“It wasn’t intended for you”
posted at 8:45 am on August 29, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | regular view
I’m reading one comment over and over again in response to criticism here and elsewhere about Barack Obama’s speech — that those who criticize it weren’t the audience for it anyway. I admit that I’m a Republican who has no intention of voting for Barack Obama. However, shouldn’t that have been the audience for this speech?
Presidential candidates rarely win office by only holding their own partisans. That happened in 1992 and to a lesser extent in 1996 because of strong third-party bids by Ross Perot, but otherwise presidential elections become almost entirely binary affairs. One can help tip the scales by energizing the base, but presidential elections are won by convincing skeptics, not just by pandering to the faithful.
When Obama (and John McCain) hit the campaign trail, they know that the audience comprises the faithful. When they have the opportunity to go live on every network, though, the candidates have a much wider audience — and a much larger opportunity to convince the skeptics, and even impress their opponents. Conventions provide the greatest chance in the race for bringing this kind of audience to a candidate.
So why just focus on the faithful, instead of convincing the skeptics that Obama is more than just talk? Either Obama simply isn’t adept enough to understand the difference between a campaign event and a nationally-broadcast event — and I don’t believe that — or he’s still worried that his base has fractured too badly for him to win. After a summer of policy reversals and hedging on still more, Obama can’t afford to reach out in any substantive way beyond the limits of his base.
And again, if we needed more proof of that, we could simply have watched the tone and tenor of the convention itself. Its harsh, complaining, and Bush-obsessed speeches were calculated to present an enemy around which this fractured base could rally, rather than make the sale with the general public.
Obama is a brilliant orator, and his delivery last night was very good. However, it wasn’t good enough to get beyond the limits of his base, and that’s what made this week a lost opportunity for Obama and the Democrats.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
The Obamessiah is running for Jimmy Carter’s second term.
Blackacre on August 29, 2008 at 8:49 AM
He proved he is no MLK…MLK had a vision that was from within and was for all people. even if it wasn’t feasibl it wasn’t an empty one.
tomas on August 29, 2008 at 8:50 AM
heh…
I’m Barry the Lightworker and my state of the union speech is for max only 58% of the American people….
goodnight now.
sven10077 on August 29, 2008 at 8:50 AM
I really hope you are right, Ed. I was flipping to the Obama speech during breaks from the Twins game and I couldn’t watch more than 30 seconds at a time.
Obama is truly dangerous for America and the throngs are deceived. Sad times.
Grafted on August 29, 2008 at 8:50 AM
And yet, if it was a Republican’s speech, it’d be like “out of touch” or whatever.
An t-Oibriche Criosdail on August 29, 2008 at 8:51 AM
Nice speech – but man-oh-man – Obama has got a major league DUMBO THING goint on with those ears.
jake-the-goose on August 29, 2008 at 8:51 AM
Obama is a brilliant orator, and his delivery last night was very good. However, it wasn’t good enough to get beyond the limits of his base, and that’s what made this week a lost opportunity for Obama and the Democrats.
Problem with this, Ed, is this… why should we trust your opinion? What merit does it have? You’ve been attacking Obama for well on a year now… NO MATTER WHAT HE DOES.
He misspeaks and leaves an “s” off “bombs” in a speech and you turn it into:
It speaks to a fundamental superficiality of Obama, a man who seizes tropes and themes with little understanding of their significance or their details. Obama reveals himself as a man who doesn’t understand threats at all, and whose instinctive responses would make them far worse.
You’re a hatchet man. I can honestly say without a doubt that I KNEW you’d say it was a bad speech. Why, because that’s your role. Personally, I couldn’t imagine not being able to say “you know, McCain gave a good speech last night. it was effective. I disagree with this and this and this, but he did well for himself.”
That kind of thinking doesn’t exist with you, it seems. And thus, why should we take you seriously here?
Tom_Shipley on August 29, 2008 at 8:53 AM
In places. But I thought he raised his voice too much, too often, and sometimes in the wrong places. If it were a speech-making contest at that convention, Bill Clinton whupped Barry’s ass.
Typhoon on August 29, 2008 at 8:53 AM
Hey B.O.: The White House
because we are not a socialist nation. You are a socialist and so the White House in the United States of America is not intended for you.
merci beaucoup
Branch Rickey on August 29, 2008 at 8:53 AM
The only thing the democrat convention did was hurl vitriol at Bush. They have defined themselves and their position with reference to Bush. All McCain has to do is maneuver himself intelligently and it’s game over. Easier said than done, but the democrats have given up the ability to maneuver by fixating themselves on Bush. Bad move.
