Classy.

His observation is, strictly speaking, just. We didn't hear much about economics at the convention. Of course, conventions are not the place to talk about economics, unless you're Mike Dukakis or Fritz Mondale, that brace of exciting national leaders.

So far I've heard nothing from Mr. Obama himself about economics except that he plans to raise my taxes, in exchange for--um, oh yes. "Hope." What does that mean? Adolf Hitler--another spellbinding speaker--came to power on promises of "hope," of restoring jobs and building a great nation. Not that I'm saying the two men are alike; my very point is that they're not. But when two such very different men can campaign on the same word you have to wonder what is meant by it.

If he means by that, that "we are the ones we've been waiting for," that again means--what? Someone who sits around waiting for h/h-self sounds like a hopeless nebbish to me.

And if you are, I'm one lower middle class taxpayer who's sick and tired of subsidizing cheapskates like you who benefit mightily from our current tax system.

You can also shove your little Hitler comparison right up your right-wing ass, thank you very much.

THE POINT - The rise to power of the Nazis in the Third Reich was based on a propaganda stage of soaring overheated speeches, ringing and singing and soaring - delivered at well staged giant massive rallies

Years and years worth, they make Hollywood look like cheap pikers.

Cheesy shows or content? I think it is a valid question, even if the post has used words that are too strong.

Also, one of the things I love about Obama is his ability to counter punch. SUCH a breath of fresh air after the pussies the Dems have been sending up the last few election years.

If you want to know because you don't care, or because you've already bought into the silly smears, then you're too far gone anyway.

I suck.

As to those steamed over my point about "hope" as a political slogan; anyone who believes that Adolf Hitler wasn't explicitly peddling hope is ignorant of history. All you have to do is look at his Nuremberg Labour Front speech of 1936, as one example. Interestingly, he pushed "unity" as a major theme. But of course, I doubt anyone here would dare to read that sort of thing. Reading of that sort ought to be banned--right? If so, does that mean Sarah Palin was right, as Governor, to look into restricting library access to certain books, then? How would YOU feel if your child brought home a copy of "Mein Kampf" from the school library? Probably rather concerned, as I myself would be.

What I'm driving at is that history presents us with a lot of 'incovenient truths' when we decide to actually check into it--instead of just crouching in the amen corner and agreeing with our favourite commentators.

As far as specifics in Mr. Obama's DNC speech, I remember proposals to increase the number of solders and Marines, and to increase Americorps to 250,000; also an idea about asking college students to do some community service in part exchange for their student loans. I don't recall anything else except for some well-told personal stories and an assortment of maxims.

As far as 'right-wing' goes ... that's just a general term for ginning up dislike. I doubt anyone that's commented here could offer a philosophically coherent definition of the term, though I'd love to hear some tries at it. Insults don't bother me; I like getting them because they simply demonstrate the mental vacuity of those who throw them, and serve to reinforce my points.

you know nothing about how business works. A business person who passed their tax hike along to the customer would soon find themselves in financial trouble.

I don't think "right-wing" is a very difficult concept to understand; why are you having problems with it?

I'm not going to discuss my background in business here; there isn't enough room, for one thing. But, 14 and 15, Business 101 is that taxes get paid first, other expenses next, then salary or dividends, and finally investment. If taxes eat up a larger share, there's less left for everything else. Investment goes first, then salary or dividends, then other expenses. At a certain point, the business that can't invest, let alone do the rest, is going to either move or fold. I don't hear any contrition from Howard Schultz over the thousands of jobs that famously progressive Starbucks is shedding these days. Howard cares about the stock price of his company, and he's doing what it takes to keep it where he feels it needs to be. That's all there is to it.

As far as problems with the term "right-wing," I haven't any, 14. Do you personally know any right-wingers? I'd be interested to hear a thumbnail sketch of what you believe makes them so, if you do, which I rather doubt.

I'm familiar with Godwin's Law by the way. Perhaps I should have used Yasser Arafat as an example instead--another politician who talked a lot about hope. I'll be sure to bow toward Hyde Park and recite a mea culpa.

In the meantime, I'll ignore any further namecalling and saracasm directed at me, and wait for a rebuttal to my main point--twice made--which is that anyone can talk about "hope;" it means precisely nothing. I'll also participate in a discussion about what, exactly, the term "right-wing" means, aside from 'approved subject for the Two Minutes' Hate.'