Dean Barnett, writing in the Weekly Standard, tells us that Obama sans a teleprompter is a much less impressive speaker. However, I have my own thoughts about this passage:
His spontaneous comments eschewed the conciliatory and optimistic tone that has made the Obama campaign such a phenomenon. It looked like the spirit of John Edwards or Howard Dean had possessed Obama every time he vamped. While Paul Krugman probably loved it, this different Obama was a far less attractive one.
At one point, Obama launched an improvised jeremiad against the current administration that took special note of the recent revelation that he and Dick Cheney are distant relations:
"Now I understand some of the excitement doesn't have to do with me. I know that whatever else happens whatever twists and turns this campaign may take, when you go into that polling place next November, the name George Bush won't be on the ballot and that makes everybody pretty cheerful. Everyone's happy about that. The name of my cousin Dick Cheney won't be on the ballot. That was embarrassing when that news came out. When they do these genealogical surveys, you want to be related to somebody cool. So, but, his name went be on the ballot.
"Each of us running for the Democratic nomination agrees on one thing that the other party does not--that the next president must end the disastrous policies of George W. Bush. No more Scooter Libby Justice! No more Brownie incompetence! No more Karl Rove politics."
None of this was in the prepared text. And all of it was a marked departure from the kind of successful campaign that Obama has run. One can imagine Obama, if he thought things through more fully, using the revelation regarding Cheney as an occasion to note something vapidly uplifting like how in America, we're all part of the same family.
I'll accept that none of this was in the prepared text. However, I saw Obama live and un-teleprompted at a high school event before the New Hampshire primary and he used almost those exact words there, so I query "marked departure". That said, Obama managed to turn the Cheney-bashing into a big laugh line - had I blogged about it (I nearly did, but my time-management being what it was...) I would have reported it as follows:
The name of my cousin Dick Cheney won't be on the ballot. That was embarrassing when that news came out. When they do these genealogical surveys, you want to be related to somebody cool - someone like Abraham Lincoln, or Martin Luther King... or Tom Brady. So, but, his name went be on the ballot.
Obama also included the "No more Scooter Libby justice" line, at which point one of my companions, knowing well my habits and vices, asked whether I was still feeling the inclusion and outreach. I was not, but promised I would be feeling it again as soon as I finished a few more eye rolls.
My takeaway at the time was that Obama was having a bit of fun with some red meat, a vital part of any campaigner's diet; I didn't lose sleep worrying that his heart was in it.
Mow this recent speech was given at the Virginia Jefferson-Jackson dinner - maybe Obama just couldn't think of any cool Virginians off the top of his head (it was a Jefferson-Jackson dinner, so there were subtle hints...) but had the tickling sense that "Abraham Lincoln" might not have been precisely the right name to invoke. I blame deficient staff work! And Obama's own flawed madrassas upbringing, of course - when in doubt, go with "Derek Jeter". E.Z.
MORE: Of course Derek Jeter is not from Virginia, but they wish he was. Michael Jordan is comparably iconic, but those Virginia basketball fans can't be trusted to get over the North Carolina thing.
PILING ON: The Politburo has a YouTube clip and challenges folks to judge Obama's unprompted speaking skills for themselves; he also heard the same "My cousin Dick Cheney" story in Hartford.
He is cousin to Abe. We're all cousins.
=======================
Posted by: kim | February 12, 2008 at 12:08 PM
That line about Scooter Libby really sealed the Obama deal for me. And not in a good way.
Posted by: Jane | February 12, 2008 at 12:32 PM
Oh, heck, Jane, do you have any idea what a tiny percentage of the population believes Scooter was innocent? Even among Republicans, Thompson was the only one to defend Libby.
=============================
Posted by: kim | February 12, 2008 at 12:36 PM
Libby was judged guilty, and has sinced dropped his appeal. He's a convicted felon.
He's "innocent" only in the "minds" of the idiotic and deluded, granted that's virtually everyone here.
Posted by: Martin | February 12, 2008 at 01:26 PM
Ah, Martin, talk to me about Russert, Mitchell, and Eckenrode.
======================================
Posted by: kim | February 12, 2008 at 01:32 PM
The jails are full of 'innocent' people. Ask any of them.
===============================
Posted by: kim | February 12, 2008 at 01:39 PM
We even execute a few of them; even deluded idiots know that. What's your problem?