Jester on August 29, 2008 at 8:53 AM
I disagree. He’s a brilliant teleprompter reader with a nice baratone voice. Oratory requires more that.
lionheart on August 29, 2008 at 8:55 AM
It wasn’t for me, I couldn’t possibly care less what this clown act has to say, it’s all an insult to my intelligence. I’m not a child.
Should this clown act become President, I’ll start listening, as the inanities that come out of his mouth will affect my life.
For now, he’s no more than Brittany Spears to me and I don’t listen to or care about her either.
NoDonkey on August 29, 2008 at 8:55 AM
You know, all I heard from the Messiah on his Temple Mount last night is how government will take care of you. He promised to cut taxes for 95% of Americans. He even asked the question my wife and I were literally screaming at the television: how will The One pay for His programs and cut taxes for Americans? He said he would raise taxes on corporations. News flash, Messiah, CORPORATIONS DO NOT PAY TAXES. They pass their expenses on to the consumer, i.e. Americans. Hence, de facto, The One promised to raise our taxes last night to “give” us a state run health care plan. Ask our northern neighbors how that proposition is working out for them. I’m no McCain supporter, but if this Socialist is the only alternative, I’ll take some straight talk any day!
LarryinVA on August 29, 2008 at 8:56 AM
Branch Rickey on August 29, 2008 at 8:56 AM
Sounds like he wants to end one war and start another: Class Warfare
flyoverland on August 29, 2008 at 8:58 AM
“And thus, why should we take you seriously here?
Tom_Shipley on August 29, 2008 at 8:53 AM”
The real question then is, why are you here?
I get news here I can’t get anywhere else and I enjoy commenting on topics that the Captain brings up.
Meanwhile, the Tom Shipleys of the world have CNN, MSNBC, the Daily Kos, the Huffington Post, etc. ad nauseum.
Not telling you how to spend your time, but if you don’t take Mr. Morrissey seriously, than feel free to take your business elsewhere.
NoDonkey on August 29, 2008 at 8:58 AM
Elitism – if you don’t understand then you don’t count.
TooTall on August 29, 2008 at 8:58 AM
“I don’t have a dream.”
drjohn on August 29, 2008 at 8:59 AM
Only ambition.
drjohn on August 29, 2008 at 8:59 AM
Let’s see how the great orator does in the debates.
He acted macho last night about debating McCain.
Obama will be devoured by JSMc in the debates.
carbon_footprint on August 29, 2008 at 8:59 AM
I’m pretty sensitive to other people’s opinions. If I don’t like someone or don’t think they’re doing a good job, yet people I respect do think well of him, I must give them the benefit of the doubt. Maybe they see something I don’t. Maybe they know something I don’t.
Having said that, I thought Obama’s acceptance speech was filled with his typical empty, sweeping, vague, and ultimately meaningless rhetoric, and I thought anyone and everyone could see that. And yet all I heard was the opposite, about how this was the greatest oration since JFK, that he has the gift, that he hit it out of the park. Over and over I heard that. And so I am very confused now. Will have to reevaluate.
Very few things in the speech inspired me. I did connect when he talked about parents raising their children, which also seemed like the biggest applause line of the night. For the most part, it left me cold. It really was “just words”. Contentless platitudes. I thought any thinking person could see that right away. Look not to the past, but the future. Change. This is the time. Over and over again. It’s nonsense. It doesn’t inspire me.
Paul-Cincy on August 29, 2008 at 8:59 AM
Obama has shown himself to be a brilliant orator, but last night’s delivery was not brilliant. He was nervous at the beginning, speaking too fast, rushing his lines, stepping on applause when it would have been better to wait, stumbling over words.
Content aside, I was seriously shocked at his mediocre delivery.
labwriter on August 29, 2008 at 9:00 AM
When is somebody going to point out that some of Obama’s key lines were refashioned from the climactic press conference given by President Andrew Shepherd (Michael Douglas) in American President? I wonder if all that Fox News footage of Richard Dreyfus got Obama’s speechwriters thinking, “Hey, that’s the ticket.”
BuckeyeSam on August 29, 2008 at 9:00 AM
I disagree. Obama is NOT a brilliant orator. He’s a good teleprompter READER. Like any great news anchor. But his speeches are poor and his ad-hoc speeches are even worse (unlike Bush his reading skills suck but when he’s off the cuff are some of the most powerful things he’s ever said)
Skywise on August 29, 2008 at 9:00 AM
Excellent assessment.
It was difficult for me to watch the speech too. Obama is a great orator but anyone could have given that speech. It was hollow. Full of hope but no substance.
