I can see why many Republicans are excited about Palin. Good speech. Okay, it was a pretty great speech... even if you disagree with the McCain/Palin vision. I realize that the best candidate for president is not necessarily the best public speaker, but as someone who is "kind of into the whole speaking thing"... this has been an amazing election.
Do realize that we have seen, (according to many), some of the best public speakers in the history of this nation. (Obama, Huckabee, Palin... all are excellent). It really has been great year for speeches. Without watching commentary... I think a star is born. It really was an amazing speech.
Curious for those of you who watched it... what did you think?
12 comments:
I feel like the speech was definitely worthy of stealing some of the Dem's great speech reputation they have accumulated. It was also abrasive enough to raise some eyebrows. I am just tired of hearing this banter from both sides that the opposing party doesn't have specific plans of action for the promises they make. For example, it almost seems ironic that Palin didn't mention the economy even once in a speech that was dripping with sarcasm about Obama's great empty rhetoric.
Anyway, the republican ticket sure seems a whole lot more appealing with Palin mixing things up.
Palin seems to be a tough, smart woman. I am nauseated by the level of negativity though. The sarcasm and mocking of Obama was over the line. The tone of the whole evening was mocking and superiority. The way people ate it up, every time she said some trigger phrase about the troops or terrorists...it just seems that the people in that room - most of the important Republicans and a lot of regular folks - just don't have it in them to think critically and tend to just respond the way they are expected to. It seems like most of the those people still believe that Iraq was responsible for the 9/11 attacks...and they also think their taxes will be lower with McCain's plan, which according to www.obamataxcut.com is not true for most people.
She might have neglected mentioning the economy because she has no experience in dealing with a troubled economy (Alaska is experiencing an economic boom at the moment due to the rise in oil prices).
I felt the speech was heavy on attitude but way to low on substance (not to mention truth). She neglected to even mention a number of key issues and instead just jabbed the dems. I might not have minded that if I didn't already know that I disagree with her on a number of issues and if I felt she was accurate. Both she and Liberman have made downright false accusations (she accused Obama of never drafting legislation and Liberman said he had never reached across party lines - both comments are simply not true).
Also, I'm amazed at how working for the good of one's community has been given such a bad rap? How is it that being a soldier is honorable but working to help people get jobs and ensure they have the resources they need is a wimpy thing to do? I would think that this would offend those who are committed to SERVING OUR COUNTRY through full-time community service. How is it that they can say being a mom of 5 has equipped her with valuable experience but that Obama's community experience has not contributed to his understanding of the issues?
Oops, should have been spelled "Lieberman". I must have gotten a bit flustered...
Honestly, I'd rather see a politician who isn't polished but has great things to say. Someone that can speak to a person's intellect instead of their emotions. This goes for both parites.
This speech may have sounded great when she gave it, but the content isn't that impressive. She spends at least 25% of her time bashing Obama (which is to be expected) and talks a lot about financial responsibility, energy sources, taxes...all the typically issues for her party. But I see nothing on health care or education and very little on poverty.
One other thing caught my attention. She says near the beginning of her speech:
"Before I became governor of the great state of Alaska, I was mayor of my hometown. And since our opponents in this presidential election seem to look down on that experience, let me explain to them what the job involves. I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a "community organizer," except that you have actual responsibilities."
And later in her speech she says,
"My fellow citizens, the American presidency is not supposed to be a journey of 'personal discovery.' This world of threats and dangers is not just a community, and it doesn't just need an organizer."
She does goes on to share how experience as governor makes her qualified to potentially run the country, but it was a REALLY bad idea to describe being mayor as "sort of like a "community organizer," and then later say "This world of threats and dangers is not just a community, and it doesn't just need an organizer."
In a world of soundbites you've got to watch things like. And when people READ the text, repeated lanugage jumps out at them. Big time.
There's my two cents. I look forward to watching her speech soon. :)
Gimme a speech writer and some practice on a teleprompter, and I'm ready to be the next VP! (OK, I'll take the hair and makeup people, too.)
Easiest Task for Palin May Have Been Speech
People. You are not getting this.
I am NOT saying anything about her content. (And I know the political slant of all the people who commented.) It does not count to READ the text.. that misses my point. :)
I'm talking about public speaking. I'm talking about her ability to speak to "her peeps." (She was NOT speaking to people who would vote for Obama).
