Skip to content

The real Obama?

February 20, 2008

This article discusses a speech Obama gave earlier this month without the use of a Teleprompter. I remember hearing earlier in the election season that Obama was the only one who consistently used a Teleprompter when giving speeches. Obama speaking without a Teleprompter is disappointing compared to his usual performances. I always found his speeches to be generally uplifting and hopeful, if devoid of an acceptable level of detail on any particular issue. This time around, not so much. Here is a link to the video if you want to watch it yourself (I have only seen parts of it myself, but from what I saw I was not impressed). The author of the article, a conservative Obama fan, writes:

What was especially noteworthy about his Virginia speech were the diversions Obama took from the prepared text. Because of Obama’s improvised moments, this speech was different than the usual fare he offers. We didn’t get the normal dosages of post-partisanship or even “elevation.” Virtually every time Obama deviated from the text, he expressed the partisan anger that has so poisoned the Democratic party. 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.

What makes Obama’s Jefferson-Jackson speech especially relevant is where he went when he went off script. The unifying Obama who has impressed so many people during this campaign season vanished, replaced by just another angry liberal railing against George W. Bush, Karl Rove, Exxon Mobil, and other long standing Democratic piñatas. The pressing question that Obama’s decidedly uninspiring Jefferson-Jackson oratory raises is which Obama is the real Obama–the one who read beautifully crafted words from a Teleprompter after his victory in Iowa, or the tediously angry liberal who improvised in Virginia?

Obama and Clinton are very similar when it comes to most policy positions. Obama’s major appeal to me over Clinton is that he will move beyond typical partisan politics. If this unscripted moment is any indication of how Obama really will be as a president, then he loses that advantage over her.

(Sidebar: MS Office and WordPess do not recognize “Barack” or “Obama” as real words. How can we have a president whose name by default has red squiggly lines underneath it? And when you type “Obama” MS Office recommends changing it to “Osama.” Does Bill Gates know something we don’t?)

6 Comments leave one →
  1. artier permalink
    February 20, 2008 2:00 pm

    Hillary has proven her shamleful character with her bid for the presidency. CLINTON WAS IMPEACHED!!!

    Clinton Accused of 1978 Hotel Rape,
    Clinton Murders video in my blog:

    Please look at my blog:

  2. Justin permalink
    February 20, 2008 2:04 pm


    Pains me to admit, but Obama’s speech last night was pretty underwhelming. I’m hopeful that he was just tired and didn’t have his “A” game.

    this is just another example of Mission Critical’s severe anti Obama-ism.

  3. Ashley permalink
    February 20, 2008 2:48 pm

    Wow. Thanks for the link, artier. It’s been too long since I’ve read a completely whacked out and delusional conspiracy theory. Thanks for bringing me up to speed. If I’m ever in Waco, I’ll look you up. Take care now.

  4. Ashley permalink
    February 20, 2008 2:50 pm

    And I love your opening paragraph.

    “THE SAFETY OF THE U.S.A. AND THE WORLD DEPENDS ON US PREVENTING THE CLINTONS FROM WINNING THE WHITE HOUSE!!! Though all of these accusations may not be factual. I think the American people have a right to know they exist.”

    Fantastic way to set the tone for the rest of the “article”

  5. Keri permalink
    February 20, 2008 2:56 pm

    I listened to the first 10 mins of the speach and the worst thing I heard was that he was embarassed to learn he was related to Dick Cheney. I would be too. I don’t think it has been angry or partisan so far, I think it’s honest – Bush Administration has some horrible policies and we’ll all be glad they’re gone. Not all republicans identify with the Bush White House – just look at the approval ratings – the lack of enthusiasm for the Bush White House is bi-partisan.

    But who knows how the rest of the speach goes.

    \And the man has said the same things for a year – let him deviate a bit.

  6. February 20, 2008 3:05 pm

    Anti-Obama? I don’t buy it. It just means we haven’t jumped on the “Obama-mania” bandwagon yet.

    And the problem wasn’t that it was a bad speech. The problem was that he sounded like any Democratic politician. Oooh big oil and pharma companies are evil because they make big profits; Karl Rove is the devil; blah blah blah.

    If that was the level of discourse I was looking for out of a presidential candidate I would have voted for Edwards or Romney. Obama is the one is supposed to bring us all together, and bashing Cheney and Exxon doesn’t do it for me.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: