Author: N.Z. Bear

My opinion hasn’t really changed; slow start, laundry-list middle, but a very strong finish. I will say that Bush’s speech delivery has improved hugely since the 2000 campaign; he’s beginning to master his own tone of mixing conviction and passion with folksy I’m-a-regular-guy humor.
Ultimately, though, my opinion on judging political speeches is the same as my opinion on judging popular art: there are no objective standards, and it doesn’t really matter what I think. If lots of people like it, it was good, by definition. And by that measure, media reports this morning suggest that Bush scored a win last night.

Houston, we have

George W. Bush: The Main Event
11:13: And that’s all, folks. Overall, a deeply erratic speech. When Bush spoke about security and terrorism, he showed vision, and sincerity, and absolutely rocked. But the middle section on domestic issues was horrible; a simple laundry list of promises and pork, much of which he promised four years ago and hasn’t delivered. Overall, I’d give it a B+. And I need more beer.
11:12: Ooooh, who was that cute redhead they just showed?
11:11: “This young century will be liberty century”. Sorry, but that one just fell flat, even with the convention audience. Love the sentiment, but a lame line.
11:07: Wow, we’re suddenly watching Last Comic Standing! And even more shocking, Bush has actually got the lines! “People sometimes have to correct my English. I knew I had a problem when Arnold Schwarzenegger did it.” Beautiful.
11:05: “Even when we don’t agree, at least you know what I believe and where I stand.” Nice.
11:00: This is the core of it, and why I support Bush. We are at a point where realpolitik and morality intersect and overlap: where it truly is in America’s best interest to ensure democracy and freedom is spread across the world. This is where Bush shines, and why I support him.
11:00: My helpful commenters point out that the “four more years” chants are to drown out liberal hecklers. Got it now. Give me a break, I’m typin’ a bit fast here (and drinking even faster).
10:59: America is “The greatest force for good on this earth.” Guaranteed to make some cringe, but I think it’s a good one. If you don’t agree with that statement, don’t vote for Bush.
10:57: Another direct slam, on Kerry’s sneer that those who supported the Iraq war were bribed/coerced. Bush says they are: “Allies that deserve the respect of all Americans, not the scorn of a politican.” Now that was a good line, both in substance and in delivery. We’re getting back on track here.
10:55: Wow. Direct attack on Kerry on the $87B vote for funding the war. Interesting choice, but I think a good one. “When pressed, he said it was a complicated matter. There’s nothing complicated about supporting our troops in combat.”
10:48: Nice segment on the decision to attack Iraq. “… or do I take the word of a madman? Faced with that choice, I will defend America every time.”
10:48: I am awestruck by the stupidity of the delegates who think it is a good idea to interrupt their candidate’s speech by chanting “four more years”.
10:46: Back on terrorism. Safe ground! Thank heavens.
10:44: Beer output accomplished, additional input procured.
10:40: “The unborn child”? Abortion!??!?!?!? You’re bringing up abortion? Have you fallen off the wagon, you stupid Texan? Are you high? Are you high right now?
10:40: I’d estimate that Bush looses about .01 in the polls for every minute those idiots chant “four more years”.
