Obama Is A Good Reader
It seems that Barack Obama has trouble delivering a good and inspiring speech without a telepromptor. We all know that he can give tremendous speeches when he’s reading it out loud, but when the teleprompter refuses to work Obama seems to be lost.
USUALLY WHEN BARACK OBAMA gives a major speech, the overdone hosannas from the liberal commentariat follow as surely as night follows day. The American Prospect’s Ezra Klein wrote of Obama’s post-Iowa victory speech, “I’ve been blessed to hear many great orations. I was in the audience when Howard Dean gave his famous address challenging the Democratic Party to rediscover courage and return to principle . . . But none achieve(d) quite what Obama, at his best, creates. . . . Obama’s finest speeches do not excite. They do not inform. They don’t even really inspire. They elevate. They enmesh you in a grander moment.”
It would be unfair to say this childish lefty gushing has been without cause. Obama is indeed a magnificent speaker. A few days after his Iowa address, I emailed a friend of mine and called it the finest political speech I had ever heard. Then again, I cannot claim to have been in the audience for Howard Dean’s “famous address.”
In spite of Obama’s obvious strengths in this area, questions linger regarding Obama’s gifted speechifying. Do his speeches give us a glimpse at a very special man with a unique vision? Or are we merely witnessing a political one-trick pony? Yes, Obama can turn a phrase better and do more with a Teleprompter than any other modern era politician. But does his special skill set here actually mean anything, or is it instead the political equivalent of a dog walking on its hind legs–unusual and riveting, but not especially significant? Regardless, the liberal commentators have gushed their praise nearly every time Obama has opened his mouth before a Teleprompter the past few months.
It was thus interesting to see Obama climb to the stage at Virginia’s Jefferson-Jackson Dinner on Saturday night. As he strode to the podium, Obama clutched in his hands a pile of 3 by 5 index cards. The index cards meant only one thing–no Teleprompter.
Shorn of his Teleprompter, we saw a different Obama. His delivery was halting and unsure. He looked down at his obviously copious notes every few seconds throughout the speech. Unlike the typical Obama oration where the words flow with unparalleled fluidity, he stumbled over his phrasing repeatedly.
This is Obama’s main problem: he is not inspiring or thoughtful or enlightening when he has to innovate. We often see this in debates. He does not get better at them. He loses every single debate. Why? Because he does not know what questions he will be asked.
It is also interesting to note that Obama instantly started talking like an ‘angry liberal,’ according to Barnett. I think that is quite likely if for nothing else than because Obama is very, very liberal.
Again, Ronald Reagan gave the same speech over and over and over again. Any nuance in the delivery was almost predictable, and often just related to regional or audience specific quirks.
When he ad-libbed, he would essentially call Liberals idiots. Obama is not pretending to be something other than a Liberal. This argument is a creation of his critics, not his campaign.
Everybody sounds worse when off guard. See red, puffy faced Bill Clinton when he has off-the-cuff questions posed to him.
And didn’t Barnett support Romney? Isn’t this a severe case of the pot calling the kettle black? Romney was the most polished and contrived candidate in the race.
If you think you can do better than Obama, with or without telepromter why aren’t you runing.
I am ineligable because I am Dutch, Mikey. Do some research before you ask stupid questions. As for debating: Yes I could do better than Obama. In fact, I am a pretty good debater whereas Obama looks like Fred Thompson who forgot to take his daily cafeine shot.
admin: another personal attack will = ban
Unlike most of the people here as well as the author of the linked article, I have given a large number of public speeches with minimal scripting. It is very difficult to come off sounding perfectly coherent, no matter how well one knows the underlying issues. It is also difficult to see how one’s relative skill in this ad-libbing relates in any way to whether they would be a good President. I was one of the best in the business at it — you want me to be President? Didn’t think so.
Sorry, Michael, but I think this one is just a cheap shot at Obama. There are lots of legitimate ways to criticize candidates that we each dislike, maybe we shouldn’t be swinging at every pitch.
I for one enjoy the current Presidents ad lib speeches heard on my tube radio. In a time of war, such insight and wisdom motivates the country in shared sacrifice. Gotta go, time to weed the Victory Garden and recycle some oil…
So how to explain this?
This might be a problem were it not for the fact that Barnett
apparently pulled this story out of his ass.
Here’s a Youtube clip of part of the speech. Not great quality, but he doesn’t look too unsure or stumbling over his words.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOu5KZJF-iE
The problem with Obama is that this is all there is to complain about because he is so content-less. He’s for "hope". Golly gee wiz…that’s swell.
His plan seems to be to "unite" us by being saccharin.
Funny…I never thought what this country was lacking was a (yet another) rather boring politician from Illinois.
Well, if Obama wins the nom, we’ll find out how true this really is when the debates roll around. I too have noticed that Obama seems noticeably less nimble and elevating in debates than when delivering canned content. I think this is demonstrable, IOW undeniable. And while it is indeed true that everyone will speechify less well without a teleprompter, it still raises a very legitimate question. Namely, how much more is there to Barack Obama than his undeniable stage presence and oratorical skill? I don’t pretend to know that with any certainty, but there is one thing that I DO know. There’s the wizard on the stage, and there’s the guy behind the curtain. The wizard on the stage can get elected, but when it comes time to govern, it’s the guy behind the curtain that will have to do the hard work.
Oh boy, this is a good one….
But as Tom Maguire, John Cole and others have pointed out, Dean Barnett’s story is just plain false. They even have an actual video, and it would be nice if you posted that here so people could decide for themselves.
From Balloon Juice:
http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=9664
From Just One Minute:
http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2008/02/a-sidebar-on-ob.html
From politburo diktat 2.0:
http://acepilots.com/mt/2008/02/12/barnett-unplugged/
And in fact, I’ll back them up by saying I’ve heard Obama incorporate the same things into his speech about Bush and about the Cheney being his cousin. It happened in Kansas City. It’s part of his stump speech. So much for this meme…
Listen, I know a lot of you over here really don’t like Obama, but posting stuff like this just hurts your credibility to actually attack him on something substantive. What’s more, you’re hurting the moderate blogosphere by pushing this stuff. Please be more selective Michael.
What’s more, you’re hurting the moderate blogosphere by pushing this stuff.
Any more than being uncritical of the man?
Alright, you like the man…fine. But if this were a contest about who best represents a moderate viewpoint, then it is a horribly lopsided affair where Obama , who is embraced by nearly every leftist loon you can think of and who sports a legislative record which can be called "partisan" at best and "out of the mainstream" left at worst, comes off very badly when compared to McCain, who has so often stood against the right wing of the Republicans that the conservative loons are having conniptions.
And the truth is, if you compare Obama and Clinton’s legislative record there is no basis to the claim that there is a whit of difference between them. In fact, Clinton probably has the better claim to working with the other side, although that point is debatable.
But, we are told again and again that so-called moderates have "feelings" that tell them Obama is some sort of moderate messiah.
To me real moderates are those that avoid that kind of emotionalism in favor of the pragmatic, and as far as I can see there is nothing pragmatic about Obama.
I guess I take more umbrage at Obama because the image that is being sold is so obviously a fraud, if you believe that past performance is any indication of future performance.
Listen, MvdG is pushing a story that is riddled with false statements. The idea that he hasn’t done his homework and merely reprints it because he’s not a fan of Obama is what hurts the moderate blogosphere. So yeah, I’d rather have him be uncritical and silent because he’s unsure of a story than publicly wrong because he’s got something against Obama. You wouldn’t? That’s just plain weird.
Of course maybe I should be saying logically bankrupt statements like "Obama stands for nothing," or "Obama is all talk." Maybe I should level criticism at him for his liberal stances when he’s never said he’s anything but. That type of criticism?
And let’s be clear about this idea of being "uncritical"…the Obama supporters in the moderate blogosphere I’ve encountered aren’t uncritical. We all have our doubts about him. But the people I’ve read who support him, like Alan Stewart Carl and Pete Abel and Michael Reynolds, have done enough research to give them enough trust that the guy is genuine. I’m in that same boat. We all know that Obama has helped pass bi-partisan legislation throughout his career, is held in high regard by colleagues on both sides of the aisle and is certainly not in the habit of making political enemies. Is he more liberal? Yes. Does that mean he’s opposed to some ideas from the right? No, and so the bi-partisan legislation throughout his career.
And yes, it’s true that moderates feel very heartened by Obama’s tone. But that’s because we realize it all starts with tone. It’s not like he’s going to end it there, though, and I have faith that a guy who has actually crafted and helped pass bi-partisan legislation will keep doing the same when he becomes President.
So I’m sorry Rich, but you’re leveling charges at me and a bunch of other people who have done their homework. It’s time you did yours.