Serious questions: Political conventions edition

Serious questions: Political conventions edition

I like listening to convention speeches. I like listening to analysis of speeches from analysts I respect. Then why can’t I enjoy both on television, PBS?

Why doesn’t the “sound-proof booth” of old game shows turn up at the conventions to keep the sound of the speeches away from the voices of the analysts, and vice versa?

If you let your speechwriters plagiarize, wouldn’t you try to pick out something that wasn’t a platitude or a song lyric?

Hasn’t anybody in political life heard about “Under-promise, then over-deliver”? Or must they all say¬†everything will be perfect, then run for the microphones (or away from them) when it’s not?

Most of the U.S. is in a heat wave. Why is it an excuse in Philadelphia?

Margaret Serious has a page on Facebook.

Convene here again! Subscribe by clicking the button above or e-mail me at so that I can add you to my select list of subscribers. I never send spam, and you may unsubscribe at any time.

Filed under: Uncategorized


Leave a comment
  • "Then why can't I enjoy both on television, PBS?" I remember when it was decried that people believed Stewart and Colbert were real news. Colbert has convinced me that he has real news. As far as I know, Gwen Ifill is still waiting for the Rep. candidate to "pivot." Most of the news programs are waiting for a UIC Pavillion Brawl between Sanders and Clinton supporters. Fortunately, Sarah Silverman defused that volatile situation.

    Heat wave: Colbert explained that too, when he ate a rancid cheese steak sandwich and hallucinated over Hillary in Bollywood fashion.

    BTW, I remember when the conventions were a wall to wall TV event, and for instance, one sat through Bill Clinton's 45 minute speech in 1988, or "the Great Territory of Guaaaammm casts 3 votes for ....". Fortunately, that isn't the case this year.

  • In reply to jack:

    Thanks, Jack. Last time I tried either, Stewart and Colbert were talk-show hosts or comedians. I don't find either one funny, let alone thinking they're Serious. The question was more about why I had to hear commenters and speakers at the same time, not one after the other. I'd have liked longer coverage on more (free) channels.
    Yes, I remember wall-to-wall coverage, too. I was disappointed not to hear the traditional roll-call state introductions, and I think we needed more time to look at each party's productions. Not that I was satisfied with either, I just wanted more data.

Leave a comment