What bothered me more was the Brittany Spears’ producer stuff like the family movies that lead up to his arrival. I was expecting to see the Hallmark signature at the end.
So tacky and full of fluff.
His campaign has been nothing but fluff. However his presidency will be nothing like that. As a true socialist the fluff will still be on display while claws, talons, and spines will tear at any opposition.
shick on August 29, 2008 at 9:00 AM
You can’t win a national election merely pandering to your base. And you can’t win the seat of POTUS, blatantly stating that you only represent PART of the country. Even if that is true, you cannot state it.
“It wasn’t intended for you” is one of the most politically moronic, stepping on my own tail, comments that one side could make. Plainly stupid with no inherent gain.
GeeWhiz on August 29, 2008 at 9:02 AM
The argument could certainly be made that the target was the general public based on the President’s popularity. If you think that Bush is only doing badly with the Dem base you’re sadly mistaken. It seems that reminding them of the past eight years – all of it – is not a bad strategy, as long as it’s equal amounts of substance for Obama’s policies. That’s what I think was really missing throughout the con.
In any case, of course Republicans didn’t like the speech nor the tone of the entire convention.
Seriously: DUH.
SouthernDem on August 29, 2008 at 9:02 AM
Who said that?
SlimyBill on August 29, 2008 at 9:03 AM
My favorite moment of the evening was when Bill Richardson said something in Spanish and the crowd !!!roared!!! in approval.
SlimyBill on August 29, 2008 at 9:03 AM
Hey, I did hear one specific last night – he said he’d eliminate the Capital Gains tax for small businesses. Not sure how that slipped in there, but it was there.
The wife and I noticed several times where he almost lost his place on the teleprompters. Each time it’s while he’s turning and you wind up with a very odd pause as he has to find his line.
In terms of just plain public speaking the gentleman from Wyoming that was on before Hillary blew D’oh!bama away, Hillary creamed the gent from Wyoming, and Bill just blew the doors off of the place.
KCSteve on August 29, 2008 at 9:03 AM
But i thought Obama was a uniter, not a divider. If this speech wasn’t to convince conservatives to vote for him, why the h*(% did he give it?
mjk on August 29, 2008 at 9:04 AM
I think Obama is a spineless empty suit. I think he’s a puppet whose strings have been and still are being pulled by some of his advisers. Some happen to lobbyists and special interests.
shick on August 29, 2008 at 9:04 AM
No. Obama isn’t trying to convert diehard conservatives. He was going after Hillary supporters, moderate independents, and probably young, new voters (the type MoveOn has helped register).
Motivating his base and then getting the votes of even a few undecideds will give him this election. He doesn’t need the votes of die-hard conservatives to win this election, so why even pander to them.
cornfedbubba on August 29, 2008 at 9:04 AM
He can get 100% of the black vote, 100% of the gay lesbian vote, 100% of the hippie counter culture vote and it still won’t matter they comprise less than 25% of our population combined. He did little to help get him win the 40% of the typical white person vote he needs.
This is the high water mark for his campaign, the last flare that went up before the SS Barack-tanic goes down.
Alden Pyle on August 29, 2008 at 9:05 AM
There is nothing, nothing that he could say or do at this point to get you or most anyone on this board to vote for him.
Of course it wasn’t intended for you per se, but it certainly was intended for the public consumption, most of whom are not hyper-partisan.
SouthernDem on August 29, 2008 at 9:06 AM
He’s a brilliant orator when he’s reading off a teleprompter in front of screaming fans. In any other setting, he comes off like a mumbling goofball — hence why he is running away from debates with McCain and rarely makes himself available to the press.
I did like the Parthenon setup, though. It made him look like he was, indeed, Zeus, coming down from Mount Olympus to rule over the unwashed masses.
Outlander on August 29, 2008 at 9:06 AM
I wish you people would stop saying that. He’s flat and monotone and his speaches are retreads of the same old democrat speaches that they’ve been giving for years. He plagiarizes other speaches and doesn’t even deliver as well as the original source. The speach he gave last night was the same speach kerry gave in 2004, gore gave in 2000, clinton gave in 1992 and 1996, dukakis gave in 1988 and hitler gave in 1938.
peacenprosperity on August 29, 2008 at 9:07 AM
Lionheart his it out of the park… he reads well. Spontaneously from the heart – not so much.
Chicost84 on August 29, 2008 at 9:08 AM
No Donkey,
Because I believe the Ed Morriseys of the world should be challenged. And this his (at Captain’s Quarters) and Hot Air’s credit, they allow such challenges.