10:39: Shit. Zero more beer to input, and there needs to be some beer output shortly.
10:38: “He’s proposed more than two trillion in spending so far, and that’s a lot even for a Senator from Massachusetts.” Ok, that was nice.
10:37: George seems extremely pleased with himself to have a web page. Maybe we should get him up on LiveJournal?
10:36: Note to self: be careful to turn off snark when responding to coworkers IMing at the same time liveblogging political events.
10:35: “The soft bigotry of low expecations”. Hey, that’s line! Well, kinda.
10:30: This isn’t a vision, it’s a laundry list. And it’s not even a very good laundry list .
10:25: Is it suddenly Spring? Did I miss seven months? Am I watching the State of the Union, or a convention speech?
10:24:OK, this speech blows. Tell me a story, damnit. I don’t give a shit that 2/3 of mothers now work outside the home.
10:22: “Restraining Federal spending”? He said that with a straight face, too. Spoons, call your office.
10:21: So far, Bush is getting his butt kicked by Pataki, for crissakes. Not a single money-line yet in this slog.
10:19: I need more beer.
10:18: By the way, I hope all the liberal bloggers/commenters are paying attention. Did I forget to mention that I’ve never liked Bush very much, and that his speechifyin’ drives me bugshit? Mine is a loyalty of policy, not of personality…
10:17: Oh dear. “Nothing will hold us back” is the theme? Please no.
10:16: “Tonight I will tell you where I stand”. Yes, please! Get on with it. And by the love of god, shoosh the 4-more-years chanting idiots.
10:15: This is going nowhere. Pick up the pace, George.
10:14: A Cheney tribute? This is not looking good. Oh, nevermind. Thanking the wife too. Although on second thought, I’m not so sure if I was Laura I’d be too thrilled about being lumped in with Dick.
10:12: So far, I’m not with the vibe. The valley is in our view? Huh?
10:11: Yes Stephen, I’m drinking.
10:10: He’s letting the applause / chanting go on too long, if ya ask me.
10:08: Not sure about the tie.
George W. Bush: The Clip Show
10:05: Isn’t using “Amazing Grace” in a campaign ad a violation of McCain-Feingold? Kinda the rhetorical equivalent of WMDs…
10:04: What the hell is with all the sirens in the background? A bit much, isn’t it?
10:03: Firefighters! Everybody loves firefighters. (Wonkette, call your office…)
10:01: Hey, isn’t that the guy with Alec Baldwin in Red October?
“Son, Roooski’s don’t take a dump without a plan…”
Interlude
Mission Accomplished: Additional beer retrieved. Anderson Valley IPA, if you were curious, which is ex-cellent. And with this damned jump-jive crap music, I’m glad I have it…
Governor Pataki
9:55: Unlike Stephen, I foolishly haven’t had dinner yet. Severe tactical error. But I am going to get another beer, and Bush can damned well wait.
9:52 : On deposing Saddam: “Some people have called this an abuse of power. I call it progress.”
9:47: On Kerry’s positions: “This is a candidate who has to Google his own name to find out where he stands!” Quote of the convention thus far.
9:46: I hate these little “And he did” chant-with-the-speaker bits. But maybe I need more beer.
9:44:On comparing Kerry’s record to “That way they’ll be able to see the difference, which is that President Bush has a record of achievement.” Ouch.
9:42: Pataki’s material is good, but his cheery delivery on the 9/11 stuff is creeping me out.
All times GOP-local-time. All quotes are approximate, best-efforts based on live typescription; your mileage may vary.

