Tonight I went out for a nice hour run over to Ft. Snelling and back (+/- meandering on side trails). A great run- and a great opportunity to show that we're not just a country of short runs - or a country of long runs - but that we can go out for perfectly medium-sized runs as well.
The Obama show last night was great. Pretty stock political speech overall. Gotta take care of the children, gotta make heath care affordable, gotta not be like Bush, McCain is sorta like Bush, Hillery is ok by me, ok-er if she just gives up already... But amazing to be there when he announced that he would be the nominee and amazing to cheer right though the climactic lines about this being our moment. I hope he gets about 10 hours of sleep tonight.
But also, yeah, a show. The cameras panned the crowd. Campaign workers appeared to be giving strategically seated people some quick tips on cheering and sign waving. The concession stand was open- all just like a Wild game. I'm not bitching or anything. I wouldn't reasonably expect it to be any other way. Just funny to see those side details happening.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
June 4: LSCC A & W short, 43:11. We weren't going fast, but took a sidetrack through the park and rr tracks which further shortened things. Then got some grub at Adelita's, which was solid.
I think I have to disagree with the description of a "stock political speech." Yes, those were clearly the themes which needed to be addressed--but the amazing part wasn't the fact that he mentioned Hillary or that he mentioned Grampy McInsane or that he talked about healthcare or the war. The amazing parts were (a) the more positive than was necessary description of Hillary (b) the hardass approach to McLame's policy positions and commitment to make the case in the marketplace of ideas and (c) the overall pitch was directed at the process rather than the goal.
Some might want to dismiss those as mere style points, but that style is such a relief. The presentation wasn't "I'm going to win, I'm on the road to the white house" or that crap, but rather it was "you have a voice and power. . .the clear policy positions will be on the table and the people will decide."
A lot of politicians talk about health care, the war, etc--but there aren't many who can hold back their hubris when they do so. There's a compulsion to insert the quiet part of "ohmigoshohmigoshohmigoshohmigosh nobody else in the wholefrigginwideworld could possibly do this as goodfully as I" that is flat-out pathetic.
On the Hillary side, there was clearly a need to address her positively, but he went much further in praising what she has done than decorum and healing and all that crap required. Same topic as anyone would have broached, but communicated more effectively and more believably than most could manage.
Overall, yes, the topics that were raised were "stock" if you will insofar as those are the issues that a person running for president and clinching the nomination would be expected to address. I wasn't expecting him to tell a story about how his cat made a really funny face after the yarnball he was playing with got trapped under the couch then walk off the stage--and he didn't tell that story. But the stock elements of the political speech are more than the topics but also the perspective on those topics--in that respect it was far from standard. He did everything he needed to do politically, but he up and did it all better and more effectively than any presidential candidate in my lifetime. Granted, that's a pretty small sample size, but it has certainly been some time since that packaging and presentation of the same topics that modern presidential campaigns have been based on has been revamped like this. The presentation of the message is as important as the topics, since we all know what the topics are going to be in advance. Therefore, I would disagree with the description of it as a mere "stock" speech.
Most importantly, the fist bump between Barack and Michelle was the best thing I've ever seen. I can only imagine that the next time around, they'll be blowin' it up.
i actually agree with biz.
i didn't know how to react, either...
I loved the fist bump, too!
Still processing my thoughts on the speech/nomination process. My emotional reactions have surprised me. I have been personally saddened by the response to Hillary and to her actions, and it's been interesting for me to objectively observe myself watching the end of her run. I didn't expect to feel this way since she was not my choice for the nomination.
I've been an Obama supporter all along, since before he declared his candidacy, I think, and his approach is so very refreshing. I really appreciate his appeal to the better part of human nature, his belief in hope and change. It's inspiring, and I do feel it is a drastic change from where we have been for a very, very long time.
I maintain that it was a stock speech. Of course he overpraised Hillary. That was the stock thing to do at that moment. He needs to recover from "You're likable enough, Hillary." Everyone on the planet is talking about how the party needs to get reunited. I don't think anything he said there was particularly innovative. Overpraise fit the bill.
As so far as his hardass approach to Gramps- he just did the stock Bush-McCain thing. And he did that after the stock - but oh muh gosh I sure do respect Grandpa thing. If all we hear for the next five months is Bush's name, followed by McCain's name with a hyphen in between like we can be tricked into thinking it's just one word, well then I think that's stupid. And I think it will be an example of playing not to lose, Viking-Democrat style.
I don't know about (c). Maybe you've got a point there. If you walked away feeling like there was an innovative pitch towards the process rather than the goal, then I can't dispute that. And also, it is true that he didn't do the "We're going to be in the white house blah blah blah thing." I agree with you there too.
But on the whole, I didn't feel like I saw a breakthrough in political rhetoric. I think that Obama is a great orator. I just don't think that that's what we saw on Tuesday. On Tuesday I think we saw bullet points and cheering - which was completely appropriate for the moment.
That doesn't mean that he would have had to talk about his cat and its yarnball - as my opponent has suggested - to make it not a stock speech. I just don't think that there was anything in the speech that was at all tricky for a screaminly pumped up democrat audience to digest.
Again- not saying that he needed to get out there and reinvent the acceptance speech. Just reiterating that I thought it was pretty typical. I look forward to hearing the sort of speeches that President Obama would deliver outside of the madness of a campaign. If he gets four years to develop thoughts and ideas with us, then that's when I'll expect him to go beyond the bullet points. The Wright thing forced him to make a thoughtful speech and it was beautiful. I hope to hear more of that - when the occasion affords.
And the fist bump WAS cool.
Post a Comment