Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Fjolnirsson on January 26, 2010, 02:06:03 PM
-
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100126/ap_on_re_us/us_obama_at_the_podium (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100126/ap_on_re_us/us_obama_at_the_podium)
NEW YORK – As a supporter of Barack Obama for president, former JFK speechwriter Ted Sorensen welcomed the young Democrat as a winning, Kennedy-esque orator who didn't bore the public with "five-point programs" and lectures more fit for campuses than for campaigns.
But as Obama prepares to deliver his first State of the Union address, Sorensen wonders if the president hasn't become more like the politicians he supposedly displaced.
"He is still a very eloquent, articulate speaker," Sorensen says. "He is clearly well informed on all matters of public policy, sometimes, frankly, a little too well informed. And as a result, some of the speeches are too complicated for typical citizens and very clear to university faculties and big newspaper editorial boards."
Authors, editors and speechwriters interviewed by The Associated Press agree that Obama is indeed a gifted and effective speechmaker, able to set a new tone with the Middle East in his Cairo speech or to turn public opinion, at least temporarily, in favor of changing the health care system after his address to Congress.
But even admirers have a hard time remembering what he actually says.
Ted Widmer, who edited an anthology of political speeches for the Library of America, praised Obama for his "masterful" style, but could not cite a specific line the president said. Similar observations were made by Jeff Shesol, David Frum and Harry C. McPherson, who wrote speeches for presidents Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Lyndon Johnson, respectively.
"The speech he made in Cairo — I remember the intelligence, the breadth and the reasonableness," McPherson says. "But I can't tell you, and this is one of the shortcomings of the kind of speech he makes — I can't quote anything, or cite anything, off the top of my head."
"His speeches can go for pages without applause lines, making comprehensive arguments about particular issues," said White House spokesman Bill Burton. "And though people may not remember particular lines or phrases from every speech, when he is done speaking, people always get a sense of who the president is and exactly where he is coming from."
A distinctive phrase can define, or make history, like Franklin Roosevelt's calling Dec. 7, 1941, "a date that will live in infamy" because of the bombing of Pearl Harbor, or President Ford's declaration, upon taking office after Richard Nixon had resigned, that "our long national nightmare" was over. President Kennedy's inaugural call to "ask what you can do for your country" helped inspire an era of public service, while President Reagan's demand that Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev "tear down that wall," the Berlin Wall, was a climactic moment of the Cold War.
"I think there are memorable lines in certain speeches (by Obama)," says presidential speechwriter Adam Frankel, who started writing for Obama when he was a candidate. "But what makes him unique as a speaker is not necessarily a single line but the overall story he tells and the seriousness with which he tells it and the trust he puts in people to understand a complicated argument."
Frum and others warn that a speechwriter can be so eager to come up with a memorable quote that the overall text suffers. Obama's preference for sustain explanation over snappy summaries is a good thing, Widmer says, because it means he's treating the public as adults.
"Sound bites help people to remember a speech and think about the larger message of a speech, but they become a distortion if you only remember the fragment," Widmer says. "You can end up with a situation like the presidential primaries where you've got eight people in an Iowa cornfield, all trying to have a striking single sentence in the middle of a speech."
Geoffrey O'Brien, editor of the next edition of Bartlett's Familiar Quotations, says that so far he has 12 Obama citings planned, but just one since he became president (though he says that could well change).
The passage he wants to include from Obama's presidency comes from his inaugural speech, when Obama called the United States "a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus, and nonbelievers." He could not immediately cite any other lines from Obama's presidential speeches.
"Obama is very strong at sort of coolly laying out issues, which may not be memorable, but is effective," O'Brien says. "When he was running for president, he had to draw on a more impassioned style. He was addressing huge crowds of people."
O'Brien says that when he talks about Obama with young people the phrase they remember is "Yes, We Can," his campaign slogan.
Fred R. Shapiro, who edits the Yale Book of Quotations, mentioned a few phrases from Obama's inaugural speech that could make the next edition some years from now. He cites Obama's insistence that "We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals" in the fight against terrorism, and that "a man whose father less than 60 years ago might not have been served in a local restaurant can now stand before you to take a most sacred oath."
But Shapiro doesn't think that any of his presidential statements have caught on widely with the public, certainly not at the level of then-candidate Obama's private observation in 2008 that small-town Americans "cling to guns or religion."
