I'm A Believer

Great Speech. Rich. Complex. True. I don't think that people will be able to find fault with him on this one, not for being a panderer, or a doe-eyed optimist. Or some such thing.

you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink...

In other words, you can put all sorts of ladders in place Borock, doesn't mean people are going to use them.

Maybe it was because I was watching the speach while I was working on other things, but I was completely uninspired by Obama today. Some of his other speeches have been really good. Today's was as interesting as a Bob Dole speech. Content was okay, but not convincing.

Justin,

Read the speech

I was out and about during the speech, and just finished reading it. It had power in written form. I deeply agree with the point that the nation has some unfinished business regarding black/white race relations, and that Obama is the man to bring them forward and reconcile them. We all know he has nuance, but the speech appeared as of a visionary, a thought-leader, a FDR or Lincoln type.

Un-meh.

Also, to holton, it's a good point, but right now we have a president who snuck out one night when the parents (that's us) were asleep, made a ladder out of scrap wood from his old tree house with his nerr-do-well pals, climbed to the top, and then set the base on fire.

I don't see any other candidate with a ladder hanging around, either.

It wasn't perfect (like Douthat says, it could have stood a little more conservative "chest thumping"); I do appreciate that it wasn't framed in "conservative vs. liberal" (or used either as the archimedean point).

In other words, it wasn't about ladders, it was about problem solving. While I do wish I had a better sense of what Obama's solutions aka "ladders" would look like, but to approach this speech from that standpoint is to miss its import (and nuance & depth), and I appreciate that Obama had the guts to call everyone to the carpet.

Also, I read it first before I watched it. A much better read.

Not to overblow things, but being old enough to remember Carter and Reagan and all who've followed, I've got to say that Obama today delivered one of the most finely crafted political speeches I can remember.

Ive read it a couple times now and Im not sure how anybody could be anything other than impressed...if for other reason than the fact that Obama has admitted into political discourse notions like imperfection, incompleteness, and inconsistency without actually being guilty of a crime (like Spitzer's 'hooker bangin') and without flip-flopping on or retracting any of his previous positions (his message of realistic hope and optimism remains 100% intact). Plus he used that great Faulkner quote. The speech was downright astounding if you ask me.

Noel, as a man far more intelligent than myself, I hope you can see your rebuttle has no logical standing. I say this confessing I got a C in Dr. Mac's logic class. Our current president's utter crappness has nothing to do with Obama.

My main snide comment was meant to poke at the "hope" obama speaks of. These ladders have no practical or physical manifestation. Which Josiah admitted,

"While I do wish I had a better sense of what Obama's solutions aka "ladders" would look like"

And I'm sure Borock could come up with a few if push came to shove, some more after school programs, better guidance counselors in highschools, better highschools, etc... The point I would like to bring is these ladders though, they can be constructed, no one can make the troubled youth of today climb them.

I say this not aruging that McCain or Lord help us, Hillary, have any better ideas. Many things are promised, communicated during an election year.

Well, C-to-the-HOLT, I am excited that we have what appears to be a very very intelligent and articulate person running for Pres. Considering the respective absence of real policies in the various campaigns, I'm willing to bet on the really smart guy that makes me feel good and smokes.

I just saw clips of the speech on the Daily Show. The delivery was awful, awful enough to make me speculate that he was aping with speech what Kant attempted in prose by refusing to write concisly and clearly so that you would know that if you believed him it would be due to the truth of his ideas, not his rhetoric. Or he just did not want to sound in any way like the Rev. Whittaker.

Josiah actually replied to Mr Holton for me, but for the sake of completeness, here is the syllogism (with missing premises supplied). Prepare to have the metaphor pummeled by literal logic.

1 Ladders are good.
2 A leader with an articulated, viable ladder is better than a leader with an nothing.
3 An leader with an articulated, viable ladder is better than a leader with an dysfunctional or nonfunctional ladder.
4 Barack articulated a viable ladder in his speech.
5 Bush has a dysfunctional ladder.
6 Hilary and McCain have no ladders.
7 Barack is a better leader than Bush.
8 Barack is a better leader than McCain or Hilary.
9 Barack is the better leader.
QED

Rules used is left as a exercise to the leader.

Josiah, I'm guessing you're not REALLY voting for Obama because he's intelligent and articulate. Those are suck reasons to vote for someone. William F. Buckley was smarter and more articulate than Obama, but I don't either of us would have wanted him as president.

