Wow

I really think that this ought to put an end to the “just words” or “just speeches” argument.

We went back and forth at some length on an earlier thread about Bill Clinton’s ability to articulate his message and how important that was in 1992 and 1996. And one point I tried to make, albeit less than deftly, was that you can tell a lot about a person’s abilities by their facility with language. It’s not an accident that Bill Clinton was so adept at delivering the message; there was an inordinate amount of brain power behind his words, and that depth of understanding came through when he spoke.

A person’s gift with language isn’t, despite what my Irish ancestors might think, an accident of birth; nor is it frivolous or irrelevant. Intelligent words reveal an intelligent person. A man or woman who can deliver a speech like that is an individual who can perceive things more deeply, analyze issues with greater clarity, and develop solutions to even the most vexing problems. Or so I believe.

Years ago I worked at a big law firm in Chicago, and in the firm library they had a facsimile of a letter Abraham Lincoln sent to a mother who’d lost multiple sons in the Civil War. It was the single most moving thing I’ve ever read. It’s hard to explain the impact those mere “words” made on those of us who read the letter a hundred and twenty years or so later, but it proves a point: Extraordinary writing (or speaking) is a sign of an extraordinary person.

I think Obama is that type of person. Perhaps not Lincoln; but a damn sight better than most politicians out there.

Dave vE, to put an even finer point on this thought: “A man or woman who can deliver a speech like that…” Not just deliver a speech like that, he can write a speech like that. We will finally be able to get beyond teh stoopid with our next president. I’m psyched.

okay, so evidently it was the link. here’s the other thought i had:

It’ll be interesting to see what sound bites are used out of a very complex, layered, and nuanced speech. Something so thoughtful is difficult to summarize, easy to spin or misrepresent by pulling lines out of context.

For example, we know they won’t use all of the following:

“Given my background, my politics, and my professed values and ideals, there will no doubt be those for whom my statements of condemnation are not enough. Why associate myself with Reverend Wright in the first place, they may ask? Why not join another church? And I confess that if all that I knew of Reverend Wright were the snippets of those sermons that have run in an endless loop on the television and You Tube, or if Trinity United Church of Christ conformed to the caricatures being peddled by some commentators, there is no doubt that I would react in much the same way

But the truth is, that isn’t all that I know of the man. The man I met more than twenty years ago is a man who helped introduce me to my Christian faith, a man who spoke to me about our obligations to love one another; to care for the sick and lift up the poor. He is a man who served his country as a U.S. Marine; who has studied and lectured at some of the finest universities and seminaries in the country, and who for over thirty years led a church that serves the community by doing God’s work here on Earth - by housing the homeless, ministering to the needy, providing day care services and scholarships and prison ministries, and reaching out to those suffering from HIV/AIDS.
– snip –
Like other predominantly black churches across the country, Trinity embodies the black community in its entirety - the doctor and the welfare mom, the model student and the former gang-banger. Like other black churches, Trinity’s services are full of raucous laughter and sometimes bawdy humor. They are full of dancing, clapping, screaming and shouting that may seem jarring to the untrained ear. The church contains in full the kindness and cruelty, the fierce intelligence and the shocking ignorance, the struggles and successes, the love and yes, the bitterness and bias that make up the black experience in America.

And this helps explain, perhaps, my relationship with Reverend Wright. As imperfect as he may be, he has been like family to me. He strengthened my faith, officiated my wedding, and baptized my children. Not once in my conversations with him have I heard him talk about any ethnic group in derogatory terms, or treat whites with whom he interacted with anything but courtesy and respect. He contains within him the contradictions - the good and the bad - of the community that he has served diligently for so many years.

I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother - a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.

These people are a part of me. And they are a part of America, this country that I love.”

That to me is personal, is heart-felt, and explains that things aren’t black and white (no pun intended), and that you can disagree with something a person says without throwing away all they are as a person.

Wanna bet some ads or headlines are trumpeting “obama won’t distance himself from controversial/racist reverand” ? Sigh….

Like Obama, Bill Clinton has a great intellect, a mastery of the language and the ability to bring people together but he was dead wrong on a number of very key issues in my opinion — NAFTA, GATT (now the WTO), the drug “war” and welfare policy come immediately to mind.