"The lines I mentioned from his inauguration have not become very famous," Shapiro says. "And if they're in the next Yale Book of Quotations, it will be more because they were borderline choices than because they were overwhelmingly clear-cut candidates."
No presidential speech since President Kennedy's inaugural, which has 11 mentions in the most recent Yale book, has been so quoted. A Kennedy-Sorensen trademark is chiasmus — what speechwriters call "reversible raincoats," in which the second half of the phrase is a variation on the first half, such as "Let us never negotiate out of fear. But let us never fear to negotiate."
The stature of Kennedy's speech is one reason it hasn't been matched. Shesol recalls an agreement among Clinton speechwriters that reversible raincoats should be avoided because Kennedy and Sorensen had so perfected them.
"I think it's very important for people to remember the words. Words have power. A successful speech will resonate and phrases will provide a kind of power in the near term and the longer term," Shesol said. "But, ultimately, it's important to any president to be able to make continually clear who he is, what he believes and where he wants to go."
Thurston Clarke, author of "Ask Not," a well-regarded book on President Kennedy's inaugural speech, wonders if Obama isn't still reacting to criticism during the 2008 campaign that he was too good with words. His main opponent, Hillary Rodham Clinton, cited a quote from former New York Gov. Mario Cuomo that "You campaign in poetry, but you govern in prose." Robert F. Kennedy Jr., son of the late attorney general and New York senator, worried about the limits of "poetry or lofty language."
"I think he's scared of appearing too polished," Clarke said. "I think it scared him from giving a great inaugural address and I think that was a huge mistake because no president gets an audience again like he does for his inaugural address."
Allegations that Obama is holding back are "not true," said Burton, the White House spokesman. "That speech (Kennedy's) was 50 years ago, only underscoring the point that these iconic moments are so few and far between. But knowing a couple lines is not the best measure of a speech and certainly not of the effectiveness of a president."
Yes, wouldn't want to overwhelm the simple people, now would we... :mad:
-
"We are the ones we've been waiting for..."
"this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal..."
There's two right off the top of my head. Of course, if you want SUBSTANCE, you won't find it in his speeches. He may have specifics, but he doesn't have substance. The reason for this is he promises whatever sounds good and often promises it specifically. He then ignores what he said and pushes his liberal agenda.
His speeches are forgettable because they are not good. This is more hand waving to try to avoid admitting to the hype.
Denial is the first such coping strategy (we've seen anger and depression too. Very little bargaining, though.)
-
Coded: " . . . some of the speeches are too complicated for typical citizens and very clear to university faculties and big newspaper editorial boards."
Decoded: ". . . ignorant hicks are too dumb to automatically agree with my socialist agenda the way my fellow travelers do."
The sheer arrogance of these people is amazing . . . simply amazing.
-
But even admirers have a hard time remembering what he actually says.
Yeah, those empty platitudes aren't all that memorable.
-
Yeah, those empty platitudes aren't all that memorable.
Agreed. I love how everyone seemed to go nuts over his "big" speeches before he gave them and then right after. However, a month or two later, they were distant forgotten memories. I always thought great speeches were ones that were remembered years later.
It seems those commie lefties always think that anyone who disagrees with them is a low class ignorant fool so anyone who says what they want to hear is automatically the opposite.
-
But even admirers have a hard time remembering what he actually says.
I have that problem with most comedians. Five minutes later I can't remember the joke. In Obama's case, I'm deliberately trying to forget.
As for memorable fragments, "let me be clear," "it's not about me," and "I inherited" are burned into my memory.
-
I have that problem with most comedians. Five minutes later I can't remember the joke. In Obama's case, I'm deliberately trying to forget.
As for memorable fragments, "let me be clear," "it's not about me," and "I inherited" are burned into my memory.
You forgot some: "make no mistake" "Some say (outrageous strawman here), while others say (different outrageous strawman here), but I say we can (false choice here)"
-
[Media tools] seemed to go nuts over his "big" speeches before he gave them and then right after. However, a month or two later, they were distant forgotten memories. I always thought great speeches were ones that were remembered years later.
I've been thinking the same thing. I remember especially that his Speech on Race (trying to defuse the Jeremiah Wright issue) was declared ahead of time to be a watershed moment.
