<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>The Moderate Voice - Latest Comments in On Not Watching Michelle Obama</title><link>http://themoderatevoice.disqus.com/</link><description></description><atom:link href="https://themoderatevoice.disqus.com/on_not_watching_michelle_obama_40/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Aug 2008 10:11:39 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: On Not Watching Michelle Obama</title><link>http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/chelsea-clinton/22095/on-not-watching-michelle-obama/#comment-1851231</link><description>&lt;p&gt;This was the extra-feel-good "warmup" first night (start of the show -- this year it won't merely merit the derogatory term "circus," such as the Dems 1992 convention) and the Dems appeal anyway to emotion over reason so much of the time.  It was meant to be touchy-feely.  (I wanted to know what an Obama administration will do starting next year and want Michelle Obama's insight into her husband's specific political and economic goals rather than hear her talk mainly about herself and her husband as people accompanied by a little Dem-party-general touchy-feely stuff.)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;You realize that the Clintons' role has to be strongly touchy-feely as well.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Obama's outdoor speech will be an obvious spectacle.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;But maybe sometime during this convention we will hear concrete (not emotive) attacks on the GOP _plus_ mention of specific agenda items on which we can better evaluate the candidates and the parties.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">DLS</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 26 Aug 2008 10:11:39 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: On Not Watching Michelle Obama</title><link>http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/chelsea-clinton/22095/on-not-watching-michelle-obama/#comment-1850705</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Neocon,&lt;br&gt;I didn't see that at all.I saw tons of teary eyes and transfixed expressions. Michelle's speech was not a rabble rouser. It was a heart warmer.  To jump and down and cheer would have been out of place considering the speech.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">elrod</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 26 Aug 2008 09:26:32 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: On Not Watching Michelle Obama</title><link>http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/chelsea-clinton/22095/on-not-watching-michelle-obama/#comment-1850197</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I listened to her speak.   The thing that has struck me as the cameras walked the floors of the convention is that their is no excitement.  It seems to be as if the entire convention is waiting for something to go wrong.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I have this dire sense from the people cheering politely that this is a football game and that they are 40 points behind and they just scored a touchdown.  Exciting but hardly significant.  Michelle Obama's speech was met with a muted respect.  A tacit applause.  A subtle lack of fire and rain from the rabid fans that normally attend these conventions.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;It is as one spoke to me last night.  "We are all afraid something is going to happen and we don't know what."&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Neocon</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 26 Aug 2008 08:29:18 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: On Not Watching Michelle Obama</title><link>http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/chelsea-clinton/22095/on-not-watching-michelle-obama/#comment-1850119</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Jazz&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;If only more voters thought as you (&amp;amp; I ) do. However, where would this country be without it's MSM's in- depth analysis of "are they pretty enough" or "what about those facial tics", or "was that a Terrorist Fist Jab"?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">christoofar</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 26 Aug 2008 08:15:53 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>