Politics in many ways is about perception. Since the election began, it seems to have fallen on Ed to make whatever Obama does look bad.
I mean, when you start delving into the psyche and drawing real conclusion about a man because of the back drop of his speech… it starts to become ridiculous — and in a real dishonest way.
Tom_Shipley on August 29, 2008 at 9:09 AM
I disagree, but sorry you have so missed the point he was making. I’m sure there is still room for you and the 3 other Obamacans over at the DKos.
BadBrad on August 29, 2008 at 9:11 AM
jumping in late here – there was a speech last night? Thank the Lord (the real one, up in the sky) for football season and the SEC! Didn’t watch the first second of the superstar show. I gather it was uneventful, standard fare..
meoky on August 29, 2008 at 9:13 AM
Ahhh. Refreshing bipartisanship. Looks like all the boundaries and walls are tumbling down. Thank goodness that the “us against them” policies of the Republican party are going away.
/sarcasm
Rogue Traveler on August 29, 2008 at 9:14 AM
Obama needs to give us enough specifics to make himself into a serious candidate, to give himself credibility. Folks were hoping the speech would do that, but it didn’t. It was more of the same shallow rhetoric, just another stump speech.
Obama was an empty suit before the speech and is an empty suit after the speech… a silver tongue in an empty suit.
petefrt on August 29, 2008 at 9:15 AM
I do not know either of their hearts. Based on performance, King seemed to be interested in a America where all people would look at each other as Americans in unity. Hussein, based on who he listened to on Sundays, seems to be a politician saying anything to get elected. What is really troubling is that I believe Hussein is a racist and marxist interested in destroying America. But, again, I do not know his heart—just who he has listened to for years on Sunday morning.
saved on August 29, 2008 at 9:15 AM
Gotta agree with them. Sorry.
wise_man on August 29, 2008 at 9:17 AM
Luckily, judgment is above intellectuals such as yourself.
Rogue Traveler on August 29, 2008 at 9:17 AM
heh..
Barack has a Barry-tone voice..
Now that that is out of my system..
the speech wasn’t spectacular in any sense fashion..
it was the same formula that was being used all week long..
Instead of using the nationwide broadcast for his advantage and laying out a plan on how to unite the country, he listed the same list of greviances of the two terms (or was it 10 years) of GW Bush.. then equated JMc to Bush.. then said ‘Change’ once or twice..
DaveC on August 29, 2008 at 9:18 AM
He’s simply still playing the community organizer role right out of Alinsky’s playbook.
Alinsky:
BrianA on August 29, 2008 at 9:19 AM
Rogue Traveler on August 29, 2008 at 9:17 AM
Hmmm. Probably should have said “below”. I tend to believe in judgment comes from a Higher Power. My comment wouldn’t make too much sense without understanding that.
Rogue Traveler on August 29, 2008 at 9:21 AM
you mean.. like pointing out the Bill Ayers connections?
or the character assassination of National Review investigative journalist Stanley Kurtz at the same time, decrying character assassination?
and trying to systematiclly shut down people who speak out against ‘The One’
DaveC on August 29, 2008 at 9:25 AM
Osama Obama is following in the footsteps of his ideological forebears (Stalin, Chavez, Alinsky, Ayers, etc.) and speaks to his base. I wonder if, like them, he will use thugs, gulags and bombs to deal with the rest of us?
MrScribbler on August 29, 2008 at 9:29 AM
I think Ed’s analysis is spot on. Obama blew it. He came off as an angry old-style liberal.
I am fascinated by how little attention his speech is getting this morning in the news. With the McCain VP drama and the Hurricane Gustav watch, his speech is close to being an after-thought already. McCain’s people have to feel pretty good right now.
flyfisher on August 29, 2008 at 9:33 AM
I agree with lionheart. Obama isn’t a brilliant orator – he’s an actor reading off of a script. It takes more than just reading off of a telepromptor to make a great orator.
crazy_legs on August 29, 2008 at 9:34 AM
Also, about this Messiah thing, Alinsky wrote:
BrianA on August 29, 2008 at 9:34 AM
Proposal for the next McCain ad/internet video:
Several clips of Obama whining about “guilt by association”, then dozens of sound bytes of Obama tying McCain to Bush…Then McCain saying, “I’ve got a record of service that lasts decades, yet my opponent can’t stop talking about a man who isn’t even on the 2008 ticket.”
It’s a way to defeat much of O’Carter’s lame rhetoric while not alienating Bush supporters.
Additional sarcastic remark: “Besides, I was only 67 years old when Bush decided to invade Iraq.”
ynot4tony2 on August 29, 2008 at 9:34 AM
No he isn’t. If his speeches aren’t scripted, he can’t speak. He stumbles, and there are plenty of examples of that.