For those of you geeks who can’t be bothered to use one of those old fashioned tee-vee’s, the live feed seems to be holding up much better than C-SPAN’s under the stream. Getting a nice consistent stream from the RNC folks.
I might liveblog Bush’s speech. I might not. We’ll see…

From the spam inbox today:
I love your website!
Your creative talents have produced a killer site. You’re only missing one thing. Visitors.
Worst. Timing.

Powerline’s Hindrocket to the soft bigotry of low expectations:
Whatever. It’s good, in any event, to see an article about me in the Strib that doesn’t slander me.

We’re about to hit a milestone here at TTLB, probably on the overnight or early tomorrow morning, if I had to take a guess. I’ve temporarily moved the SiteMeter counter up top to commemorate the moment…
Update: Well, that’s that! The counter’s back down at the bottom, until the next million. Thanks to Janes for pushing us over the edge, and for saving a nice screenshot of the event. And an even greater thanks to all of you who have visited, commented, read, linked, and otherwise supported my efforts here over the past 2+ years!

So Kerry is the deck chairs a bit, adding former Clinton spokesperson Joe Lockhart, among others, to his campaign Dream Team.
Joe Lockhart?
Let’s be serious: can anyone actually imagine Kerry, or his senior advisors, suddenly interrupting a staff meeting to declare: “We’re screwed! Get Joe Lockhart on the horn — he’s the only one who can save our asses!”
I don’t think so. Joe’s a nice guy and all, but a Rove-like Svengali he ain’t. Flacking for Oracle might be heavy on the dukats, but it isn’t exactly the political big leagues.
But forget Joe for a moment (who?). The even worse news for Kerry is that despite the exceptional job his campaign has been doing at executing political hari-kari, the Bush team hasn’t even started to attack him yet. All the damage thus far has been self-inflicted, or at the hands of the Swift Vets (also arguably self-inflicted, allowing that karma sometimes takes a while to come around — but it does come around). And don’t give me any nonsense about how Bush is behind the Swifties; these guys have hated Kerry’s guts for thirty years, and they show every intention of hating him for thirty more.
No, Kerry’s recent Swift-Vet-driven collapse is the political equivalent of a boxer being clocked by a random spectator on his way to the ring. (OK, a not-quite random spectator, more like one who’s been nursing a 30-year grudge). Somewhere, Karl Rove is sitting in quiet misery, gloomily considering the prospect that by the time he’s allowed to open up on Kerry with the big guns, the poor sod may have already self-destructed. Takes all the fun out of it.
So Kerry, fading in the polls, disliked by the electorate, faces the unappealing prospect of not only the traditional post-convention bounce for Bush, but that the true campaign hasn’t even started yet. Who knows what surprises Rove & Co. have in store for the hapless Senator? All we can know for sure is that they’ve got some, and they’re unlikely to be of the pleasant sort.
I think it’s going to be a rough September, Senator…

I’m pleased to announce the public launch of a new project: Truth 2004!
The intent of Campaign Truth is to provide a portal where bloggers and other interested folk can gather links to information which sheds light on where the candidates stand on issues in the 2004 Presidential Campaign. By harnessing the collaborative power of bloggers that has been proven by sites such as The Command Post and by the influence of the blogosphere itself, Campaign Truth will provide a place where voters can come to get past the story-of-the-moment in the media, and dig deep into candidates’ true positions on the issues that matter to them most.
The site is now live and open to the public, but is extremely light on actual content. That’s where you come in! I’m putting out a call for assistance to any and all interested bloggers and blog-readers who would like to contribute. It’s easy: just post comments on the relevant topic entry for the candidate you’ve found info on, and the information will be periodically rolled up into the body of the page by the editors (well, editor: at the moment, it’s just me.)
For more information, see the FAQ, or just drop me a line.
The site is an evolving work in progress, so suggestions, comments, and feedback are very much welcome.
I hope you’ll all join me in this effort to bring a focus on substance to the 2004 campaign. Because as the banner says: it’s about the issues, stupid!

Overheard at Kerry campaign headquarters:
“OK, so what the hell do we do now?”
“How about B?”
“That was Plan A, moron.”