I'd like to see a "man on the street" segment, asking people in NYC or San Francisco to quote their favorite passages from his speeches. I doubt very many people would remember anything beyond "hope" and "change."
-
"The speech he made in Cairo — I remember the intelligence, the breadth and the reasonableness," McPherson says. "But I can't tell you, and this is one of the shortcomings of the kind of speech he makes — I can't quote anything, or cite anything, off the top of my head." that he actually accomplished."
There, that's fixed.
-
The sheer arrogance of these people is amazing . . . simply amazing.
Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, and Mao did it first—and better.
-
"The speech he made in Cairo — I remember the intelligence, the breadth and the reasonableness," McPherson says.
All I remember is how patronizing it was, and how angry it would have made me, were I an Arab or Muslim. Gee, thanks, President Obama. I really needed you to tell me my own history, and let me know that I'm just as capable as real people like you Westerners. ;/
-
His speeches are forgettable because they are not good. This is more hand waving to try to avoid admitting to the hype.
I agree completely. I think his speeches (or what I could stand to listen to) were childish and self indulgent. I haven't heard anything come out of his mouth that I found deep or inspiring.
I don't think he is even that articulate. Granted I am not either, but I find much of his speech to be borderline slang.
-
But even admirers have a hard time remembering what he actually says.
..
"The speech he made in Cairo — I remember the intelligence, the breadth and the reasonableness," McPherson says. "But I can't tell you, and this is one of the shortcomings of the kind of speech he makes — I can't quote anything, or cite anything, off the top of my head."
Sounds less like subtlety than bullshit.
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fabesthost.net%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2009%2F09%2Fsmells-like-bullshit.jpg&hash=e1b00ed1b85e3e289bd12a147aa1b440b8d26425)
-
That Obama was Oratory Incarnate was the first big lie of his myth, but unfortunately not the last.
I've heard platitudes and empty phrases, delivered mechanically, on-stage, fumbling and vagueness impromptu. Real orators are articulate and cogent both on and off teleprompter.
-
Real orators are articulate and cogent both on and off teleprompter.
Or in other words; "Senator Obama, I knew the Great Communicator. Ronald Reagan was a close personal friend of mine. And you're no Ronald Reagan."
-
Oh, how I wish I had the power to knock out Obama's teleprompters tomorrow night. ;)
-
Oh, how I wish I had the power to knock out Obama's teleprompters tomorrow night. ;)
Not me . . . I'll settle for the power to edit his teleprompters. >:D
-
Not me . . . I'll settle for the power to edit his teleprompters. >:D
hah! [popcorn] (http://baracksteleprompter.blogspot.com/2009/04/really-unnecessary-leak.html)
I have that problem with most comedians. Five minutes later I can't remember the joke.
this guy will keel you [popcorn] (http://www.break.com/index/achmed-the-terrorist.html)
-
You forgot some: "make no mistake" "Some say (outrageous strawman here), while others say (different outrageous strawman here), but I say we can (false choice here)"
And, most importantly, "Uh,..."
-
That Obama was Oratory Incarnate was the first big lie of his myth, but unfortunately not the last.
I've heard platitudes and empty phrases, delivered mechanically, on-stage, fumbling and vagueness impromptu. Real orators are articulate and cogent both on and off teleprompter.
I think the problem is that people compare him to Bush II and no one else. Since GW BUsh mangled a few words now and then, anyone that can speak clearly without doing that is some sort of amazing speaker. Personally, fancy talk never impressed me much. I'd much prefer good content and substance. I didn't think GW was a great speaker, but I didn't think he was near as bad as people liked to say either. The opposite is my opinion with Obama.
It was some years ago, but I remember hearing a congressman speak once that got up and spoke off the cuff to a to a group of a couple thousand at a meeting. He was a little tentative at first, but once he found his audience, he had everyone laughing and listening to every word. I don't remember what he said (20 years ago), but he was entertaining. IMO, that was good public speaking skills (not counting content). The stuff Obama does is just reading. He does it better than I could, but speaking better than an engineer is nothing to brag about.
-
Try reading a GWB speech side by side against an Obama speech.
-
Yeah, he has turned into the usual Washington politician, he lies alot now.....chris3
-
Yeah, he has turned into always was the usual Washington politician, he lies alot now.....chris3
There you go. Fixed.
-
Heck, a typical Washington politician is probably better than the typical Chicago politician so...