UPDATE: Barack Obama's Speech at "Take Back America"

cross-posted @ DKos

Take Back America Conference brings thousands of progressive activists, thinkers and leaders together to discuss vision, unite our groups and train our campaign organizers.  Obama gave a rousing speech.  I must also state, his speech was good this morning on MSNBC at the AFSCME Convention, part of MSNBC's allday politics, theme.

Senator Obama's Speech

It has now been a little over four months since we began this campaign.  And everywhere we've been - whether it's Oakland or Cleveland, Atlanta or Austin - we've been getting these inspiring, humbling crowds of thousands.  For a lot of people, it's the first political event of their lifetime.

I'd like to take all the credit myself, but I know that's not the only reason they're coming.  There is a hunger in this country right now - a longing for something new that we haven't seen in years.  And whenever I stop and think about it, I'm reminded of what got me into public service in the first place.  

The year after college, I decided to move to Chicago.  It was a time where factory closings were sweeping the Midwest, and thousands were being laid off, and they were boarding up homes and businesses.  

On the South Side of Chicago, where neighborhoods were struggling to rebuild after the closing of nearby steel plants, a group of churches came together and decided that they could make a difference.  And they hired me to help.    

The salary was $12,000 a year plus enough money to buy an old, beat-up car, so I took the job and became a community organizer.  We went to work setting up job training programs for the unemployed and after school programs for kids.  And block by block, we turned those neighborhoods around.    

It was the best education I ever had, because I learned in those neighborhoods that when ordinary people come together, they can achieve extraordinary things.  And so later, when I finished law school, I turned down the corporate job offers and I came back to Chicago to continue the work I started.    

I organized a voter registration drive that signed up 150,000 new voters to help elect Bill Clinton in 1992.  I joined a civil rights law practice, and I started teaching constitutional law - because unlike some occupants of the White House, I actually believe in the Constitution.    

And after a few years, people started coming up to me and telling me I should run for state Senate.  So I jumped in the race.  And I shook every hand I could and passed out flyers to whoever would take them.  But the one question I'd get from people more than any other was, "You seem like a nice young man.  You've done all this great work.  You've been a community organizer, and you teach law school, you're a civil rights attorney, you're a family man - why would you wanna go into something dirty and nasty like politics?" 

And I understand the question, and the cynicism.  We all understand it.    

We understand it because we've all seen that politics in this town is no longer a mission - it's a business.  Our politics has never been pure, but there's a sense that in the last several years, the race for money, and influence, and power has left the hopes and concerns of most Americans in the dust.  You're worried about how you'll pay for college, or health care, or save for retirement, but when you turn on the TV or open the newspaper, all you see from Washington is another scandal, or a petty argument, or the persistent stubbornness of a President who refuses to end this war in Iraq.  

As the rest of us have turned away from this kind of politics in cynicism and frustration, we know what's filled the void.  The lobbyists and influence-peddlers with the cash and the connections - the ones who've turned government into a game only they can afford to play.  It's the pharmaceutical companies that get to write our drug bills while the price of prescriptions skyrockets for the rest of us.  It's the oil lobbyists that get to meet with the same White House that silences the scientists who warn us about the destruction of our planet.  

You know who I'm talking about here.  They write the checks and you get stuck with the bills, they get the access while you get to write a letter, they think they own this government, but we're here to tell them it's not for sale.    

People tell me I haven't spent a lot of time learning the ways of Washington.  But I promise you this - I've been here long enough to know that the ways of Washington must change.  

The cynicism we feel about what politics can achieve today is no accident. It has to do with a failure of leadership.  It has to do with the philosophy they've peddled in this town for the last six years - a philosophy of trickle-down and on-your-own that says government has no role in solving the challenges we face and so it shouldn't even try.  

It's a theory that's easy to talk about when you're playing politics in Washington, but harder to defend when you actually see what it does to average Americans.

I met a family in Iowa City with a small business of fifteen years who is now facing bankruptcy because of their medical bills.  Try telling them they're on their own.  

