Posted July 30, 2004.
*Guest columnist Mike Inganamort is the president of the AU College Republicans this year. He is a junior in the School of Public Affairs.
"You have to take a speed-yawning course to get through some of this stuff, even when you're in the convention hall. I could see people nodding off, and I couldn't blame the ... If we were on for three hours a night, in a lot of places a test pattern would get better ratings." -Dan Rather, on the Democratic National Convention
With all due respect to the party regulars, Dan Rather got it right. A political junkie to the tenth degree, I slept very well as I missed a good portion of the convention coverage.
After all, what did I miss? The speeches did not come close to being newsworthy, repeating the same themes we've heard over and over again. Two Americas. Son of a mill worker. Vietnam veteran. Vietnam veteran. Vietnam veteran. The only thing new about these speeches was their positive tone.
And when there were no speeches, the delegates occupied their time by getting up and dancing. The Fleet Center DJ would alternate between Mo-Town and NOW 7, playing to an audience that liked a good bass-line more than they did Al Gore.
Even the media found themselves spinning in circles. How many times could they interview the youngest delegate and talk about blogs?
But isn't that what conventions have become lately? It's a concert where the party rock-stars perform for the party-groupies. This is not 1968; there are no epic political battles.
Today, even characters like Dennis Kucinich come back into the party fold, ignoring their past (and near universal) disagreements with the nominee and joining the chorus of praise.
To the keen eye, however, there was a tiny morsel of "news" to come out of the convention. Once you got beyond the lofty speeches and delegate dance parties, there was something missing.
It was something on the minds of all the delegates, yet it was barely uttered. Ah yes, that's it - a deep, intense, almost blind dislike of President Bush. Up until this point, the Democrats were running on high-octane Bush-rage. In Iowa, that guttural outburst of "YEA!" was the rallying cry for liberals and Bush-haters around the world. Now, at their cattle-call in Boston, nary an utterance of Bush could be found. "Bush, who?" an unsuspecting delegate may ask.
The Democrats thought they had you fooled by not saying the words "George W. Bush." Of course the many references to the anonymous evils of America never left any doubt in my mind who they were talking about.
In fact, President Bush's entire cabinet was on full display as Kerry explained what his cabinet would not be. For instance, I learned that as vice president, John Edwards will not have meetings with energy companies. Good to know. What will he do? Well, that's for another convention I guess. I also learned that a Kerry attorney general will not ignore the Constitution. What will his attorney general do? Stay tuned.
I learned that John Kerry will not privatize Social Security. But what will he do to save it? I listened when John Kerry said he will not have an arrogant foreign policy. Fair enough, but what will his foreign policy be? I got bored when John Kerry said he would not ignore education. Then I wondered, what is his education plan?
When the delegates go home, the DJ turns off the Mo-Town, and mounds of confetti are swept up, what remains for me, is a Democratic party that knows precisely what it opposes, but not what it supports. For four straight days I've heard about every program they oppose and every broad ideal they support.
Hope, respect, and honor are all wonderful things, but give me something concrete.
To respond to this column, submit a Letter to the Editor online by clicking on the link to the left, or e-mail Editor@TheEagleOnline.com.