He’s no better than a Chatty Cathy, but a Chatty Cathy knows there are only 50 states in the Union, not 57.
madmonkphotog on August 29, 2008 at 9:35 AM
Thank you peacenprosperity for putting my jumbled thoughts into words. You nailed it!!!
Branch Rickey on August 29, 2008 at 9:36 AM
LOL if I had a nickel every time he said “change”, I would have a lot of change! I just DON’T get Obama’s magnetic appeal to so many. I don’t see a depth of feeling associated with his rhetoric. I mean, he won’t follow up on most of the crap he spewed. A lot of it is so vague as to be meaningless. Then he’ll change his positions too. You really think we’ll see a lowering in cap gains tax for small businesses? Maybe for anyone selling their business for less than $100,000. Above that it will stay the same or increase! I hope if Obama becomes prez his Secret Service code name is “Just Words”.
Paul-Cincy on August 29, 2008 at 9:36 AM
Don’t worry, Tom_, in an Obama Administration, the “Fairness Doctrine” and Net Neutrality will instituted, so the Capt.Eds of the world need never be challenged again……
Techie on August 29, 2008 at 9:39 AM
GREAT post!
I was just talking to my dad about this. I actually listened and watched Barack Obama carefully at the beginning of this campaign, because he was saying and doing a lot of things that made me think he might really be a guy I could vote for. I was not particularly interested in giving any Republican another four years in office after what’s happened the last eight. I knew tons of republicans who felt the same way and were very much open to a new Democrat who might have understood how we felt and reached out to us.
Whether he was just playing at the beginning, or Hillary pushed him to the left, he has abandoned all efforts to win over disgruntled Republicans. He did not even make a token gesture in that speech to us. Instead he made me feel like I was evil and uncaring because I am a Republican.
He has given John McCain an ENORMOUS opening next week to make a speech that will show America who is the one who can truly unite America. Average Americans are really sick of the partisanship and gridlock. And that’s all they got from Barack Obama last night. They aren’t going to vote for a symbol or an idea. They want action, they want the politicians to STFU and get to work. If McCain speaks to this it will be a grand slam.
rockmom on August 29, 2008 at 9:41 AM
I think McCain should get an ad up ASAP showing Obama’s outrageous and disingenius debate challenge to McCain. If Obama wants to debate foreign policy, McCain should oblige him post haste.
Come on McCain, take Obama’s hubris and shove it down his throat!
flyfisher on August 29, 2008 at 9:41 AM
Ed – you and others here are going to find fault in Obama’s speech because, well, he is supposedly opposite from your political view, and heaven forbid you ever ever agree with anything he says.
It’s quite telling of the type of whining that’s in full unobjective force when people are actually saying there were no specifics in the speech, when, in fact, there were.
The list of complaints is long, tedious and predictable:
-Claims of plagiarism
-claims that he’s a monotone speaker (!)
-complaints about the set
-complaints that the speech is scripted(!)
etc
etc
etc
The party blinders are on in full force.
Dave Rywall on August 29, 2008 at 9:42 AM
Peggy Noonan said Obama “left the Republicans a big opportunity to wield against him, in contrast, humor, and wit, and even something approximating joy.”
I like that.
It makes me think about the pure joy I feel in being an American.
Contrast that with the Dark Lord’s theme, which seems to be, “America sucks.”
__________
RJGatorEsq. on August 29, 2008 at 9:42 AM
I’ve said it before…Obama’s speaking skills aren’t all the impressive. His skill level is easily matched or beaten by many politicians, most actors, newscasters, motivational speakers, comedians, televangelists, corporate spokesmen, and many teachers I’ve had.
So PLEASE stop marveling on his slightly above-par skills as a speaker!
Give me a speech and a couple hours to practice, and I’ll nail it without a teleprompter. So in 2012, you all should nominate ME!
ynot4tony2 on August 29, 2008 at 9:44 AM
So… election strategy…
Obama is running against Bush…
McCain is running against Obamas lack of experience…
Uh… is either running a campaign FOR somthing?
Romeo13 on August 29, 2008 at 9:48 AM
Tom_Shipley on August 29, 2008 at 8:53 AM
Boring.
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on August 29, 2008 at 9:49 AM
It appeared to me that several points in Obama’s presentation last night included things that would appeal to conservatives; build the military, withdraw from Iraq in a responsible manner. It also seemed that Obama lost his rhythm and lost his audience when making those points as if he was unfamiliar with them and uncertain about just how to add oratorical emphasis. It also seemed that the audience, while responding to the cadence of the speech, was somewhat confused by the appearance of those conservative talking points.