Jeff Jarvis has been one of the few voices the blogosphere for our participation thus far in the 2004 campaign. Jeff is a stand-up blogger (and person, I assume, although I haven’t had the pleasure of meeting him in ‘real’ life), but I think he’s missing the boat slightly when he says he’s “been a bit disheartened in recent days by the incessant gotchaism of some blogs and more commenters in our new medium.”
Jeff doesn’t point to specific examples, so I have no idea whether he includes TTLB in his disappointment, although he’s made clear he takes a dim view of the Swift Vets controversy in general.
I’d argue that we in the blogosphere have two roles: first, to try to bring stories that aren’t getting attention into the public eye, and second, to ensure that the stories that are being widely reported are covered accurately and completely. We try to change the focus of the debate, and we try to improve the quality of the debate.
Focusing on the Swift Vets story (although Jeff specifically did not limit his comments to it), it seems undeniable that the blogosphere played some role in moving the story into the public focus. But to be frank, blogger triumphalism aside, I think that was going to happen anyway. The Swift Vets had a compelling story, and it was only a matter of time before Big Media walls crumbled and they received a great deal of attention. Whether focusing on their story was a good thing or a bad thing is, I think, a matter for every voter to decide for themselves. I think it is relevant, I believe it is safe to say Jeff thinks it is not.
But now, with the Swift Vets story in full public view, we’re in our secondary role: improving the quality of debate. And I have to say, I think our performance has been absolutely stellar. Blogs like Captain’s Quarters, BeldarBlog, and others have been devoting serious effort to the story, and arguably doing more hard-core research than professional journalists seem willing to devote. And of course I would hope my own contributions in researching 527’s, campaign financing, and other topics will be viewed as useful, substantive contributions to the debate.
So, to Jeff, I’d say: cheer up, friend. The new media which you’ve done so much to foster is young, and we’re passionate, and perhaps sometimes a little too eager to go for the quick kill. But overall, I think we’re doing a damned fine job of adding to the public debate — and we’ll get better from here…

I remain rather puzzled by the fact that the Kerry campaign has not posted an official announcement of the FEC complaint they filed last Friday. The fact that it cannot be found on the Kerry-Edwards site has led me to suspect that perhaps it wasn’t actually filed after all.
So, to attempt to clarify matters, I sent the following inquiry to the Kerry-Edwards campaign this morning:
To John Kerry and the Kerry-Edwards Campaign:
I publish the weblog ‘The Truth Laid Bear‘ , and have recently been covering the controversy surrounding the Swift Boat Veteran ads, 527 organizations, and your campaign’s response to these issues.
It has been reported in the media that the Kerry-Edwards campaign filed a complaint with the FEC on Friday, August 20th, alleging coordination between the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth 527 and the Bush-Cheney campaign.
It puzzles me, however, that I can find no official mention of this filing on the Kerry-Edwards campaign website (see here).
In the interest of clarifying the record, I would appreciate the following:
1) A confirmation from the campaign that the FEC complaint was officially submitted to the FEC on Friday, August 20th (or, if it was not, when it is expected to be submitted).
2) A copy of the actual FEC complaint. As I am sure you know, the Bush-Cheney campaign submitted a similar complaint alleging collusion between the Kerry campaign and 527’s; they have put the actual complaint and other documentation online here. I urge you to do the same, and allow voters to review the complaint for themselves, and make up their own minds as to the validity of your claims.
Although I am a simple ‘blogger’, I would appreciate your treating this request with the respect you would accord to those in the professional media. Any response received to this message may be published on my weblog.
Thank you…
-N.Z. Bear
The Truth Laid Bear

I sent the inquiry to press@johnkerry.com, and submitted it as a general comment on the campaign website. If you are similarly curious, I urge you to take a moment and do the same. As always, I would ask that you be courteous and polite (and feel free to cut-and-paste my message); no need to get obnoxious with the folks answering the Inbox. Perhaps if the campaign receives enough inquiries, we’ll actually get to see the mysterious complaint…

From Paper of Record:
The Republicans, in an e-mail message to reporters, listed several Democrats who they said showed connections between Democratic 527 groups, Mr. Kerry’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee. Among them were Zack Exley, the former organizing director for MoveOn.org’s political action committee who now works for Mr. Kerry’s campaign; Jim Jordan, the former campaign manager for Mr. Kerry who now works as a consultant for the liberal groups America Coming Together and the Media Fund; and Joe Sandler, who is a lawyer for both the Democratic National Committee and MoveOn.org.
Emphasis mine: Gotta love that passive reporting! Heaven forbid that the Times might actually do some research and establish whether connections exist or not on their own. Nah, why bother — there’s a staff meeting in twenty minutes and this cruller is tay-stee.
Hello! It’s over here. At least steal some solid information, for crissakes. Look, I’ll turn my back for a minute, go ahead, I’ll pretend not to notice…