Disrupting a convention

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by The Return of the Raider, Aug 24, 2008.

  1. The Return of the Raider

    The Return of the Raider Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2003
    Messages:
    2,619
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    This probably isn't the first time this has happened. I find this to be kind of silly. What kind of paranoid schizophrenic do you have to be? Why not just let them do their thing, and leave them alone? This tells me that they are not confident in their own party's candidate, and message that they have to disrupt someone elses. Why not just do that during your own convention? Isn't that why they have them? It's sort of, "your turn to talk", right?


    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080825/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_loyal_opposition

     
  2. GMJ

    GMJ Suspended

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Messages:
    12,067
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yeah, it's called the Republican National Convention. It's stuff like this that makes me apathetic.
     
  3. The Return of the Raider

    The Return of the Raider Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2003
    Messages:
    2,619
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I find it somewhat amazing that Obama got past the Clintons. They are a huge force.

     
  4. Jurassic

    Jurassic Trend Setter

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    2,140
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I guess the Republicans didn't realize that the DNC is not a debate. Nobody likes a party crasher.
     
  5. JE

    JE Suspended

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Messages:
    6,547
    Likes Received:
    39
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    in between jobs right now
    What's to be expected?
     
  6. RipCity

    RipCity JBB JustBBall Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2006
    Messages:
    415
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    My understanding is it's a team of roughly 20 people who are there specifically to reply to negative campaign ads as well as the epic McCain bashing that is sure to come. And don't get it twisted, you can guarantee Democrats will have something similar at the RNC.
     
  7. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,957
    Likes Received:
    10,620
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    I'm sure the DNC has done the exact same thing in years past.

    Politics is a contact sport. No point in crying about it.
     
  8. Jurassic

    Jurassic Trend Setter

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    2,140
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Funny how you say there's no use in crying about it but yet the republican party is basically "crying" or at least whining about not getting equal coverage. True? It doesn't make sense to say that politics is a contact sport, or for the republicans to say that they want the chance to tell their side of the story when they have a perfectly good chance to do so at their own convention.

    *Awaits a long drawn out historical reference/explanation from Denny about how everything Republicans do is justified and how he himself is never wrong*

    Showing up at the DNC uninvited would be like a fan throwing a cup at a basketball player, be prepared for the consequences. I don't so much have a problem with them showing up there, but is that really the appropriate forum to get equal coverage? To me that is not even productive, to use another basketball analogy, it'd be like wearing a Celtics jersey to a Laker game. It happens all the time, most people wouldn't say anything to you but they'd think you are stupid.
     
  9. JE

    JE Suspended

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Messages:
    6,547
    Likes Received:
    39
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    in between jobs right now
    You can't talk about the admins that way!! >=(
     
  10. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,957
    Likes Received:
    10,620
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    Media manipulation is a big part of politics, too. If Obama doesn't have to pay MSNBC for ads because their network is a 24/7 Obama ad anyway, then he can spend his media $$$ elsewhere. So what?

    The DNC has had their own spin teams at the recent Republican Conventions, too. It's no big deal - it's where the press is, and it's the fastest way to combat all the bullshit spewed on the podium at the convention. So what?
     
  11. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,957
    Likes Received:
    10,620
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    OK, historical reference time.

    In 2004, Michael Moore got press credentials to the Republican Convention. So what?
     
  12. Jurassic

    Jurassic Trend Setter

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    2,140
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    38
    WTF How is that manipulation?! To me manipulation is what FOX news says concerning Obama, republican or democrat we can all agree on that.

    My problem isn't just that the Republicans will be there, imo that's American. A new clothing store opens up so protesters show up to picket the fact that they use sweatshop workers for example. But my point is that its silly to whine about not getting equal coverage.

    As for your Michael Moore example, do these republicans have press credentials as he did?

    Just curious Denny, do you really dislike Obama/Democrats or do you just like to play devil's advocate?
     