I very much prefer Hillary Clinton’s stated position on many key issues like health care and social security (Obama buys the myth that Social Security is in “crisis” mode). Hillary Clinton is also highly intelligent and articulate. But her lack of respect for Obama’s stated principles (and he can sure state them!), her lack of principle in her Iraq war vote and her apparent inability to unite people now has me leaning away from her (and my Oregon primary vote may actually count as it turns out).

On the electibility question, I have no idea who has the best chance. I suspect the righties with an able-bodied assist from the MSM can carve up either candidate equally. I guess all we can do on that score is to hope the public isn’t hungry for the kind of garbage that will certainly be served up.

It’s worse than you think, Becca and Sharon. Here in New York the headlines won’t even be about the speech, they’ll be about vastly more important matters.

I’m beginning to suspect that WWDTM is paying the New York state government to provide material.

I think that the 50% or so who vote are listening to BHO. I think the past two elections were won by fear, and I think that the times they are a changin’. Maybe I’m just a hopeless optimist (nice oxymoron, eh?). But the power in that man’s voice is compellling.
And Sharon, wouldn’t it be great to have a President who doesn’t torture - period?

In a country full of people who get their information in tiny 7 second chunks, who’s meaning is explained by to them by a biased reporter in 3 more seconds, how will a message like this one ever be heard?

Millions of us can find 2 hours to devote to “American Idol”. How many can devote 37 minutes to learning about the core of a man running for President. We already have the kind of president you get when you rely on 10 seconds worth of information to make your decision. Shouldn’t we devote a little more time than that to picking the next one? Is deciding on the next president half as important as picking the next “American Idol”?

I’m not sure why Mr Obama is disavowing Reverend Wright’s words. Even though I probably wouldn’t put it in exactly the same way, there’s nothing he’d reported to have said that isn’t true at its core.

I listened to the whole speech, and it brought me to tears, four times.

I think John Smart is wrong. I HOPE John Smart is wrong. I believe, with Barack Obama, that the majority of people of this country are STARVING for someone who can think the issues through, who knows that there are multiple sides to everything, and who doesn’t leap to the obvious conclusions. Who doesn’t operate on 30 second sound bites. He’s the first politician in thirty years who has talked about “we Americans” and sounded as if he meant it.

I have the audacity to hope that we will inaugurate President Barack Obama next January.

Chris, great idea! Now, if this had been in place 8 years ago, does that mean George Bush = Ruben Studdard AND Taylor Hicks?

As for The Speech, I feel pretty certain that by the end of it, even Hillary wanted to vote for Obama.

Well, he did equate his grandmother’s private admission that she feared young black men on the street with Wright’s public and hateful tirades. So we have to consider whether hers was an irrational and racist attitude, which would require looking at the information she had about who was committing the majority of street crime. It’s not a simple issue.

I don´t understand the press/public´s desire for a presidential candidate not to have positive, productive relationships with people who, on certain matters, espouse positions he/she disagrees with. Isn´t that what politics–local (the great ¨reaching across the aisle¨) and international (diplomacy, negotiation)– is about?

That said, I am a little wary of the Obama is Abe sentiment. It sounds a lot like Kennedy all over again (and least from what I´ve read of that ancient before-my-time history), and in the end, Kennedy was not a good president. True, he didn´t get much of a chance, but what he did accomplish did not live up to the promise of his words. So I voted for Obama and would do so again, but I still have the audacity to doubt and fear.

This is slightly off-topic - I won’t comment on the speech because I haven’t heard it yet. I’ve actually been tuning out all the speechifying and focusing instead on the incidental details, which is where I believe the real information is being conveyed.

So this is a question for anyone else who lives in a state where the candidates have already done their campaign appearances. Let me ste it up a bit first.

In the past two weeks the Clinton campaign has been very active in Northeastern PA. Hillary Clinton spoke at a high school gym in Scranton that held 3500 people last Monday. The event was free and open to the public on a first-come first-served basis. Over 4000 people showed up, and those who couldn’t get in were given the option of hearing the candidate over a P.A. system in an auditorium. And after she was done with the crown of 3500 in the gym, she came to see our much smaller group in the auditorium. She spoke to us for a few minutes, shook hands with some of the people who managed to get to the front of the room, and took her leave.