We should vote for whoever we think will benefit mankind the most. I know of no other way of gauging the potential actions and policies of a politican than by looking at what they've said and done. If you were right that the candidates all lacked policies to distinguish them, then I could see just going with the smart, articulate dude. But of course they don't all lack distinctive policies. If you look at McCain and Obama's respective websites under the 'issues' page, you can see the policy difference in 5 seconds. Likewise, if you look at their voting records, the difference is immediately clear.

Or am I just reading WAY too much into your quip to Holton?

Paul, yes, it's far more complicated than Baracktelligence vs. Hillary / McCain, but I wasn't saying it wasn't, nor was I offering up a comprehensive/conclusive argument for or against one candidate or the other.

I do disagree with you that any kind of comprehensive or substantive policies have been offered by any candidate. That's great Mr. Obama that you want to make "long-term investments in education" and McCains "insurance should be innovative". Yes, all three offer up great "repeal tax X" or "bring troops home by X", but I want real, detailed, technical gameplans for how they're going to actually accomplish a thing, and preferably an important thing, like the economy.

Also, I respect that Obama doesn't have a total delta-bravo "McCain Brackets Are Back!" advert on the mainpage of his site.

As this thread -- and virtually every second of news coverage this evening -- attests, white people sure do love Barack Obama.

While his speech today was solid, I wish he'd had shaved, oh, I don't know, about nine hours off of it. I had work to do.

But I digress...

Getting back to my snide "white people" comment, today's speech was a pivotal moment in the campaign. Not because I was inspired by it. (I have intelligent black people in my own family, so, you know, I'm past being blown away when encountering talented, intelligent black people.) No, I think it's a defining moment in the campaign because I fully expect Bill Clinton to go full-on black within the next week, exploiting the black folks in this country who are NOT as currently enamored with Mr. Obama. A racial holy war will ensue, destroying the Democratic Party forever. Or at least providing some hilarious soundbytes.

An aside. Or asides, if you will: In the past, when I have had prolonged differences with the teachings of a pastor, I have left that church. After all, you are supposed to be there to be taught, and there are a lot of churches out there to choose from. Then again, I didn't have a future run for President to think about.

As impressed as I was with many levels of Mr. Obama's speech, you cannot convince me that he 1) was actually all that outraged or shocked or surprised about the pastor's latest comments and 2) would be throwing the pastor under the bus -- even if he says he isn't really -- if he wasn't running for President.

You see, I just don't like politicians. Even the ones everybody else does. It's my issue, and I'm dealing with it.

My main point still stands, he can set up all the ladders in the world, doesn't mean anyone's going to use them. Though if he wins the presidency I will look forward to seeing how my tax dollars continue to be wasted with ladder programs for people who don't use them, I'm excited! Should be fun.

Hey Holeton - It's better to build a ladder for someone so they at least have the opportunity to climb up rather than giving them an anvil to weigh them down. And I think people would take you more seriously if you stopped misspelling Barack's name on purpose.

I have little desire for people to take me serious.... Raz...

And show me a person with an anvil, who are these people? And who is actually giving anvils out? Perhaps they're blacksmiths, I know that industry has been hard what with all the offshoring of Smithing.

I assume Acme Anvil company, but last I heard the only person they were giving Anvils out to was that wiley coyote fella.

And a better play on my name is Whole ton, it makes light of my weight problem.

Who are the successful people in this country? The ones that that get it via silver spoon, our current president coming from that camp one could argue. And the people who work their tail off to get where they are. Think of Chris Gardner for instance.

Do people who are down and out sometimes need a helping hand, undoubtedly. Does that hand/ladder need to come from the government, I would argue no, why should it? The government is the least efficient organization in this country. Frankly I would prefer the government take less of my money so I could give it directly to people who need it. If the government took less of my money I could support more missionaries, more charities, and frankly I honestly can say I would.

Furthermore, you can offer a person a ladder and a helping hand, that doesn't mean they'll take it. I have tried to help countless people in my life, and still will, but they do not want my help, or do not want to put effort into getting out of their plight. For me personally I am willing to help someone build a ladder, but I can't and won't make them climb it.

Borock speaks to this in his speach and I hope he truly believes it. I am only making a simple point that is essentially true, you can lead a horse to water bla bla bla. That is the only point I'm really making. I'm not even against Obamarama, I find him more appealing than his counterpart hillary. And frankly there is little I find appealing about MCan't. See I can make fun of everyone's name.

I was thoroughly impressed with James David Manning Phd's speech. Very articulate and intelligent person, just like Obama.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=khuu-RhOBDU

Try reading my post again - never said you could make people climb the ladder, just that it gives them the opportunity. And sure, the govt. is not efficient, but if not for the govt, African Americans would still be be enslaved as I don't think the free market would have addressed that little problem.