The acceptance speech to your party is NOT a state of the union address, it's more of a pep rally. We can talk content at the debate.
I find her nomination fascinating, actually. I don't think there are a lot of people (Republican or Democrat) who would say that she is the best suited person to be VP (Feel free to argue with me!). But I think she might be the perfect person to get McCain into office.
Another side note: It's interesting... "McCain," "Obama" and "Palin" are not in my spell check. I bet that changes soon.
ooo! nothing is worse than having your blog sabotaged by readers who take the issue in a different direction than you intended by their comments.
but, do you really think your readers didn't get your point?
i agree that the speaking ability of candidates in this election is excellent overall. palin is no exception. i watched as much of the speech as i could given my slow connection. but the ability to speak effectively is completely wasted if the individual doesn't have good content to share.
in a generation where style is usually emphasized too much, i refuse to judge the overall quality of a speech based upon it's emotional appeal and/or delivery. she might get 10 points for presentation, but the average-to-weak content combined with the horrible failure in word/phrase repetition (see my previous comment) brings her grade to a C.
i think what you've just witnessed is a refusal by some individuals to be dazzled by performance.
better?
no?
well, bummer.
:-d
nice "sparring" with you, friend.
Um... if I didn't want this, I would turn off comments. :P
I agree 100% with you. But, I still say there is more.
Example: the measure of a good sermon is not how well it is delivered, or even the content, but "Is it received and is there life change?" I would argue that someone with a teaching gift can write a great sermon, give it to someone who does NOT have the gift of teaching and have them preach it... and it will fall flat. Just as someone who is a gifted teacher, can take a so-so message and it will take on a life of its own (and if you don't believe that, read Billy Graham's sermons).
So I agree... but there is STILL even more than style or even content. There is the reception factor. Does it speak to an audience where they are? Does it spark? Does it have effect?
(And yes, I actually love thinking about these kinds of things. I do it recreationally.)
Also, the fact is, I heard Republicans say the same things about Obama's speech as well..."All style and no substance." So I'm not sure we don't bring our bias into this.
First off let me state that I am an Obama supporter and being passionate towards his platform, it is difficult to be open minded about the opposition's speeches. But I was moved by Palin's speech. I was even more moved by McCain's speech.
I agree that a good speech does not make a good leader. But sheesh I would gladly welcome listening to either one of those two after listening to 8 years of Bush.
I do think, however, we must be careful of great speakers. We can be sucked in by their charisma and wonderful words. This has happened too often in politics ( and religion for that matter). Martin Luther King Jr was a great speaker and he moved the masses. But, on the other hand, Hitler was a great speaker as well and he also moved the masses. Now I am not in any way comparing our potential presidential leaders to Hitler. I am just saying we must be careful of great speeches, and pay close attention to not only the deeper content of the words as well as pay attention to whether these leaders live out those words. This goes for both political parties.
Watching the american polls after Palin's speech, there were many middle aged women independents that decided their vote simply based on Palin's great speech. That troubles me and too often this is the case in our voting strategy. I thoroughly enjoyed her speech and thought to myself, "wow, I wonder what this woman can do?" Because of her speech I am now very motivated to do my research on this woman to see what she has done. Thats just it though, I am going to my research. But, as I am doing my research, I look forward to hearing more amazing speeches and welcome the inspirational thoughts that will be motivated by them.
Yeah, I was pretty distracted by all of the lying (STILL with the Bridge to Nowhere? You freaking CAMPAIGNED on it! And the jet? Not actually sold on eBay and sold at a hefty loss to the state. Those are just the quick ones.) and by the endless fount of bitchy comments.
I'm also still failing to see how the ability to gut a caribou and having a child who can play hockey are going to save the free world.
And Katie, good luck with your research since she's refusing interviews with everyone but Oprah and People, websites are rapidly being removed, investigations are being shut down, etc, etc, etc.
Yes, I am still outraged.
Yeah Tallin, I am finding research on her difficult. I heard on NPR that wikipedia found that her site was being accessed by an unidentified user the night before McCain announced her as the VP elect. The information was not just being changed to spin differently but actual information was being falsified and history being changed. That really discouraged me. They have had to shut down all access to her wiki entry. Though I did watch a very positive and completely biased exclusive on Fox News about her.
Post a Comment