The next day Chelsea Clinton was in Scranton. She met with a much smaller crowd at the grand opening of her mom’s campaign headquarters. Again, the event was free and open to the public - no tickets required. She spoke for a while, took questions for a while, and then met with, signed autographs for, and took pictures with anyone who wanted to.

Saturday Hillary Clinton was back in Scranton at the Saint Patrick’s Day Parade, one of the biggest in the nation. Barack Obama spent that day in Plainfield, Indiana, at a high school gym that held 2000 people. (Indiana’s Primary is two weeks after Pennsylvania’s.)Tickets were required, and were snapped up days in advance.

Barack Obama made two campaign stops in Scranton on Saturday - both at closed events. The first was at a dinner for the Society of Irish Women, a $60-a-ticket event where he spoke for nine minutes. The second event was a closed meeting with U.S. vets at a local bar at an event taped for MTV. He was whisked into and out of both events with no interaction with the press or public.

Today Bill Clinton came to Wilkes-Barre, to another high school. And once again, the event was free and open to the public, with no tickets required.

So my question to those who have already been through this is: Is this a pattern? Is this the way Barack Obama has campaigned in other areas? Or has he simply given up on Northeastern Pennsylvania, or written us off as irrelevant to his campaign? (I’ve seen listings of other campaign stops he has made throughout the state, and I think they were all closed events that required either an invitation or a ticket.) Barack Obama the orator is unquestionably impressive. But as a campaigner he leaves a lot to be desired, at least when compared to my experiences with his competitor’s campaign. I’m still hoping he’ll come to this area for an actual campaign rally, one that is freely accessible to everyone.

I beg to differ with you, Steve. I’m with Dale. I grew up in the shadow of JFK’s assassination and thought of him somewhat as a saint. When I was old enough to look at him with clear eyes, I was shocked by what I saw. You named a few of his problems, but there are plenty more you can add, from putting missiles in Turkey (which led to an attempt at missiles in Cuba) to shacking up with the mistress of a mafia chieftain. He was elegant, rich, and embodied a look that post-war Americans dug. He certainly wasn’t the worst president we’ve had. I’d say he’s middle of the pack. I’ve always been pleased with the moon quest, but the rest,…

Now Bobby–he could have been a great president.

But, Dee, so far we’re not seeing even intimate gatherings. Just small, essentially private affairs.

Charlotte? What’s he doing there?! When is your Primary? Maybe he has given up on Pennsylvania. Too bad, I would love to hear him speak in person. Maybe after the convention…

We’ve lived in Seattle’s African-American neighborhood for 18 years and have attempted to run a community bookstore there for 4 years. We see the issues first hand and have heard the sentiments similar to Rev. Wright discussed, shouted, and debated. When I first heard the quotes, I really didn’t think that much about it. Nothing my girlfriends haven’t said at my own kitchen table. But, that’s the thing. The discussion happened at my red formica table. It’s made me realize that white america really doesn’t know black america. There has been no discussion there.

I remember the first “pot-luck” I was invited to here. I offered to bring potato salad. I brought in my bowl and it was eagerly passed into the kitchen, where it was handed to each woman who peered in and then nodded and passed it to the next. Finally everyone had nodded and it was put on the table with the other dishes. I asked our hostess V. (who has become my best friend) what that was about. She said, “well, we were wondering if white women know to put paprika on potato salad.”

Tonight I was talking about Obama’s speech with N. (a member of my Stitch-n-Bitch posse, and the first African-American female lawyer in Seattle) and we both laughed when she said “well, Hell they ain’t been listening to any of our preachers out here! They say much worse!”

Barack is urging a conversation we need to have. So we can find out who doesn’t put paprika on potato salad.

“In a country full of people who get their information in tiny 7 second chunks, who’s meaning is explained by to them by a biased reporter in 3 more seconds, how will a message like this one ever be heard?”