I found it very difficult to watch the presentation because of the emotion laden content. I’m very suspicious of politicians who attempt to win my allegiance by appealing to my emotional hot buttons.
It was a very scary presentation for me because of that overt emotional appeal, the acceptance of it by the audience, and the knowledge that the agenda behind that presentation is the socialist/Marxist utopia.
The republicans have to do three things, explain that covert socialist agenda to voters, explain why that agenda is destructive to this country and our future, and explain why freedom of choice and a free market/capitalist government is a better alternative. If McCain can’t do that, there is a very real probability that Obama wins the election.
rockhauler on August 29, 2008 at 9:50 AM
Did anyone notice the line in the Spielberg film making the claim that Obama had a typical American childhood (or something like that)? You know I think he’s right about that. I know a lot of people who have Harvard-educated communist fathers. Some of my best friends attended an Muslim school in Indonesia. My grandpa and I spent a lot of time with his communist poet friend who praised the Red Army and once wrote a poem called “Christ is a Dixie Nigger.”
I feel so much better about Obama!
flyfisher on August 29, 2008 at 9:51 AM
Tom Shipley, I don’t get you. You’ve been coming here for months telling Ed that all his posts about Obama are dishonest. Yet at the top of the post he states, “I admit that I’m a Republican who has no intention of voting for Barack Obama.” You’ve known that all along. Ed doesn’t swoon over Obama and never will. His criticisms are legitimate. What is dishonest about it?
You see and hear a very different man and speech than Ed does b/c you are an Obama supporter. Ed may have a tin ear when it comes to Obama’s speeches, but that doesn’t make him dishonest. It makes him partisan. Kind of like BDS. Has any liberal hack on TV given Bush the benefit of the doubt about anything in the last 4 yrs? This is political hardball. Stop whining about Ed’s posts. You’ve made some thoughtful responses in the past about Obama and why you are voting for him. You should stick to that. Persuade us that Obama is “the man.” I’m listening b/c you have been respectful.
JAM on August 29, 2008 at 9:53 AM
That’s right. He’s looking to energize and mobilize his youngest supporters, the “20-somethings”. He’s counting on Democrats, blacks and first-time voters to take him over the top.
If Maverick is to win this thing, he’d better target older voters because, by and large, the kid’s are lost. The Socialist indoctrination of America’s young people is almost complete.
CliffHanger on August 29, 2008 at 9:53 AM
I agree he’s not a great orator, IMHO.
Kennedy was…
no modulation to Barry’s monotone voice — the only striking characteristic is his low professorial tone… lends faux gravitas.
I thought the “Eight is enough” line was cute, catchy, yet indicative of the fluffy sit-com celebrity aspect of this “Friends” candidate.
It REALLY bugged me when he referred to the events of September 11, 2001 as “Nine-Eleven.” That is trivializing, and was surely intentional. Sure, in conversations, etc. it’s ok, but in a speech of this (hic) magnitude, this day should simply not be abbreviated…again Just IMHO…
max1 on August 29, 2008 at 9:53 AM
Weird. Where on earth are you reading these comments, Ed? I thought that the only accepted wisdom was coronation?
Jaibones on August 29, 2008 at 9:56 AM
AMEN! I hate hearing anyone use “Nine-Eleven.” That’s been a pet-peeve of mine for almost seven years now.
flyfisher on August 29, 2008 at 9:57 AM
Did anyone notice the line in the Spielberg film making the claim that Obama had a typical American childhood (or something like that)? You know I think he’s right about that. I know a lot of people who have Harvard-educated communist fathers. Some of my best friends attended an Muslim school in Indonesia. My grandpa and I spent a lot of time with his communist poet friend who praised the Red Army and once wrote a poem called “Christ is a Dixie Nigger.”
I feel so much better about Obama!
flyfisher on August 29, 2008 at 9:51 AM
This should be a McCain ad! Maverick ad team, get on it, STAT! …. crickets….
uh, I guess not… must. praise. Obama. historic night… my esteemed opponent… bla bla…
Senators should never run for president. they always circle the wagons around their “Capitol Club.”
max1 on August 29, 2008 at 9:59 AM
TS,
Obama doesn’t need Ed’s or anyone else’s help to look bad.
MarkTheGreat on August 29, 2008 at 10:00 AM
When you are saying what people want to hear, it always sounds good.
MarkTheGreat on August 29, 2008 at 10:02 AM
He doesn’t and he can’t. When he spoke to all of America before the primaries, it was of platitudes and generalities. When he gets to the specifics of his platform, its partisan and divisive.