  13. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,957
    Likes Received:
    10,620
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    Fox News has press credentials. These RNC people are not set up INSIDE the convention, they're just there ready to fax and email and hand out materials in immediate response to the bullshit said inside the convention center (they can see that on TV).

    I dislike Democrats AND Republicans. I do not feel I fit in either party:

    • I am for cutting size of the federal government by 2/3 (from $3T/year to $1T/year).
    • I am in favor of legal abortion.
    • I am pro unions.
    • I am for low taxation.
    • I am generally anti-war, though I do feel we have to set things right where we've messed with people.
    • I oppose nationalized health care.
    • I favor free markets and near zero regulation.
    • I am a strong advocate of civil rights.
    I hate parties that put party over country, which I see the Democrats do a lot more of.

    Sorry if you haven't seen me bash republicans enough, though I am pretty consistent in doing so. I've frequently posted that I don't see many republicans I am a fan of - maybe 5 in total. I did like Reagan because he was mostly a libertarian, but no republican since is in that league, except for Ron Paul.
     
  14. The Return of the Raider

    The Return of the Raider Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2003
    Messages:
    2,619
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Let me see if I've got this straight. They don't go inside the convention to hear the speeches. They watch them on TV, outside, in the parking lot. They spend money and time to set up a moblie war room with satellite vans and communication.

    Basically, they are taking up parking spots in the parking lot, spending a bunch of time and money to do something that could just as easily get done from their news studio, while watching the convention from their television. Kind of redundant, don't you think?
     
  15. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,957
    Likes Received:
    10,620
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    The RNC isn't a news channel or organization. They want to be able to directly hand press releases in the parking lot to the reporters covering the convention. And maybe get interviewed in the process.

    The Democrats are going to do it, too, and have done it since 1992 (that I know of), if not earlier.

    http://www.npr.org/politics/convention2004/diary.html

    <fieldset class="dategroup"><legend>September 2, 2004</legend> The Art of the 'Spinja'

    <table> <tbody><tr> <td valign="top" width="440"> <table width="140" align="left"> <tbody><tr><td> [​IMG] Texas delegate Pat Peale wears a purple heart band-aid on her chin on the first day of the Republican Convention in New York, Aug. 30, 2004. · Reuters
    </td></tr> <tr><td>
    [​IMG] The Democrats have set up their war room in a building owned by the union UNITE! · Mike Pesca, NPR
    </td></tr> <tr><td>
    [​IMG] Signs adorn the Democratic war room in New York. · Mike Pesca, NPR
    </td></tr> </tbody></table> By Mike Pesca
    A dozen opposition researchers sitting at a dozen lap tops working on a collective dozen hours of sleep couldn't have invented anything juicier than what was handed to them by Virginian delegate Morton Blackwell on day one of the Republican National Convention.

    Blackwell thought that a good way to illustrate his belief that John Kerry exaggerated the severity of his war injuries was to make adhesive bandages with little pictures of hearts on them. The hearts were purple. Get it? Purple hearts.

    In case delegates missed the Voltairian political wit, a message accompanying the bandages read, "It was just a self-inflicted scratch, but you see I got a Purple Heart for it."

    If war reveals character, the immediate and overwhelming response to the band-aid affront revealed the character of the modern political war room. Bright young Democrats saw the purple hearts on TV and called out to Charlie Rangel, the Democratic representative from Harlem and Korean War Purple Heart recipient to denounce the band-aids. CNN ran with it. The president's press secretary was questioned about it. Soon Republican chairman Ed Gillespie had a nice chat with Blackwell and an end was put to the adorned adhesive bandages.

    This is how opposition research works -- when it works. The "war president" on the Republican side and a war hero who's "reporting for duty" on the Democratic side each have "war rooms" doing their bidding. The war rooms, a subset of the "rapid response teams," are made up of mostly twenty-somethings who've memorized impressive swaths of the Congressional Record and also have, as they say, the gift of Google.