Unless Obama is the nominee and the media are forced to give him his moments to present his case, which they must for both the Republican and Democratic nominees for president (and people do watch the presidential debates), the answer is it won’t.

I finally got to watch Obama’s speech last night on C-Span, and I think the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times were correct in their editorial assessments today. Problem is the broadcast media had other purposes in their coverage, which was not what he said, but whether or not his speech worked for white male voters, a pointless question because most white male voters still don’t know what he said, only what Jeremiah Wright said. The nature of mainstream broadcast media, which is essentially entertainment which is guided most by a desire for ratings, which determine how much can be charged for ads, probably precludes it being a serious vehicle for anything besides attention-grabbing variations on tabloid journalism and dramatic speculation.

Obama delivered the speech in Pennsylvania, then headed for North Carolina, a state he can win. The governor of Pennsylvania is a major Clinton supporter, and Obama has said that he expects Clinton to win comfortably in Pennsylvania.

New Zogby poll puts McCain ahead of both Clinton and Obama. Don’t know if it was before Obama’s speech. It appears that Clinton might have no chance of outcampaigning McCain. Obama might be able to recover his previous lead over McCain, and he can bring new voters in. He can certainly put our best values front-and-center. He would be the future of the Democratic Party, and was before the Jeremiah Wright tapes. Nothing to do now but see who our nominee is, and whether our nominee can win in November.

Proud of Obama’s speech, and proud of the fact that my party has a black and a woman as its two finalists. But only victory matters in presidential elections. Hopefully we will still see gains in both the Senate and the House, and if McCain wins, it will be like GHWB’s one-and-done, followed by eight years of a Democrat and a competent administration that, among other things, re-establishes the Constitution as our defining document. But if McCain wins, the Supreme Court is completely gone for at least a generation - and he thinks Scalia is a model justice.

I finally got to watch, and, wow.

This time.

I have no illusions that the American public can understand nuance. They vote for all the wrong reasons. So if you ignore what Barack says and just listen to him talk (say you didn’t understand English), he sounds comforting, assuring, and confident. You feel good about him. You like him. If you listen to Hillary she is usually yelling and even when she is calm it doesn’t feel the same. I think that she would be a good president but I don’t think she connects to people the same way.

I don’t know what there is about Hillary that makes some people hate her. (And lots do). I’ve asked numerous people, and they can’t answer other than to say they just do. On the other hand several of my family will vote for Barack in the general election and it will be the first democratic vote they will have cast.

Thank you, Dan. You’re very kind. For what it’s worth, I posted again at some length on this topic this morning.

What strikes me is, Obama’s encouraging dialogue, but much of the response is to ignore his pleas for open discussion and his condemnation of Wright’s more controversial statements, and instead to focus, again and again, on Wright’s specific transgressions … as though the speech itself never occurred.

Sigh.

Maybe we need an atheist to run for president. Then there’d be no right-wing hate and no left-wing polemics involved. Of course, an atheist candidate would be pilloried for not believing, so you really can’t win in the end.

Damned if you do believe, damned if you don’t.

I beg to differ with you, Steve. I’m with Dale. I grew up in the shadow of JFK’s assassination and thought of him somewhat as a saint. When I was old enough to look at him with clear eyes, I was shocked by what I saw. [. . .]

No question there. If you read Seymour Hersh’s The Darker Side of Camelot, you’ll definitely be shocked. I know I was. As you suggest, bedding down with Sam Giancana’s mistress wasn’t the brightest thing to do and playing a game of nuclear “chicken” could have ended it all, right then and there.

However, those were different times.

What Kennedy did do was to give us a feeling that things could be changed, they could be made to be better, and, in a very real sense, he did get the country “moving again”, as he promised.

If he had lived, I suspect I wouldn’t be the cynical old bastard I am today.

Now Bobby–he could have been a great president.

Bobby was an ever bigger SOB and opportunist than JFK ever was, if Sy Hersh’s book is to be believed.

Frankly, I think the only dead presidents I want to be arguing about right now are those whose faces are in circulation. I would like to see all candidates addressing the economy a little more directly.

I think maybe RFK’s conversion experience happened during his tours of Appalachia.

Oh, and Short Attention Span Theater was the perfect TV series for America, don’t you think?

By the way, back on topic: Did anyone else juxtapose these two quotes?:

“In a country full of people who get their information in tiny 7 second chunks, who’s meaning is explained by to them by a biased reporter in 3 more seconds, how will a message like this one ever be heard?”
From Senator Obama’s speech.

“His minister said: God Damn America - Nuff said. There is no “context” that matters besides “from a pulpit” If you want a Democrat in the White house you best rally behind Clinton now.”

From John Smart. Just sayin’.

Coop, no offense was meant to the great state of North Carolina. I didn’t realize you had a Primary on the same day as Indiana - two weeks after Pennsylvania’s. Oregon’s Primary is two weeks after yours.

But all these events in these states when juxtaposed with his general lack of campaigning in Pennsylvania make me think that perhaps Obama has written off this fair (and fairly large) Commonwealth - unless I’m missing some major events from other parts of Pennsylvania. Murray, what do things look like from South Central PA?

becca (and brian): Yep, that does sound pretty open and public, though I never thought about the data harvesting angle on ticket requirements before. (I mostly think about the Bush/Cheney access restrictions and loyalty oath requirements for their appearances four years ago.) I’m sure Obama could easily draw a crowd several times that size. I wish he would do something like that around here! Will you be attending?

Aw shucks, Harold, I was just messin’ wif ya. No offense taken. Hope you’re doing well, buddy. BTW, my relatives never went back to PA after Gettysburg; they claimed you guys weren’t as hospitable as they were accustomed to back home.

Cooper, it wasn’t a brochure, it was Aaron Copland. I mean, Ap-pal-ach-i-an Spring or Ap-pa-lay-shian Spring.

Actually, I like the idea ofAp-pal-ach-i-an Spring. Maybe I’ll start saying it that way.

Attention Pastafarians!

FSM statue is now taking its rightful place, installed on the Cumberland County courthouse lawn.

For whomever is interested, you can view the livestream at www.katu.com, www.kgw.com, or www.koin.com.

Oh. The commas and periods got tangled up in the links.

Becca (and Brian), there is NO ONE more provoking and astute (and inspiring and brilliant and creative and beautiful) than Jim Henson. More and more I am beginning to suspect that you guys have my soul but have done something much better with it.

As far as the important issue in this thread–I have my doubts about anyone who puts potato salad in their paprika.

Nice hair-splitting, DvE, but unsupported. You say “compare,” I say “equate,” but the effect is the same. The entire point of that portion of Obama’s speech was to draw a parallel between his relationship with Wright and his relationship with his grandmother. Since we naturally understand that he would never renounce his own grandmother, we no longer expect him to renounce Wright.

This speech was a masterful piece of rhetoric. In fact, he tells us nothing about his grandmother: She might have been a naïve, old-fashioned, cookie-baking homemaker, or she might have been a fiery and profane, college-educated union organizer. In the absence of any evidence, we tend to assume the former. “Grandma” conjures up sweet domestic images for most of us. And naturally, no decent man would reject his own grandmother. So by leading us to view his relationships with Grandma and Wright in the same way, he successfully “defangs” Wright. In addition, he tacitly both condemns and forgives those people who actually share his grandmother’s views.

Don’t get me wrong: I applaud him for this speech, and I would have been disappointed if he’d succumbed to pressure and repudiated Wright. A successful politician has to forge relationships with people of widely varying values and attitudes, and Obama should not have to renounce someone who has been so important to himself and his family. I’m appalled at the hypocrisy of those commentators who blithely ignore the hate-filled speeches of right-wing Christian leaders (blaming all our disasters on “liberals, abortionists, and gays”) and never call on Republicans to denounce those preachers.

As an atheist, though, I’ll never forgive Wright for “turning” Obama!

Seattle Dan, Kennedy didn’t forward a civil rights agenda, he was brought into the fray against his wishes by MLK.

He couldn’t get much in the way of meaningful legislation passed in accordance to his agenda because despite his fuckability in the eyes of voters, he was too young, did not have the political connections, to get things passed, DESPITE the “get legislation passed free” card he thought he held in picking LBJ as a running mate.