=========================================
Posted by: kim | February 12, 2008 at 01:44 PM
He's "innocent" only in the "minds" of the idiotic and deluded, granted that's virtually everyone here.
You're here Martin.
Posted by: Jane | February 12, 2008 at 02:02 PM
Martin-
He's "innocent" only in the "minds" of the idiotic and deluded, granted that's virtually everyone here.
It would have been really great if you had said
...that's virtually everyone "here".
Posted by: MayBee | February 12, 2008 at 02:05 PM
But crime was.... what? Not remembering exactly what day and hour he spoke with a reporter 3 years earlier?
Scooter was NOT the source of the "leak" about Plame. Mr. Armitage over at State was - and this was known by Powell and the Prosecuter BEFORE Scooter was even asked to testify.
So the "crime" for which he was judged guilty.... lying under oath. Not being wrong... lying.
Think about it. His "lie" concealed nothing, spared no one, harmed no one. It was a process crime, not something that jeopardized national security, or threatened to bring down his boss.
Posted by: John | February 12, 2008 at 04:44 PM
This excerpt doesn't sound very Kumbaya-ish. Is the MSM keeping his partisan swipes underwraps to help his positive image with the barely-informed? Lynne Cheney was much more gracious about the connection.
Posted by: Ralph L | February 12, 2008 at 05:12 PM
I'll give Dean Barnett the benefit of the doubt and assume he didn't intend to mislead his readers and is simply incomeptent and dimwitted. After all, Obama's speeches are available all over the Web, and for Barnett to suggest that the language he cites from the speech represents a marked departure from the language Obama has been using in all his other speeches on the campaign trail is evidence of laziness and incompetence on his part (after all, perhaps a third to one-half of his speeches over the past three months include all or some of this language). Secondly, what is "less impressive" here is not Obama's speech, but the fact that any person of sound mind could misconstrue a couple of sentences that are clearly intended as a joke (and always taken as such to thousands of people hearing them) as evidence of partisan "anger." Dean Barnett's incompetence and lack of basic English comprehension is simply staggering. What does this say about the Weekly Standard?
Posted by: Charles | February 12, 2008 at 06:06 PM
I'll give Dean Barnett the benefit of the doubt and assume he didn't intend to mislead his readers and is simply incompetent and dimwitted. After all, Obama's speeches are available all over the Web, and for Barnett to suggest that the language he cites from the speech represents a marked departure from the language Obama has been using in all his other speeches on the campaign trail is evidence of laziness and incompetence on his part (after all, perhaps a third to one-half of his speeches over the past three months include all or some of this language). Secondly, what is "less impressive" here is not Obama's speech, but the fact that any person of sound mind could misconstrue a couple of sentences that are clearly intended as a joke (and always taken as such to thousands of people hearing them) as evidence of partisan "anger." Dean Barnett's incompetence and lack of basic English comprehension is simply staggering. What does this say about the Weekly Standard?
Posted by: Charles | February 12, 2008 at 06:15 PM
After all, Obama's speeches are available all over the Web, and for Barnett to suggest that the language he cites from the speech represents a marked departure from the language Obama has been using in all his other speeches on the campaign trail is evidence of laziness and incompetence . . .
Yeah, well, that's not exactly what he said, though, is it? His point was rather that Obama's delivery sucked, which that cited language supports rather well. Here's the relevant claim from Barnett:
Perhaps he mis-cited Obama's, but if BHO really said "So, but, his name went be on the ballot," then I think Barnett's point is made.Posted by: Cecil Turner | February 12, 2008 at 06:34 PM
Yeah, I read it as "BHO Fever is really infectious but it's a 48 hour bug". Sticking with him is gonna be like riding a roller coaster for a week straight without a bathroom break.
The thrill will pass.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | February 12, 2008 at 06:41 PM
Holy crap-you Bush worshippers are now actually critcizing how someone talks?!
Everytime I think you've descended beyond parody-you hit new depths.
Posted by: Martin | February 12, 2008 at 06:46 PM
Holy crap-you Bush worshippers are now actually critcizing how someone talks?!
My ACME irony meter spun wildy for several minutes, the needle twisted into a pretzel, and the whole damn thing melted.
Where do you get yours, Rick? I need a better one, or at least need it better calibrated.
Posted by: Bill in AZ | February 12, 2008 at 06:58 PM
That has got to be the stupidest thing I have ever heard a lib say.