    These warriors of wonkery, these stealthy "spinjas" fight it out in the media trenches mostly by hissing like wounded game cats at the slightest hint of offense. In Boston, the bloody shirt was waved, lowered to half mast and then waved some more over what the Republicans called anti-Bush "hate speech;" or what anyone who's ever rented "Sister Act II: Back in the Habit" might call a moderately unfunny Whoopi Goldberg joke.

    A month later and band-aids weren't simply bad attempts at prop comedy that only a few hundred Americans would have known about -- they were "outrageous and disgraceful" according to Democratic Party spokesman Matt Bennet.

    But while both the Democrats and the Republicans war rooms are on a desperate mission to find umbrage wherever it may lurk, there are telling differences between the two.

    The Democrats have set themselves up in a sprawling space in a building owned by the union UNITE! There's a 25-by-75 banner adorning the building that announces the presence of Kerry loyalists inside (note to Republican war room: I checked -- the banner was installed by union workers). But in Boston, the address of the Republican war room was a secret shared with reporters only off-the record; giving the place the feel of a Dick Cheney-undisclosed-location starter set.

    The main purpose of the Republican war room in Boston seemed to be to hold news conferences and issue a nightly press release rebutting the major points of each evening's speakers. Here in New York, dozens of volunteers pack the halls, t-shirts and posters are handed out, and almost a hundred workers busily crank out the responses.

    Then there's the signage. The Republicans went Spartan Chic: big posters on the walls with the claim that John Kerry was the most liberal senator. A ranking of all the other liberal senators hung to the right of Kerry. (For a war-room type rebuttal of the relevancy of this claim click here. )The Democratic war room, on the other hand, had as many talking points on the walls as there were planks in their platform: war casualties, unemployment figures, gasoline prices… I think I saw Rocky Colavito's lifetime fielding percentage up there. Then there were the little details, like computer home pages. About a third of the computer screens at the Republican shop were on the Drudge Report; the Democrats seemed to all be on Hotmail, or some other email home page. The Republicans handed out fake dollars with pictures of George Soros. The Democrats, just like with the band-aids, showed the good judgement to leave the prop comedy in the capable hands of Carrot Top.

    A lot of what I saw in each war room fit in with the so-clichéd-it's-true stereotypes: Republicans as models of button-down, perhaps even relentless, efficiency; Democrats as more loosely organized. Democratic spokesman Matt Bennet said he expected to get less media attention for his war room than the Republicans got for theirs in Boston, but he was pretty fair about his analysis.

    He reasoned that in Boston, the Republicans' rapid response team was the only alternative story to the convention. Here in New York, protesters clashing with police have pushed the Democratic war room that much further from the front page. Speaking of which, yesterday the NYPD released video of a suspect assaulting a policeman; and protestors have been posting video of the police on line. It seems that a form of opposition research has reached that conflict as well.<!--

    Related NPR Stories:



    [​IMG]Nearly 1,000 Protesters Arrested in NYC

    [​IMG]Taking Stock of Convention Protesters in New York -->
    </td></tr></tbody></table></fieldset>
     
  16. huevonkiller

    huevonkiller Change (Deftones)

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Messages:
    25,798
    Likes Received:
    90
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Occupation:
    Student.
    Location:
    Miami, Florida
    Indeed. :O

    Might I add Denny, that I think you look very slim today. :)
     
    Last edited: Aug 25, 2008
  17. RipCity

    RipCity JBB JustBBall Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2006
    Messages:
    415
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    The Republican party is complaining about the total bias in coverage toward Obama, as we should. When 2 of the 3 major news outlets are an on-going Obama commercial it raises certain questions about the impartiality of their final product. Secondly, you seem to think the Republicans showing up at the DNC is a big deal, when in fact Democrats will do the same at the RNC. When Democrats do something similar at the RNC are you going to be outspoken about that being inappropriate? I highly doubt it.


