Paul Rayon gave a lie to all he said in just the second paragraph of his speech, which of course he delivered without a Teleprompter because, as we all know, Obama could not do without one. Here is the Big Lie, borrowed from David Barton and all those embarked on a systematic brainwashing of Americans into believing, as that fat little turd Gomer Shuckabee once put it, "it's time to interpret the U. S. Constitution according to Christian principles." (America is the only country in the world with a cable news outfit willing to hire a former hick state evangelical governor -- just after Clinton, I might add -- to do a political talk show. The FCC should pull their license or take back any tax breaks or other perks at such blatant mixing of government and the Christian fucking religion.) Put on your night eye-masks so you won't have to see this:
"Each of these great moral ideas is essential to democratic government -- to the rule of law, to life in a humane and decent society. They are the moral creed of our country, as powerful in our time, as on the day of America's founding. They are self-evident and unchanging, and sometimes, even presidents need reminding, that our rights come from nature and God, not from government."
Does anyone see something wrong with this? No, no, not the awkward syntax, which loses you about where "They are self-evident..." begins. The equation of Judeo-Christian morality with God and our "rights." The use of "nature and God" as code words for fundamentalist teachings including creationism, the idea that all things were createdd at once in six days about six or seven thousand years ago. You might want to discuss as well the total contradiction of an Ayn Rand freak discussing anything called "God." Like the aptly named Rand Paul, the individualist, objectivist atheist of the 40s has become enslaved to myth, irrationality, superstition, and very fuzzy thinking (if you can call it that: there is a move on to ban "critical thinking" from our schools, and guess which political party has or had it in their platform?).
Didn't know Warren was speaking or, for that matter, who would be other than Obama and the Veep. Warren comes off as a smarty pants, which turns off some. Of course, she would be head of the deceptive trade practices and consumer protection agency if the Repubs hadn't blocked her nomination.
Regarding Elizabeth Warren, I just did a quick Google search and she is speaking at the convention. Here's a HuffPost blurb about it.
You answer your own question.
You waste time sitting there listening to all of the b.s. politicians spout. Why not watch something good or read a book, then catch the highlights of the convention on the news?
"So, Clint ... were you going to make an honest woman of Meryl Streep in "Bridges of Madison County," or did you just play her to get into her pants?"
Are you referring to 3-D Meryl, or empty chair Meryl?
Ummm ... yes?
Eastwood opened up a new era in ventriloquism by making the speaker and the dummy one and the same, but he still moved his lips too much. I hear the Democrats have planned a great comeback for their convention next week: they will have Betty White addressing an empty suit—if they can get Romney to show up.
I'll admit, I didn't watch it (and won't), but fact is that Eastwood just lost ANY cred he might have had with me with that stunt. He thinks he has Trouble with the Curve; my guess is that his troubles are just starting.
Oh, I'm sure the ditto-heads at the convention just ate it up, but the fact is that that act is going to wind up getting lampooned and parodied up the ying-yang (and for what I hear, it already IS). Worse, he upstaged Romney on what was supposed to be Mitt's night. NOT horribly smart.
That new movie of Clint's explains why he went on. He probably has his own money invested in the production and needs all the advertising he can get. Guess what? I refuse to go to his %$&#$@ movie. I also think I will avoid it on TV and DVD.
They wouldn't need Romney. A Japanese robot would do.