I spoke with workers in Newton who were watching their Maytag plant close down and their shops get shipped overseas.  Try telling them to pull themselves up by their bootstraps.  

Try saying "tough luck" to the families who still don't have homes in New Orleans, or the 45 million Americans without health care, or the 15 million children born into poverty in the richest nation on Earth.  

This is not who we are.  This is not how America has persevered through war and depression, through struggles for civil rights and women's rights and worker's rights.  We have come this far as a nation because we believe in a different kind of politics - because we believe in a different vision for America.  

We believe that we rise or fall as one people.  We believe that we each have a stake in one another - that I am my brother's keeper; that I am my sister's keeper.  We believe that what happens to that family in Iowa, or to those Maytag workers - that matters to us, even if it's not our family, or our job.  And what's more - in the face of our cynicism, and our doubts, and the power and influence we see in Washington, we believe that this kind of America is possible.  

The time for the can't-do, won't-do, won't-even-try style of politics is over.  It's time to turn the page.  

Some of our more cynical friends in the media tease me from time to time for always talking about hope.  But the reason I do is because I've seen its power.  

No one thought those South Side neighborhoods had a chance when I got there. But we banded together, and we kept working, and we taught people to stand up to their government when it wasn't standing up for them.  

When I got to the Illinois state Senate, people said it was too hard to take on the issue of money in politics - that our state had too long a history, and too many entrenched interests.  But I knew we had the people of Illinois on our side, and I even found a few folks on the other side of the aisle who were willing to listen, and we passed the first major ethics reform in twenty-five years.  

People told me I couldn't reform a death penalty system that had sent 13 innocent people to death row.  But we did that.  They doubted whether we could put government back on the side of average people - but we put tax cuts in the pockets of the working families who needed them instead of the folks who didn't. And I passed health care reform that insured another 150,000 children and parents.  

So I know that change is possible.  I know that turning the page is possible.  This isn't just the rhetoric of a campaign, it's been the cause of my life - a cause I will work for and fight for every day as your President.  

It's not enough just to change parties in this election.  If we hope to truly transform this country, we have to change our politics too.  It's time to turn the page.  .  

It's time to turn the page on health care - to bring together unions and businesses, Democrats and Republicans, and to let the insurance and drug companies know that while they get a seat at the table, they don't get to buy every chair.    

I have a universal health care plan that will cover every American and cut the cost of a typical family's premiums by up to $2500 a year.  It's a plan that lets the uninsured buy insurance that's similar to the kind members of Congress give themselves.  If you can't afford that, you'll get a subsidy to pay for it. And it goes further than any other proposed plan in cutting the cost of health care by investing in technology and preventative care, breaking the stranglehold the drug and insurance industries have on the health care market, and helping business and families shoulder the cost of the most expensive conditions so that an illness doesn't lead to a bankruptcy.  And I promise you this - I will sign a universal health care plan that covers every American by the end of my first term in office as your President.  Count on it.  

It's time to turn the page on education - to move past the slow decay of indifference that says some schools can't be fixed and some kids just can't learn.  

As President, I will launch a campaign to recruit and support hundreds of thousands of new teachers across the country, because the most important part of any education is the person standing in the front of the classroom.  It's time to treat teaching like the profession it is.  It's time to pay our teachers what they deserve.  And when it comes to developing the high standards we need, it's time to stop working against our teachers and start working with them.  We can do this.  

It's time to turn the page on energy - to break the political stalemate that's kept our fuel efficiency standards in the same place for twenty years; to tell the oil and auto industries that they must act, not only because their future's at stake, but because the future of our country and our planet is at stake as well.  

As President, I will place a cap on carbon emissions, and require companies who can't meet the cap to buy credits from those who can.  This will generate millions of dollars to invest in renewable sources of energy and create new jobs and even a new industry in the process.  I'll put in place a low-carbon fuel standard that will take 50 million cars' worth of pollution off the road.  And I'd raise the fuel efficiency standards for our cars and trucks because we know we have the technology to do it and it's time we did. We can do this.  