Posted by: Bill in AZ | February 12, 2008 at 07:00 PM
What does that ACME crap actually mean, Bill in Az?
Call me stupid if you want, you moron, at least I'm comprehensible.
Posted by: Martin | February 12, 2008 at 07:02 PM
Bah forget it-I come here every six months to see if you jake-ices have learned anything. Why bother?
I love that RAND study thread. An 18 month study and the first poster busts it by using google! It's comedy gold, I tell ya.
Posted by: Martin | February 12, 2008 at 07:07 PM
FISA has their diapers in a twist tonight.
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | February 12, 2008 at 07:08 PM
The ACME ironometer just won't hold up around progs, Bill. They're fine for everyday blog use in a normal environment but you have to go to a Krupp Ironiedetektor for a prog environment. I think it has something to do with that Liberal Fascism concept but I've really been afraid to ask.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | February 12, 2008 at 07:12 PM
You still here Martin? You have painted a particularly interesting picture of yourself.
Altho "idiotic" may be a bit too kind.
Posted by: Jane | February 12, 2008 at 07:19 PM
BTW Fox calls VA for BHO 66% to 33%. If those percentages hold up, Hillary has been creamed.
Posted by: Jane | February 12, 2008 at 07:21 PM
Jane-you're so boring. I see TM has pretty extensive archives over there. Can you link to the smartest comment you ever made please?
How about top 10? Think you have that many?
Really, you ought to be terrified at what an archive of mediocrity and wrong predictions Maguire has created here.
Posted by: Martin | February 12, 2008 at 07:23 PM
Cecil, Barnett does say "improvised" three times, and "spontaneous" once. It used to be an achievement to make extemporaneous remarks sound as fluent and coherent as a prepared speech. BHO seems to have fooled Barnett by doing the reverse.
Posted by: Ralph L | February 12, 2008 at 07:39 PM
Oh gee Martin, you hurt my feelings. That is what you were going for, right? What a successful boy you are.
Posted by: Jane | February 12, 2008 at 07:57 PM
Call me stupid if you want, you moron, at least I'm comprehensible.
It was comprehensible, all right . . . quite clear, in fact. It also encapsulated Barnett's secondary point perfectly:
That's the irony thing. Acme means "perfection" or a perfect standard (ACME is also often used tongue-in-cheek referring to the company the coyote used in one of his roadrunner trap schemes). Personally, I didn't find it all that obscure.Posted by: Cecil Turner | February 12, 2008 at 08:08 PM
Really, you ought to be terrified at what an archive of mediocrity and wrong predictions Maguire has created here.
Think 70%.
Posted by: Sue | February 12, 2008 at 08:26 PM
Ah that's the problem, marty is notihing if not obscure.
Posted by: boris | February 12, 2008 at 08:26 PM
Well--the kindest thing one can say about Martin is that he's rude.
Posted by: glasater | February 12, 2008 at 08:29 PM
He dared to come here and attack Jane?
That calls for Super-Woman Wrestler--Take this Martin *thwack* and this *smack* and this *crack*!@$^&$*%(
Posted by: clarice | February 12, 2008 at 08:47 PM
Hit & Run,
Have you noticed how well your candidate is doing? Ole Uncommitted is racking up the delegates.
Posted by: Sue | February 12, 2008 at 08:52 PM
I don't think Martin got enuff cartoons at a tender age. Too busy being puffed up with partisan anger. I'd hope for a new way, too.
===================================
Posted by: kim | February 12, 2008 at 09:09 PM
And way too goddamn willing to execute the innocent.
==================================
Posted by: kim | February 12, 2008 at 09:10 PM
You know why I like Uncommitted?
Ecclesiastes 6:11
Posted by: hit and run | February 12, 2008 at 09:12 PM
Well, you can't argue that anybodies said less with more than Obama.
Posted by: Pofarmer | February 13, 2008 at 12:11 AM
Sorry martin, had a meeting to go to... I didn't call you stupid. You're conflating stupid things you say with who you are. That isn't normally an issue with libs - why now? Go on back to your chemtrail discussions - see you in 6 months.
Posted by: Bill in AZ | February 13, 2008 at 12:21 AM
MayBee:
"...virtually everyone 'here'."
LOL! Pearls before swine, alas.
Posted by: JM Hanes | February 13, 2008 at 12:26 AM