The people trying to align Obama with Lincoln is just… sad.
By the time Lincoln got into office, he was a political veteran, and was tested many, many times before taking the reigns, and developed significantly more relationships amongst his political peers than Obama by a long mile.

Obama is too young, held political office for too short a time, and could prove to be worse than George Bush.

I consider Obama to be a peer of Kennedy’s as far as talent for public speaking. I consider Kennedy to be the greatest public speaker of the last century, but…
he also was a poor president, in that he created a lot of problems were, before he took action, there weren’t any.

His “greatest” achievements were putting out housefires he set himself, then taking credit for it.

Also, I’d urge people to read Obama’s autobiography.
If you then think he isn’t running on a personal racially charged agenda, then we’ll just have to agree to disagree.
I don’t particularly like hillary or mccain, but at least they’d be politically functional.

Congress can quietly cut Obama off at the knees during his whole presidency, and nobody will be doing anything about it.

In the wake of a MASSIVE economic downturn that is just beginning, we don’t need added confusion of a green politician full of rhetoric, who, in my opinion, has a racial agenda that is obvious to anyone who reads his autobiography, who congress will call bullshit on, as pleasing as that rhetoric may sound.

Jim d. … If you want to have credibility, try to avoid statements like “Obama could prove to be worse than George W. Bush.” Please, no rational person honestly believes that.

And maybe, just maybe, you might want to cite an occasional fact.

I know, Reagan was probably right when he said facts are stupid things. Still, I’m kinda partial to ‘em.

“2) he could actually accomplish what he says he wants to accomplish”

Hell, lilyfern-He’s can actually say what he wants to accomplish in an intelligible way. After nearly 8 years of Bush, that’s enough for me.

Jim … even if it were true that JFK (or did he mean Obama? Couldn’t tell from the context) only “put out housefires he set himself” … that’s a whole helluva lot better’n the current douche-bag-in-chief.

Hell, W can’t even restore electricity and running water to Baghdad.

Ann, I’m not sure which comments you’re referring to, in particular, but when someone says that Obama could be worse than Bush, in my view that’s an assertion that strains credibility. When they say Obama has a “racial agenda,” in my view that’s an out right lie and a scurrilous accusation. And yeah, I ridiculed it, because ridicule is better than being truly nasty.

Jim d.’s comments may or may not be valid in some ways, but they are utterly conclusory without any effort at factual support. Combine that with the nonsensical “he could be worse than Bush” and the questionable (I didn’t say “racist”; I might be thinking “racist,” but I didn’t say it) accusation that Obama has a “racial agenda” … and I’m not feeling particularly generous.

Racial agenda … gay agenda … feminist agenda … sounds a like like code words to me. In fact, that sounds a lot like, um, Limbaugh and O’Reilly, ya know?

Ohferlobstersake, DvE, you sure do like to argue! Or do you just like to argue with me? Since I didn’t refer to that guy’s comments at all, or yours, why would you address a rebuttal to me? And since I did quote another commenter, you might at least have assumed that was the post I was referring to. Or you might, y’know, actually read my comments and respond directly to them. I know you know how.

When Billy picked on me in grade school, Mom said it was because he liked me. If you keep this up, I’m going to assume the same thing about you.

On an unrelated note, a woman I know who escaped from Vietnam after the fall of Saigon says that everyone in the local Vietnamese community is supporting McCain because he “fought for them” and they feel an obligation toward him. I was greatly dismayed.

Lobster Almighty, Ann! First Dale, now DvE? How many other suitors do I have to fight off?

Hey, guys. We’ve been going at it all wrong!

So, are you saying that rather than try to impress Ann, we should hide her slide rule or something?

Gunther, please…

I’m certainly glad to find out Acronym Jim is gay.

Yeah, they were looking kind of chummy in that picture from the West Coast gathering.

For sure, he’s a good looking guy.

Acronym Jim, watch out for Caesar, here. I don’t think he’s your type, but he sure does.

Then why is Caesar in The AnnFan Club, if he likes guys? Oh….yeah… I see…

Maybe, we could tease her about her red hair.

Maybe you should