Wow, a "scripted" convention! Whoda thunk it? If Dr. Bearse seriously is surprised that the Democratic party supports its nominee for President, he betrays a degree of naivete that makes him a questionable choice to be our representative.

Please, Dr. Bearse, drop the Feuhrer (sic) comparisons. We are not in Nazi Germany, and Obama is no Hitler. Pretending otherwise makes you look hysterical, ridiculous, or both. I am sure you are neither.

Mike ignores the larger point by focusing narrowly on a single detail, and by ignoring the fact that Hillary was coming on strong toward the end.

Let's all admit there is something creepily totalitarian about all this unity talk, and that convention was as as scripted and artificial as a Carol Shea-Porter "constituent event".

Human beings are spontaneous and adaptive to events. These party politicians seem more like robots.

Godwin's Law in action...

You really are a douchebag, you know that?

Rowland:

Conventions have been "scripted", as Dr. Bearse chooses to call it, since the 1980's. That he calls it to our attention, with pursed lips and a disapproving tone says to me he hasn't been paying attention. His concern that we no longer have a democratic Republic would also seem to imply he missed the longest and toughest primary fight in my memory. I know he is busy running his own campaign, and that can be all consuming, but I am surprised he missed the Obama-Clinton battle royale.

I see the perfect comparison between Obama and Hitler...both openly RACIST and both want to control the whole world under their world government.

Obama is the perfect puppet for the real powermongers behind world government but yet, he's still pretty damned scary, and empty, just like Hitler.

If we look at some of what Obama promises for us under his 'leadership' the comparison is not at all an unfair one from a policy perspective.

-More Top down control
-Mandatory national service (non military)
-The affluent and certain kinds of business must give (in the form of higher) Taxes to fund the crisis (war) against AGW, Big Oil-so we can create new energy, fiscal inequality, entrenched old-school government, Poverty...blah blah blah.)
-State run health care.
-Government control of all Pre-K education.
-Government controlled teacher prep and education
-Promise of rebirth of our stature (but only as a soft power player)--aka; earning repsect for the father land.

It's the trope of Government as savior-utopianism. They decide, we follow. Pick a dictator and you can make a connection to Obamaism as we currently know it.
While I can agree that they are entitled to ralley around their nominee, Demo-Con 2008 (Pun, intended) appears to have gone past rally, and on to candidate worship. That's kind of scary.

MIKE: I respect your intelligence. Please don't diminish it by reacting like a media attack dog.

Sometimes, I use an extreme point of reference simply to make a point. That point is not even a slight insinuation that Obama is like a Nazi. You over-react to insinuate this yourself. The point is over-control of a political process that should be dynamic, wildly democratic, even unpredicable. What disappoints me is that you didn't get the point, so perhaps I should have made it differently. Sorry.

Don't equate "scripted" with "support." Of course, conventions need to support their candidates. This does not mean that they should be scripted, nor tightly controlled from the top down in other ways. This makes even a Democratic convention undemocratic, or at best a parody of American democracy as a foundation of our Republic (or vice versa).

I am an American who is conservative in a very simple sense: Let us build on the best of the past to move forward into an uncertain future.

As for naivete, I am not naive in the way you suggest, but perhaps I can be considered somewhat naive in believing that the American dream makes us the "city on a hill" -- a beacon and a work-in-progress. This means empowering people as persons loving and living in freedom and liberty which, as their Representative, I would ever strive to accomplish.

In this light, consider the paragraph below. It was included in a more complete version of my short piece, a version that the NHInsider editor did not use.

"The backdrop for the final, giant, stadium rally reminded me of what I see whenever I get off the train in Washington—images of the late Roman Empire. By the time of the latter, the Roman Republic was long dead; emperors reigned. We practically long for an emperor, believing that a white (or black) knight can come riding into the White House on a white horse and save our butts. How undemocratic, in line with the obscene amounts of money, time and media attention devoted to the selection of a President who is head of but one of the three major parts of the U.S. government. What about the people’s House – or has it ceased being so? The British have a better idea: They keep their royalty in castle keeps; they don’t confuse elected officials with royalty."

P.S, Earlier conventions (of at least a generation ago, before TV came to dominate) were more unpredictable. Are you old enough to remember when:

(1) Party platforms were actually debated during conventions?

(2) There might be more than 10 roll call votes before candidates were nominated -- during conventions?

Dr Bearse:

Conventions were less predicatble in earlier days because we didn't have primaries where delegates were pledged. Party bosses made decisions at the conventions, or if before hand without guarantees, and candidates didn't arrive at the convention with sufficient delegate votes to already have the nomination. We almost saw it this year with the power of the super delegates. Almost but not quite.

This is the primary reason why conventions are staged, not TV, at least in my estimation.