Conventional Thoughts…

Some reflections on last night, in no particular order:

• I was extremely impressed by Clinton, and kept thinking that she would have been a formidable running mate. Did Obama err seriously in not choosing her? People are also talking wistfully about how she would have been a better candidate that Obama, and that Democrats might be suffering from buyer’s remorse. We need to remember, however, that the passionate Hillary Clinton we saw last night is light years from the focus-group fixated cipher who thought she had the thing locked up from day one. The gruelling campaign transformed Hillary in ways that none of us thought possible. Last night, she did what she had to do, including looking her supporters in the eye and telling them that it’s about the issues, not the person. I think she could have done more to expose McCain’s shoddy economics, but perhaps that was not her job.

• Then whose job was it? You know the Republicans will have four full days of rapid foam-at-the-mouth full frontal assaults on the character and positions of Barack Obama. Kerry’s big huge mistake four years ago was trying to stay above the fray (only to the savaged by the Bushites a week later). We kept hearing that this time would be different, but is it? The convention needs to pick the most inspiring and forceful speakers, and instead, they seemed to pick every single prominent woman– most of whom are neither inspiring nor forceful. The convention also seemed to drift at times, and what’s with the musical interludes? Come on, the McCain economic positions are so easy to attack: a very rich man coming out for tax cuts for very rich men, an energy policy that does not make sense, voting against health care coverage for children, a willingness to blow up the deficit and leave the burden to future generations. And yet the biggest soundbite of the night was tax credit for big oil. Fine, we get it, it’s typical Republican crony capitalism, but there are more important issues on the table, people.

• And then there was Brian Schweitzer, governor of Montana. I’d never seen him speak before, and he was outstanding. So far, his is the most memorable speech of the convention, making him the “Barack Obama” of 2008! He laid into the McCain energy plan, scoring points right, left, and center- all the while grinning and displaying his folksy charm. If you have not seen this, go to youtube right now! He is passionate on energy, and manages to effectively demolish the McCain position that drilling will solve all our problems. And the floor loved it. I think we’re be hearing a lot more from this guy.

• What can I say about Bob Casey? This was supposed to have been the attempt to assuage pro-life Democrats, outraged by the treatment of Casey’s father in 1992. It was supposed to heal the rift. By no means charismatic, Casey is a moderately effective speaker. Michael Sean Winters thinks his very appearance promoted unity within the party, and would appeal to Catholic voters. On this one, though, I’m more with Peter Nixon, wishing Casey would have said more. All he basically said was that Obama disagreed with him on abortion, but let him speak anyway, so wasn’t that great etc etc. Sorry, but this is not good enough. Why could Casey not have publicly supported the agenda of Democrats for Life, pointing out that opposition to abortion was fully consistent with the Democrat’s support for human dignity and for the least among us in other areas? Why could he have not said that while he was not going to persuade his party on the legality of abortion, he needed them to appreciate the need to minimize the number of abortions, and that abortion was not something virtuous? Would that have been so hard? I’m with Winters that the natural home for Catholics is the Democratic party. And yet, with an attitude for barely concealed intolerance toward anybody who deviates from the radical NARAL-Planned Parenthood line, is it any wonder that they cannot break through convincingly in the battlefield states?

• There has been much criticism of Mark Warner, and his speech was all-too-reminiscent of the warm fuzziness of the 2004 convention. He too refrained from attacking McCain on economics, even in obvious areas. Nonetheless, I thought his message of the past versus the future was a powerful one, and his reference to China “going for gold” surely resonated. The more I think of it, this could be a compelling narrative. Bill Clinton drove me crazy in 1996 with his “building a bridge to the 21st century” mantra, which seemed forced and vacuous. But the global economy has changed dramatically over the last decade, and technical progress continues to proceed rapidly, and economic insecurity has mushroomed. If Obama can craft a narrative of himself being ready for the challenges of the future, willing to actively take the initiative and shape events, all the while McCain remains wedded to the past (culture war of the 1960s, phony economics of the 1980s, militarism of the Bush years), and in the process makes sly references to his advanced age and his befuddlement over the internet and other modern technology, then I think he has a compelling message. If done right, it could become the next “morning in America”. But McCain’s economics has to be repudiated forcefully before this will work.

• Best lines: Bob Casey on McCain not being a maverick but Bush’s sidekick; Hillary’s Twin Cities reference to Bush and McCain; and Schweitzer’s riff on how they couldn’t find enough oil even if they drilled in all of McCain’s backyards, including the ones he doesn’t know about!

• It was poignant seeing Ted Kennedy, now facing his mortality, avoiding sentiment and instead rising up to give one last great speech, reprising his “dream never dies” speech of 1980, referring especially to universal health care. He really is the last of his kind, whatever you think of him.