    Classic...not shocking that a Democrat would see nothing wrong with Barack having a ridiculous edge in press coverage. If it were the other way around you'd be pissed about it. The problems Republicans have with the press are well founded and absolutely correct. The Liberal media has decided already that Barack will be the next President, furthermore they've decided it's time for a Black president. Never mind the fact that he is totally unqualified for it, never mind the fact that he's essentially a socialist in ideals and political opinion. Who cares about the actual politics of this campaign...IT'S TIME FOR A CHANGE!...we haven't really identified what that change is or weather it will be for good or worse, but it's time...right?
     
  18. Real

    Real Dumb and Dumbest

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2007
    Messages:
    2,858
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Instead of whining about what the Republicans are doing, ignore them, and hit back harder.

    If you get hit in the face, and don't punch back, you're going to get hit again, and again, and again...
     
  19. Jurassic

    Jurassic Trend Setter

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    2,140
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    38
    That would be like Best Buy complaining that there are more Circuit City commercials on tv. If Obama's "ad placement"/advertising has been more effective than McCain's, or if he is more newsworthy, then don't whine. Blame the Republican party, well actually just McCain's campaign, for not working as effectively.

    Besides, Obama could just as easily complain that Fox News constantly smears him with racist and untrue slander. Have you ever heard McCain called a terrorist on Fox? No, but Obama didn't send people to go camp outside Fox news and hold signs that say "McCain is a terroist"? NO.

    Actually show me where I said that it is a big deal? This is a quote from my second post in this thread:

    So next time read before commenting please.

    WOW. First of all, I'm not very much into party politics. I vote for who I feel the better candidate will be. So simply because I APPEAR to support Obama in this thread I'm a classic Democrat?


    So basically you're complaints are:

    1. Barrack has a ridiculous edge in press coverage.
    2. LIBERALS want him to be the next president (LOL).
    3. You don't think it's time for a black president.
    4. You don't feel that Obama has defined "change".

    As for the edge in press, that is the party's own fault, it goes both ways as Obama gets negative press for some ridiculous reasons, agree? How can you complain that Liberal media supports the liberal candidate more? If you don't think it's time for a black president you are ignorant, but entitled to your opinion. I've never understood the whole, "it's time for/are we ready for a black president" question, its silly to me. And Obama has defined change, study his platform more closely.
     
  20. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,957
    Likes Received:
    10,620
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    Democrats are complaining about Obama's coverage drowning out their own candidates. Ed Rendell is a Democrat, governor of PA:

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0808/Rendell_Obama_coverage_was_embarrassing.html

    Rendell: Obama coverage was embarrassing

    Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell was supposed to give “closing remarks” during this afternoon’s Shorenstein Center-sponsored panel discussion with all three Sunday show moderators — NBC’s Tom Brokaw, ABC’s George Stephanopoulous and CBS’s Bob Schieffer — but instead, he opened up a can of worms about bias in 2008 election coverage

    "Ladies and gentleman, the coverage of Barack Obama was embarrassing," said Rendell, in the ballroom at Denver's Brown Palace Hotel. "It was embarrassing."

    Rendell, an ardent Hillary Rodham Clinton supporter during the primaries, now backs Obama in the general election. Brokaw and Rendell began debating campaign coverage, including the on-air comments by Lee Cowan, and when MSNBC came up, Rendell went after the cable network.

    “MSNBC was the official network of the Obama campaign," Rendell said, who called their coverage "absolutely embarrassing."

    Chris Matthews, Rendell said, "loses his impartiality when he talks about the Clintons.”

    At that point, PBS's Judy Woodruff, who was moderating the moderators event, said: "Why don’t we let Governor Rendell sit down."

    That was met with applause from the crowd of big-time media figures, which included Arianna Huffington, Gwen Ifill, Al Hunt, and Chuck Todd.

    Woodruff allowed Brokaw to respond, and in defending the network, he said that Matthews and Keith Olbermann are "not the only voices" on MSNBC.

    (This post has been updated with additional quotes)
     

Share This Page