Typical, sure. However, he professes that he is the atypical, non-political politician who will change and unite.
By the way:
Your accusation is baseless and off topic. What makes you sound like Obama is that you conclude as if your complaint had merit in the first place. (Not to mention your criticisms did not match the quotes of Ed’s post that you provided.)
Makes one lean to the notion that your reaction was submitted before comprehending Ed’s opinion.
I deflect; why should we trust your comment?
geckomon on August 29, 2008 at 10:05 AM
The campaign of Hussein the Manchurian has been remarkable to me only for what it has exposed –
- the painful isolation of those who call themselves members of the “black community” or “persons of color” (my favorite). Polling 95% + in favor Obama, while declaring that this vote is not racial, and simultaneously declaring his candidacy “historic” and declaring that they cried during his speech. This from pro-life Christians. Pretzel logic.
- the startling projection of the liberal Democrats, who have cried and whined about the alleged secrecy of Bush and Cheney for 7 years, but who have made inaccessible virtually the entire written record of Obama’s 8 years in the Illinois senate, and have orchestrated a national campaign of threats and intimidation against every media outlet that dares to report or investigate his association with domestic terrorist Bill Ayers.
- and (again and again and again) the hilarious hypocrisy of the partisan Democrat, for more reasons than anyone has time to read here.
Jaibones on August 29, 2008 at 10:06 AM
…is closer to the mark this time than Ed.
The Joe “Have I mentioned I’m from Scranton?” Biden pick and this speech were both aimed at trying to pick up those disaffected blue collar Dems who voted for HRC in the primaries (why not just pick HRC for VP? Because he’s more petty than JFK in offering the VP to LBJ).
And as far as that strategy goes, the speech was alright, minus a few lapses into anger.
But the speech demonstrates the degree to which Obama was still having to address his weaknesses and defend himself against McCain’s “celebrity” attack, etc.
Obama has been playing defense since late June — rejecting public financing, audaciously flip-flopping, trying to build up his foreign policy/defense cred, etc. And late June is when he started trending downward in the polls.
Karl on August 29, 2008 at 10:07 AM
And you were wrong, completely wrong. Here’s what I read from Capt Ed’s post:
There’s no criticism of Obama’s speech here, or elsewhere in the post. The point Ed made was a remarkably centrist, objective one — that Obama’s in a tough spot because he still has to sell his base on his candidacy when he ought to have been selling the nation.
The knee-jerk partisan in the room, Tom_Shipley, is you.
By the way, there are a number of us here who think that the reason there’s so much written that makes Obama look bad is the fact that Obama does so much on his own to make himself look bad. Granted that a lot of us are partisans, we’re aware, educated, thinking partisans who are grateful that in a year when the Democratic brand is inexplicably selling well (despite single-digit approval ratings for a Democrat-led Congress), the Democrats have nominated for President a substance-free rookie who seems intent on destroying himself.
Of course, we do expect that Democrat partisans like you will find a way to blame his self-destruction on Republicans, the way they blamed Kerry’s and Gore’s self-destruction on Republicans. It’s your way.
philwynk on August 29, 2008 at 10:10 AM
Ooh, Tom, bad timing on that question. Ed is taking quite seriously by the overwhelming majority of HotAir readers – take time to actually read the commentary on his posts – because of his diligence, hard work, detailed research and straightforward reporting, in my opinion.
He has won over this group with that effort, when few of us were frequent readers of his previous work at Captain’s Quarters, other than in passing.
You, on the other hand, are reviled, and not just because of your knee jerk liberalism and dissent, but because you almost never have anything intelligent to say other than “you’re wrong and the left is right”.
Jaibones on August 29, 2008 at 10:11 AM
It REALLY bugged me when he referred to the events of September 11, 2001 as “Nine-Eleven.” That is trivializing, and was surely intentional. Sure, in conversations, etc. it’s ok, but in a speech of this (hic) magnitude, this day should simply not be abbreviated…again Just IMHO…
max1 on August 29, 2008 at 9:53 AM
AMEN! I hate hearing anyone use “Nine-Eleven.” That’s been a pet-peeve of mine for almost seven years now.
flyfisher on August 29, 2008 at 9:57 AM
——————–
Congratulations! The award for extreme nitpicking goes to you two.
Your prize is an order of Freedom Fries©®™.
Dave Rywall on August 29, 2008 at 10:14 AM
I finally figured it out. I’m not smart enough to appreciate Obama’s brilliance. Took me awhile, but I got there.
Paul-Cincy on August 29, 2008 at 10:18 AM
Actually I thought his delivery was terrible if you were watching it on TV. I can’t believe how much he did the look left, look right, look straight and switch back and forth so quickly. I did not get the impression he was trying to speak to me, but trying to look every where but at me on TV. I actually stopped watching to be able to listen, because this head swerving was too distracting at times.
JeffinSac on August 29, 2008 at 10:19 AM
Barry has some self-destructiveness in him…
benrand on August 29, 2008 at 10:20 AM
Awesome, I totally agree. I’m a NYer and lost friends in nine eleven, and I could seriously care less about how it is referenced. September 11th, 9-11 nine one one…really makes no difference.
Now to the other matter at hand. I feel like MOST speeches given during election times are primarily given to energize the base, and court some undecided independents. I think by this time each respective parties know they’re not exactly going to be cutting each others base out from under them, so they look to keep theirs in the fold, and try to nab a bigger chunk of the undecideds.
This is all before Palin though…I have no idea how that’s going to roll yet…I mean I have my suspicions, but it seems like she’s very republican, and may not garner as many of the disaffected HRC supporters as some people like to think. It’s still a great move though.
beefytee on August 29, 2008 at 10:23 AM
Congratulations! The award for extreme nitpicking goes to you two.
Your prize is an order of Freedom Fries©®™.
Dave Rywall on August 29, 2008 at 10:14 AM
Mmmmm I loves me some Freedom Fries!
max1 on August 29, 2008 at 10:26 AM
The Obamabots are trying to shutdown or shout out any legitimate criticism of The One’s performance.
Don’t blame them, they’re just following the lead of the Obamessiah.
p0s3r on August 29, 2008 at 10:38 AM
cornfedbubba on August 29, 2008 at 9:04 AM
Agreed with your analysis to a point – conservatives should not be the target of that speech. But how does Obama’s speech reach out to the groups you mentioned (other than the Kosbots)? If motivating the base was sufficient for liberal Democrat candidates, then we would be debating the likelihood of President Kerry’s second term at this moment.
HobbesDFW on August 29, 2008 at 10:38 AM
Brilliant Orator? He’s no Winston Churchill. He’s no Ronald Reagan. He’s not even Bill Clinton.
Disturb the Universe on August 29, 2008 at 10:44 AM
Well Rywall, I am not so small-minded that I would actually hold “Nine-Eleven” against Obama. That phrase is just a small pet-peeve of mine, it’s like nails on a chalkboard to me. But I will admit, it’s a big nothing.
So, please take comfort in the knowledge that his use of the phrase is something like Reason No. 497 on my Why I Don’t Support Obama List.
flyfisher on August 29, 2008 at 11:01 AM
Yes, yes, yes.
I am more than a few commentators has stated that the whole DNC convention and the wrap up speech should have been geared to swaying independants, especially given Barack’s popularity amoung Dems. Having seen that the whole Hillary will-she-or-won’t-she was essentially a very nice sucker by the Dems to ensure ratings, grabbing independants should have been the main goal.
As I (am again, many others) have said, the republicans need to forget about “engergizing the base” crap and target independants by refuting each and every lie in just about every speech that came out of Dever this week. In fact, McCains’s speech should directly address Barack’s speech.
Waterboy on August 29, 2008 at 11:10 AM
Rywall said:
Awesome, I totally agree. I’m a NYer and lost friends in nine eleven, and I could seriously care less about how it is referenced. September 11th, 9-11 nine one one…really makes no difference.
not for nothing, drywall, but i live in downtown Manhattan and watched both buildings fall in front of me eyes… sorry to take away your Absolute Moral Authority card… and i stick by my conjecture that Barry’s use of the “Nine-Eleven” term was intentionally trivializing…words count…didn’t the One tell us so?
max1 on August 29, 2008 at 11:12 AM
I’m sorry but his oratorical style just wears on me, but then, I’m not the intended audience.
TedInATL on August 29, 2008 at 11:12 AM
That was my comment, not drywall’s.
If you need someone to say the words “September Eleventh” to make the events of the day carry the proper significance, well then I’m afraid you’re simply missing the point. Does the word “September” really drive it home for you? Is that the proper phraseology to honor those who dies on that day? Screw moral authority, this is just simple common sense and nit pickery.
Saying “nine eleven” in no way trivializes the thousands of casualties of that day. If anything, it simply vilifies the words “nine” and “eleven”. Although words may count, I don’t necessarily think that the words “nine” and “eleven” will lose any sleep over their recent vilification.
beefytee on August 29, 2008 at 11:36 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »