Get to Work!
| Wed Jan. 21, 2009 9:56 AM PST
GET TO WORK!....Former presidential speechwriter James Fallows notes that Barack Obama has made a lot of speeches that were instantly praised as hits. But:
In many other cases, especially late in the campaign, the red-hots among his supporters thought he had "underperformed" or been "just so-so" immediately after an event, only to see the days-later and weeks-later reaction to the performance turn much more positive. The clearest example was his first debate with John McCain, where supporters thought he had missed chances to go in for the kill — but over time it was clear that he had established his steady, gravitas-worthy persona.
I think his inaugural speech will be in this second category. Now that I have a chance to look at some blog-world commentary, I see that some is underwhelmed, as after the first debate. I think that the speech was in fact very well-pitched to this moment in history and the messages Obama wants and needs to send. That is, both artful and useful.
I wouldn't say that I was "underwhelmed" by Obama's speech, but even after a night's sleep I'll stick to my initial reaction that it was fine, but not really very memorable. Still, maybe that was the point. If I had to describe the speech in a word, I'd call it "workmanlike," and maybe that's exactly what Obama wanted it to be. After all, his steady theme, both yesterday and for the past couple of months, has been that his administration will be one that buckles down and gets to work from Day 1. Memorable would have just gotten in the way.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Comments
I think Favreau's holding out for a bigger pay check.
"With hope and virtue, let us brave once more the icy currents, and endure what storms may come. Let it be said by our children's children that when we were tested we refused to let this journey end"
Ron Burgandy will evidently read anything put up on the teleprompter.
I listened to the speech a second time on Josh Marshall's site and was rather excited to realize that Obama exuded a sense that he was utterly in control of the message; his delivery was forceful, confident. If you notice, Obama's recent speeches, beginning with the speech at the Democratic National Convention, have veered away from the soaring rhetoric the racket-radio crowd might jump on. It's very difficult to write a relatively short "patriotic" speech without resorting to cliches, etc. Obama is sensitive enough to language to realize the pitfalls in a format like this. My admiration for this man continues apace.
h
When Obama was doing soaring rhetoric in his speeches, he was accused of a lack of substance. Now that he is going for more substance, he is accused of lacking soaring rhetoric. Really, these things are considerably at odds and not always interweavable in one speech. The times are very somber, and I think he is shifting tone appropriately.
I know several people who stood out in the cold to hear him, and not one of them feels disappointed.
To all the blog-groaners who were counting cliches: Would you try to write a completely fresh speech while doing everything that Obama and his team have been doing for the last few months? After being inundated for God knows how long with the banalities of the MSM, the inanities of GWB, the absurdities of Palin, and the generally depressing level of what passes for public discourse in this age, hearing (not reading) a natural speaker express coherent thoughts in well-turned sentences, with occasional emotional emphasis coming through the tone and pace, was electrifying. I didn't expect a SOTU on this occasion (for all you who are impatient for details) and the cliches were few enough not to annoy, at least not one who is inured to television commercials. This speech, plus the one on race last year and the acceptance speech at the convention convince me that this is the best public speaker we have had in my memory --- which goes back past JFK to Winston Churchill.
And, knowing that BHO is also a good poker player, I imagine that he will do well at the inside game too. My experience in relatively small groups (as both follower and leader) has shown me that the net result reflects the quality of leadership (a combination of persuasiveness, task-related competence, and emotional intelligence, and some un-analyzable aura of authority). Anyone who has been in the military knows exactly what I mean. And we all have experienced the negative consequences of the lack of such leadership.
So far, by the results of the campaign and the transition, plus the way his speech shows the quality of his mind, and his demeanor the quality of his temperament (not to mention his evident near-miraculous self-control) Obama seems well equipped to do the job we have given him. The real test will come when he has to push back...how he picks his battles and how he fights them. I'm so far confident of the result.
And he can hit a 3-pointer as well. The Wizards could use some help.
A President's inauguration speech becomes historic only in hindsight, when it presages an important presidency.
Obama can never again blow away people with the force of his rhetoric as he did in the campaign, even up until his Grant Park speech, when he was still surprising people. The surprise is over, we expect soaring rhetoric now, so all measurements are relative.
This speech was excellent, for its clear repudiation of the Bush years, its clear invocation of troubled times and for expressing the confidence and sense of purpose that will help us turn the page.
I don't care about 8-second phrases that will go down in history!
To the best of my recollection, Obama is the first president to mention solar and wind energy in his inaugural speech:
"We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories."
I was impressed by that.
On the other hand, I was very disappointed in Steven Chu's statements during his confirmation hearing that he supports "accelerating" the already massive taxpayer bailout of the failed nuclear power industry, and even worse, supports building more coal-fired power plants without carbon sequestration technology -- both of which are decisively WRONG ways to go with regard to both global warming and providing abundant, clean, safe, secure energy.
So, we'll see what we shall see.
Fantastic speech.
Reread Bush's speech from 2001. Bush asserts equality and rule of law as one of the first principles of governance. Then he endeavors to undermine the role of governance while in effect establishing the notion of a people united by something other than race or common history.
It's incoherant and highly ironic, given his Presidency - and it liberally uses right-wing and religious memes.
President Obama works to establish the role and limits of government - which he believes to be considerably more expansive in the economic and regulatory sphere than any President for 35 years. Brilliant. He will have to return to this theme over and over and over again, in a most workmanlike way, until America has rock-solid notion of government's expanded role in modern life.
I thought the speech was fine.
But it's time to stop reviewing the speeches, and see how he actually performs.
That's the review that matters. I very much want him to succeed, and if he governs well I don't care if he ever gives another good speech or not.
Submitted by DesiPanchi (not verified) on Wed Jan. 21, 2009 10:59 AM PST.
I would take Tripp's comment - though not the part about Kevin shutting up. I think he is never going to come around about this speech.
I admit, I felt somewhat cheated. However, upon reflection, and watching Rachel Maddow's dissection of Obama's speech helped me get over it. It was a good speech. In fact, it was thoroughly in keeping with the purpose - so a purposeful speech. No soaring rhetoric - except for one passage which had Pat Buchanan fawning - arghhh, but I don't think that was the point - as made obvious by Pat Buchanan's fawning.
I am surprised that even sober people like Kevin keep harping on this. Grow up, will ya? Just kidding, btw.
-- r
Kevin Drum >"...I'd call it "workmanlike,"..."
You agree with Pat Lang. I agree with the poker player & strategic perspective comments.
I think this is gonna be so much fun I can hardly wait. And a huge shout out to Reverend Lowery.
"...it's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine..." - REM
We will see.
It seems to me that it is way too early to know what will be the things that history latches onto. Memorable speeches are usually memorable because they are an historical marker to an importantly memorable event.
Churchill's speech
We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets ..
might not be so widely recalled had Operation Sea Lion been successfully carried out crushing the Brits.
Anyone recall one of Jefferson Davis's rousing speeches? I think not.
Didn't Fallows write for that impressive orator James Earl Cater? Wow!
I thought it was a good speech. I was in some ways more impressed with the snippet at the end of his speech at the congressional luncheon, directed toward those that he must work with:
Now it falls to us, the people's representatives, to give our fullest measure of devotion to the cause of freedom and liberty and justice, decency and dignity. And our chambers should reflect what we know are in the hearts of the American people.
And so I would like to -- all of us, to rededicate ourselves to fulfilling the sacred charge the American people have given to us. I would like all of us to come together with a sense of purpose and civility and urgency.
It doesn't mean we're going to agree on everything. And I assure you our administration will make mistakes. But what the American people I think do expect from us now is a sense not of simply our trying to advance our own aims, but trying to advance theirs. And I'm confident we can do so.
Submitted by Jasper (not verified) on Wed Jan. 21, 2009 1:07 PM PST.
I wouldn't say that I was "underwhelmed" by Obama's speech, but even after a night's sleep I'll stick to my initial reaction that it was fine, but not really very memorable.
My sentiments exactly. I think the problem is for folks who were expecting something amazing. But I wasn't. Not that Obama isn't a good speaker - he's great. And he's got a fine staff to help him craft words, and the new president himself obviously possesses a gift for writing. I just wasn't expecting anything extraordinary because great inaugural addresses happen so rarely. There haven't been any since I was born ('66). Doesn't mean there haven't been plenty of good political speeches outside of inaugurations, though. Reagan made several. Gore's concession in 2000 remains one of the most moving I've ever heard. Obama will knock a few out of the park before it's over -- I guarantee it. There's just something about inaugurations that seem to make it difficult. In fact, now that I think about it, there are only three in the country's entire history (maybe I'm missing one or two) that get frequent mention: JFK's, FDR's first, and Lincoln's second. So what were the odds of a "fear itself" phrase capturing the public's imagination?
Agree with comments above noting Obama's strategic thinking. The day itself was a soaring achievement. Obama would have gilded the lily had he delivered the sort of speech so many say they expected. I can't blame us for feeling greedy after eight years of Mr. Malaprop. But I also cannot blame the new president choosing a more sober address, if only to moderate our national mood.
One thing I've learned watching Obama for two years and having read his autobiography. He is not a show-off. He does not like showoffs. He's a right-place-right-time orator.
And so in his view, I suppose, yesterday was rightly and best dominated by the theater of inauguration. All Obama needed to utter, in his address, was the truth, plainly and with strength (e.g., "As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals. . . .)."
Powerful, soaring oratory? We'll hear it, but only when he thinks it's necessary.
Yeah, but his acceptance speech was a bit workmanlike, too.
One of these times, it would be nice to see him swing for the fences again.
One of the reasons Obama was elected was not just because he will be a competent manager, but because of the strength of his rhetoric to energize and elevate the populace. His speech did almost the opposite-- he opened with a list of seemingly insurmountable obstacles, and then, rather than saying that they will be overcome, he just says that they "will be met." It's the posture of a doomed and heroic last stand.
There was no alchemical inversion of gloom to inspiration, or fear to hope.
I agree with Bruce K: "A President's inauguration speech becomes historic only in hindsight, when it presages an important presidency."
How much of FDR's first inaugural do most of you know except the one "fear itself" line--or Kennedy's "ask not" couplet? Only after countless replays and quotes in history books do particular lines like these become iconic. Plenty of Obama's lines were quoted in stories on the speech, and the ones that remain relevant as the administration goes forward will be the ones taught to future generations. People don't go away from famous speeches recalling the best lines like the tune of a catchy song; what will be remembered is a function of history. Just wait awhile.
I liked the speech's honesty and directness. I loved the fact that it wasn't filled with platitudes and empty promises. I was surprised by the very serious tone Obama took, since I'd assumed we'd hear hopeful, uplifting fluff, or another laundry list of what he was gonna do. Instead, we've now been told that we're going to be treated like grown-ups and we'd better step up. Thank heavens for a president who can not only speak in full sentences, but who can tell us the truth.
Post new comment
MoJo Comments: Send Us Your Feedback
We changed our spam software to better filter comments. Should you encounter any issues, please let us know.