It's time to turn the page for all those Americans who want nothing more than to have a job that can pay the bills and raise a family.  Let's finally make the minimum wage a living wage and tie it to the cost of living so we don't have to wait another ten years to see it rise. Let's put the jobless back to work in transitional jobs that can give them a paycheck and a sense of pride, let's help our workers advance with job training and life-long education, and let's finally allow our unions to do what they do best and lift up the middle-class in this country once more.  And when you head to Capitol Hill in a little bit to rally for the Employee Free Choice Act, say it loud enough so that the folks on the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue can hear you - in this country, we believe that if the majority of workers in a company want a union, they should get a union.  We can do this.      

We can do all of this.  But before we do, we have to begin by turning the page and ending this war.  

I am proud that I stood up in 2002 and urged our leaders not to take us down this dangerous path.  I've said it before and I'll say it again - this is a war that should've never been authorized and never been waged.  

So many of us knew this back then, even when it wasn't popular to say so.  

We knew back then this war was a mistake.  We knew back then that it was dangerous diversion from the struggle against the terrorists who attacked us on September 11th. We knew back then that we could find ourselves in an occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences.  

But the war went forward.  And now, we've seen those consequences and we mourn for the dead and wounded.  

I was in New Hampshire the other month when a woman told me that her nephew was leaving for Iraq.  And as she started telling me how much she'd miss him and how worried she was about him, she began to cry.  And she said to me, "I can't breathe.  I want to know, when am I going to be able to breathe again?" 

It is time to let this woman know she can breathe again.  It's time to start bringing our troops home - not a year from now or a month from now - but now.      

I introduced a plan in January that would've already started bringing our troops home by now, with the goal of bringing all combat brigades home by March 31st, 2008.  

Now, we know the President vetoed a bipartisan plan just like this one a few weeks ago.  And I'm proud I voted against giving a blank check to the man who said he sees us keeping our troops in Iraq for as long as we have in Korea.  

But we can't give George Bush the last word here.  We are sixteen votes away in the Senate from ending this war. And so we need to keep turning up the pressure on all those Republican Congressmen and Senators who refuse to acknowledge the reality that the American people know so well.  We will call them, and knock on their doors, and we will bring our troops home.  It's time to turn the page.  

It's time to show the world that America is still the last, best hope of Earth.  This President may occupy the White House, but for the last six years the position of leader of the free world has remained open.  

It's time to fill that role once more.  Whether it's terrorism or climate change, global AIDS or the spread of weapons of mass destruction, America cannot meet the threats of this new century alone, but the world cannot meet them without America.  It's time for us to lead.  

It's time for us to close Guantanamo and restore the right of habeus corpus.  It's time to show the world that we are not a country that ships prisoners in the dead of night to be tortured in far off countries.  That we are not a country that runs prisons which lock people away without ever telling them why they are there or what they are charged with.  We are not a country which preaches compassion to others while we allow bodies to float down the streets of a major American city.  

That is not who we are.  

We are America.  We are the nation that liberated a continent from a madman, that lifted ourselves from the depths of Depression, that won Civil Rights, and Women's Rights, and Voting Rights for all our people.  We are the beacon that has led generations of weary travelers to find opportunity, and liberty, and hope on our doorstep.  That's who we are.  

I was down in Selma, Alabama awhile back, and we were celebrating the 42nd anniversary of the march across the Edmund Pettus Bridge.  It was a march of ordinary Americans - maids and cooks, preachers and Pullman porters who faced down fire hoses and dogs, tear gas and billy clubs when they tried to get to the other side.  But every time they were stopped, every time they were knocked down, they got back up, they came back, and they kept on marching.  And finally they crossed over.  It was called Bloody Sunday, and it was the culmination of the Civil Rights Movement.  

When I came back from that celebration, people would say, oh, what a wonderful celebration of African-American history that must have been.  And I would say, no, that wasn't African-American history.  That was a celebration of American history - it's our story.    

And it reminds us of a simple truth - a truth I learned all those years ago as an organizer in Chicago - a truth you carry by being here today - that in the face of impossible odds, people who love their country can change it.  

I am confident about my ability to lead this country.  But I also know that I can't do it without you.  This campaign that we're running has to be about your hopes, and your dreams, and what you will do.  Because there are few obstacles that can withstand the power of millions of voices calling for change.  

That's how change has always happened - not from the top-down, but from the bottom-up.  

And that's exactly how you and I will change this country.    

If you want a new kind of politics, it's time to turn the page.  

If you want an end to the old divisions, and the stale debates, and the score-keeping and the name-calling, it's time to turn the page.  

If you want health care for every American and a world-class education for all our children; if you want energy independence and an end to this war in Iraq; if you believe America is still that last, best hope of Earth, then it's time to turn the page.  

It's time to turn the page for hope.  It's time to turn the page for justice.  It is time to turn the page and write the next chapter in the great American story.  Let's begin the work.  Let's do this together.  Let's turn that page.  Thank you.



This is one of his best speeches I have read in text.  From what I understand people were frantic, and the applause thuderous.  He spoke about Katrina, influence of big money in government, Iraq, people taking their government back, healthcare, minimum wage, giving felons livable wage jobs, unions, Employee Free Choice Act, global warming, things that democrats are concerned about.

He was even cynical about people and the MSM criticizing him about talking to people about hope.

Mentioning that cynical journalists tease him that he always talks about hope, Obama referred to his biography (his job as a community organizer, his service in politics): "I talk about hope because I've seen its power... I know that change is possible. I know that turning the page is possible. This isn't just the rhetoric of a campaign, it's been the cause of my life -- a cause I will work for and fight for every day as your president. It's not enough just to change parties in this election. If we hope to truly transform this country, we have to change our politics too. It's time to turn the page." 

Link

I agree with Obama.  He is attracting many that have given up on politics, and can you blame them? The young folk just starting out in life with politics, and becoming part of something, we hope will be public service.  The frustrated from all party lines.  I can see them truly thinking, can it be a possiblity, a chance, for someone to address my issues?  See, hope gets people moving, organizing, marching, demanding change, not taking the same crap anymore.  But you know what hope does the most?  It brings people back to our party, "The Democratic Party".

Update [2007-6-19 20:43:1 by icebergslim]:AFSCME Video and Take Back America Video

Tags: 2008 election, Barack Obama, presidential election, Take Back America (all tags)

Comments

50 Comments

Wow

See, this is why I'm voting for Obama.

by This Machine Kills Fascists 2007-06-19 02:58PM | 0 recs
Too bad that on

the very same day he gave this stirring speech he voted for the anti-enironmental, pro-global warming Tester Amendment.

Shows how empty words can be.

http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/6/ 19/134520/035

by david mizner 2007-06-20 06:53AM | 0 recs
Re: Too bad that on

Firstly, is CTL an energy independence issue or a global warming issue, or both?  

Secondly, the first bill was defeated.  Tester's bill binds CTL with carbon sequestration technologies and throws a big pile of money at proving an 'unproven' technology.  Is that a bad idea?  Or just a risky one.  It was defeated, too.

The US is the Saudi Arabia of coal.  If we can't figure out something sensible to do with it to help disengage from the oil economy, and the global misadventures it has incited, we are potentially missing something quite handy and homegrown.

by Shaun Appleby 2007-06-20 07:20AM | 0 recs
Re: Coal

Coal releases carbon into the air usually as carbon dioxide.  The best way to deal with coal is to leave it in the ground.  We don't have to use everything that is there.  

We are smarter than that and new technologies will develop if we don't subsidize dirty ones.

by pioneer111 2007-06-20 07:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Coal

Well, that certainly is the position of environmentalists.  And they are right, as things now stand.

But environmentalists are not responsible for the national security or prosperity of the country, either.  What I am suggesting is that CTL is an energy independence issue with negative global warming consequences.  Who knows what the outcome might be if significant investment was made in R&D on CTL or GTL technologies.

Our biggest problem with energy is that our dependence on overseas sources has informed our foreign policy with disastrous consequences.  I think we should dramatically cut our consumption, read waste, of these fuels, implement alternative technologies and have a look at what the trade-offs are with CTL, among other things.  If we spent a billion on it and found it was hopeless and abandoned it due to the carbon emissions problem that wouldn't bother me.   At least we would have tried.  CTL is, potentially, a new technology.

by Shaun Appleby 2007-06-20 07:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Coal

I find most of the environmentalists' positions on coal to be very narrow focussed.  It's not just a foreign policy issue or a US economic issue, but when looking at Global warming it would be wise to look at the Globe.  China and India have huge resources of coal.  It makes good sense for us to invest money to see if we can design the first commercially viable environmentally friendly coal plants if for no other reason than to make this available to China and India and prevent the environmental catastrophe they may cause.  

by Doug Dilg 2007-06-20 07:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Coal

Except that we are blowing up mountains to get the coal in the first place. Coal is dirty from the moment it comes out of the ground.

this mountaintop removal method of mining has already destroyed 1 million acres of Appalachia - the most biodiverse forest inthe temperate zones. This forest is CRUCIAL for recycling CO2.

www.iLoveMountains.org

by faithfull 2007-06-21 05:33AM | 0 recs
Re: Coal

Agreed, but it doesn't have to be that way.  

by Shaun Appleby 2007-06-21 06:34AM | 0 recs
Substance

See? Obama does have substance. Others just want to keep ignoring it because they know they can't compete so instead of try, they just brush him off and say,

" Oh, he's a rock star...a Media creation...whaaaa! "

That argument crumbles every time Obama opens his mouth.

Obama 2008!

by ObamaEdwards2008 2007-06-19 03:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Substance

He had substance before he ran for President. This is who he is. Not who he has become like other candidates. That's why he is the most trusted to actually "act" as opposed to make promises that only get him elected.

by BlueDiamond 2007-06-19 03:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Substance

Act on what?  Half a universal health care plan.  Half of an environmental plan.  I have no idea what your post means.  It makes no sense.  Who is he trusted by.  I am not sold on him.  I am open to him.  

You spout platitudes as if they convey meaning.  What substance did he have before he ran?

by pioneer111 2007-06-20 07:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Substance

Actually, he had a lot of substance before he ran.  I'm sorry that he wasn't working on a lot of marquee issues, but he has done incredible work on non-proliferation and ethics legislation to name a few.

by Obama08 2007-06-21 08:18AM | 0 recs
Re: Substance

Not really.  I saw the speech and even though I am biased in favor of EDwards, everyone I talked to who also saw the speeches of Edwards and Richardson thought they were way more substantive.  Some but not all gave Obama points for style.

I don't think Obama is void of substance, but I think he has decided not to emphasize that in his campaign at this point.  I think he does so to favor rhetoric around "new politics" and a broader narrative which I personally find to be quite compelling but not that new and not that meaningful as it gets applied to reality.

Case in point being his vote to provide tens of billions of dollars of loan guarantees to the coal industry.  His "clarification" that he will only allow such technology to come to market if it helps address climate change is both cynical (who in Washington spends $10b and then walks away) and  irresponsible (bold action to save the planet, not give aways to help the coal companies back home - especially with tax payer money).

by Orlando 2007-06-20 07:02AM | 0 recs
Re: Substance

Substance is not anything you hear from policy.  Substance is understanding what the words mean.  Our words, our message describes out character.  

I believe we learn more about Obama's character through his words than we do his policy.  And..I am more concerned today about character than ever.  After Bush, how could anyone not be?

by noquacks 2007-06-20 07:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Substance

After Bush I am very concerned about substance and policy.  Bush ran on character, that he was bringing back honor to the WH.  We know how that turned out.  I know that that is not what Obama is.  But saying substance is the rhetoric is nonsense.  It becomes double speak with no meaning.

Policy is what affects our lives.  It is extremely important.  Obama may speak well, but it won't deal with my health care needs unless there is policy implemented.  

by pioneer111 2007-06-20 07:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Barack Obama's Speech

It looks like it was a very good day for Barack between the Take Back America and the AFSCME Convention.  

by Doug Dilg 2007-06-19 03:26PM | 0 recs
Re:

I'll wait for the unfiltered reports about the meets to see what non-Obamaites thought of all candidates' speeches.  

by georgep 2007-06-19 03:38PM | 0 recs
Re:

They have been out all day.

by ObamaEdwards2008 2007-06-19 03:41PM | 0 recs
by icebergslim 2007-06-19 03:50PM | 0 recs
Clinton's appearance is tomorrow...

she is not a no show, any more than Obama would be a no show tomorrow.

by citizen53 2007-06-19 03:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Clinton's appearance is tomorrow...

Thank you, stand corrected, and look forward to hearing her speech.

by icebergslim 2007-06-19 04:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Clinton's appearance is tomorrow...

I don't for one minute believe you actually mean that.  You over-stepped a nasty little gratuitous attack.  Don't try to sugar coat it by saying you look forward to her speech.  

I am a partisan in all of this but I really hope that my subjective opinions are not as completely lacking in objectivity as the idol worship that goes  on here.

by Orlando 2007-06-20 07:06AM | 0 recs
Re: Clinton's appearance is tomorrow...

Idolatry, wasn't that what Moses got all cranky about?  The Golden Calf.

And yet when the Messiah did come, according to those Christians who chronicled his words had counted them up and transcribed them, it seems he said "Let those who have ears, hear" more often than any other phrase.

I wonder what he meant by that?

by Shaun Appleby 2007-06-20 07:27AM | 0 recs
Re: Clinton's appearance is tomorrow...

Look I am one for peace on the boards, and will support the candidate, whomever it is.  I jumped the gun, apologized, stood corrected, and you write like a sour puss.  What are you angry about?  I look forward to hearing her, she was booed at this conference last year.  I don't think it will happen this year.  Don't you want to hear what they all have to say?  I do.

by icebergslim 2007-06-20 07:46AM | 0 recs
Re: Clinton's appearance is tomorrow...

I'm sure that whoever had control of the planning didn't want to handicap the poor candidate who had to come on after Obama.

by noquacks 2007-06-19 05:53PM | 0 recs
Re: After Obama

Edwards was after Obama and he was great, not handicapped at all.  I loved his speech.  I liked Obama's speech as well, but I feel that Edwards had more substance.

by pioneer111 2007-06-20 07:32PM | 0 recs
Round-up of Blog reactions to Obama's speeches
Alex MacCallum at the official Obama blog has a round-up of some of the amazing responses Barack got today among bloggers:
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community /post_group/ObamaHQ/CtPg#comment-Cpdh
by psericks 2007-06-19 03:38PM | 0 recs
Here's the link to the video

Matthew Yglesias at the Atlantic has the links to video of Edwards' and Obama's speeches at Take Back America today:
http://matthewyglesias.theatlantic.com/

Obama was on fire today.  
One of my favorite Barack speeches was actually his speech at Take Back America last year (2006).  Here's the video:
http://home.ourfuture.org/videos/take-ba ck-america-2006/senator-barack-obama.htm l

by psericks 2007-06-19 03:43PM | 0 recs
Obama was spot on,

this is one of his best speeches, PERIOD.  On FIRE!!

by icebergslim 2007-06-19 04:04PM | 0 recs
Observations on the "Take Back" Speeches

I had a look at both videos.  As I see it, both Obama and Edwards gave excellent speeches, each one using, to near perfection, their very different skills as orators and leaders.  

