary Clinton. What the last three have in common that the first one lacks is a track record. Joe Biden is the one that impressed me most of all, not only because of the sincerity and eloquence that he expressed his views with, but because of his long track record backing up his words. Bill and Hillary said what they had to say, but in the end, their assertions that Obama has the qualifications to be president were just that: assertions without proof to back them up.

Obama talks beautifully and movingly, but ultimately talk is cheap. Where’s the beef? Where is the record of action, not talk? It isn’t there because Obama has not had the time to accumulate it. He’s been too busy running for president to build up a record.

His clarion call for action in Afghanistan has no weight. When the chips were down, and he was called to his duty as a senator to chair his committee to hold hearings on Afghanistan, he blew them off to pursue his own personal ambition. That dereliction of duty is indicative of Senator Obama and defines him, as all actions do. He talks a great story, but he has never actually done anything.

There are probably thousands of taxicab drivers and barber shop philosophers throughout the nation who have been not only vocal, but eloquent, on the need to take action in Afghanistan, but that does not qualify any of them to be president of the United States.

For all his golden oratory, Obama is still a lightweight whose rhetoric does not match John McCain’s long record of service and achievement. Ever hear the phrase “the wisdom of experience”? Experience is a critical component of judgement. John McCain has both in spades.

Even though I’m a partisan, I thought the speech was a big let down. The crowd seemed underwhelmed.

Sure, the McCain and Bush bashing got some cheers and the staging was good, but the content was trite. This was the same speech we get form every Democratic convention and I think the objective audience will realize that it is just a different kind of “more of the same.”

McCain should be able to inspire and challenge in a way that seemed hollow for Obama.

I hope the following will make sense and will ask a small, but valid question.

In some of the responses in this thread, as well as some of the McCain supporter responses to the Obama speech delivered on the 24-hr news channels, I hear something of a “He hurt our feelings” attitude. Obama criticized our candidate. He went negative with one vicious attack after another!

Will someone who shares this line (and I fully acknowledge the presence of many on this board who specifically rejected that kind of response), how can Republicans even consider calling Obama’s speech negative when — and this is but one example — Senator McCain on multiple occasions has declared that Senator Obama would be willing to lose a war to win an election?

I’m not asking for a defense of the McCain attack — You may think it’s effective and spot-on; it’s a free country. Simply tell me how, when your nominee essentially accuses Obama of being a traitor at heart, you can even think of calling what Obama did in his speech as too negative?

McCain’s denials notwithstanding, when you say your opponent would lose a war to gain personal political advantage, you are attacking your opponent’s patriotism (true patriots don’t lose wars to win elections!). If that’s the character of your kettle, how do you dare say anything about the other side’s pot?

Thanks for reading and responding,
Bill Coley

I would love to see a YouTube put together of Obama talking about how if you have no experience and no ideas to offer, you attack your opponent, and then follow that immediately with the beginning of his speech where he does nothing but attack McCain.

I wonder what the carbon footprint for tonight’s event was?

In all seriousness, it was truly a great speech. The optics, the choreography, the soaring rhetoric that comes so naturally to him. You can see why his supporters would be swooning, and it was an historic moment on the anniversary of King’s speech. That being said, however, for anyone who is not already in the tank for Obama once you dig even an inch deep you start to see that reality doesn’t match the rhetoric, he can’t pay for what he promises, he distorted McCain’s record, he’s still a classic liberal, and he still has no experience.

It takes more than a great speech to be President.

I didn’t watch the speech, but I read the text that was given to media before the speech was delivered and it was entirely underwhelming.

I can’t believe that people think this was a great speech. Have they not read Kennedy’s or Reagan’s or Stevenson’s acceptance speeches?

From these and other nominees, you could take away at least a few lines that are very memorable, in some speeches, entire paragraphs, but I didn’t see anything in this speech that would merit its inclusion in a collection of great speeches. It’s value it seems only comes from its historic significance as the acceptance speech of the first black nominee.

It’s hard to tell if it was deliberately bad or if this was a case of hubris and unwillingness to turn it over to professional speechwriters.

Why has no one helped me to understand the 3rd paragraph of this posting?

Should I be concerned, or not concerned about possible dual loyalties among Jewish White House staffers?

Why is the paragraph in parenthesis?

Not a great speech, but still a good one.

If I watched Obama without chemical assistance, my mind would be constantly throwing distracting flags for his logical or factual bs.

To try to understand how his speech is seen by swing voters, the ones Obama has to reach, you need a couple of drinks. The vast majority of voters with IQ above room temperature have already heard everything they need to decide, and already know with 99+% certainty how they will vote in November, whether it’s for McCain or Obama.

The remaining 20% or so contain a tiny percentage who are seriously weighing conflicting priorities, where each candidate is better on some important issues. But the vast majority of undecideds are mentally challenged voters, who cast their votes on the basis of emotional gut feelings. For those voters, the ones that Obama wants but doesn’t already have in his pocket, it was a pretty good speech.

Both the beginning and even more so the end were very good on emotional imagery, empathy, and yes even patriotic sentiment of Americans uniting for our common good. Where Obama blew it was with the pitiful attempt at policy in the middle. Not like the policy “analysis” was intellectually demanding, but for the morons who dominate the undecided, it was their cue to grab the remote and switch to the “Law & Order SVU” rerun or whatever. Thus they missed the climax of the speech, which was really inspiring to someone who had a couple of generously served vodka gimlets or the IQ of a typical undecided voter.