Having seen both Obama and Edwards give dozens of speeches over the years, having seen both of them hit singles (yes it happens), doubles, triples, home runs, and grand slams, I think both of them hit somewhere between a triple and a home run with their respective speeches today.  

One should never underestimate either Obama's or Edwards' ability to "bring it" and "bring it" strong before voting audiences. That is why it is ludicrous to count either one of them out in Iowa or New Hampshire...ever...until the actual voting takes place.  They are that talented.  They are that charismatic.

Both Edwards and Obama have the ability to move people, to inspire people, to lift people up, much more so than we Democrats have seen in the past...much more so than Carter, much more so than Mondale, much more so than Dukakis, and more so than Clinton, Gore or Kerry.

by Demo37 2007-06-19 07:15PM | 0 recs
O/T: Obama has ringtones...sound pretty good...

Now Barack Obama, has entered the "text messaging age", but he has gone one step further.  Ringtones.  And they sound pretty good.

Instructions:  example:  TXT "ringtone1" to OBAMA (62262); he has seven different ringtones created by his "supporters".

Ringtone Page

by icebergslim 2007-06-19 04:24PM | 0 recs
Link to video of Obama's speech at AFSCME
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PpYx_LECD UQ
Also phenomenal...
by psericks 2007-06-19 04:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Barack Obama's

If he delivered it half as good as it read, I bet the audience was very happy.

by rikyrah 2007-06-19 04:54PM | 0 recs
Re: UPDATE: Barack Obama's Speech

Reading the critique of the bloggers, I would agree with one of the bloggers that Edwards was the "head" and Obama was the "heart".  Does that mean that Edwards doesn't have heart and Obama doesn't have head?  I don't think so.  

Speaking of Obama only, I don't think that our next President has to campaign as a policy wonk.  (Perhaps "wonk" is too strong a word).  I don't think the general voter is paying that much attention to the specifics of policies.  What voters do pay attention to are those things called "thin slicing" as described in Malcalm Gladwell's book, "Blink".  Do I instinctively like this person?  Do I trust this person?  Can I follow where this person leads?

I don't think the role of a true leader is to have all the answers.  Leaders get their answers, if they're smart, from the experts on those questions.  Then they assimilate it and hopefully put forth legislation that will get us someplace (unlike what we've been seeing the our Congress for the past several years).  We have seen bill after bill defeated in Congress.  I can't think of much that's gone through that hasn't hurt us more than helped us.

So when people criticize Obama about not laying out more specific policies, I just shake my head.  The question isn't "what are his policies", the question is, "Is he a wise and noble man?"

by noquacks 2007-06-19 06:42PM | 0 recs
Re: UPDATE: Barack Obama's Speech

I liked both speeches.  And I agree, "head" and "heart".  For me, Cliton, was like again robotic.  She got a few liners, but I think she needs a acting or something.  When you compare her to the other two, she does not compare, was not in their zone, at all.

by icebergslim 2007-06-19 07:34PM | 0 recs
Must be seen

The prepared text doesn't do the speech justice, it must be seen and heard. Obama was on fire! One of his most impressive performances yet, possibly even better than his 2004 DNC speech.

by Korha 2007-06-19 07:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Must be seen

The link for the video is above [update]...

by icebergslim 2007-06-19 07:35PM | 0 recs
The 2004 DNC Speech and Some Slight Changes

"Possibly even better than his 2004 DNC speech"...?  Having been there for Obama's 2004 speech, I have two words for you:  no way.  :)  To be clear, Obama has the ability to better that 2004 speech (and he knows it), but this particular speech cannot fairly be said to be the one.  

Today's speech very closely tracks (with some omissions and additions) Obama's standard stump speech that he delivers to Democratic activist audiences (yes, Obama has different speeches for different audiences...take a look at his Selma speech if you want to see something REALLY unique.) I have seen him deliver this speech before...ever so slightly better.  

On the other hand, I thought I noticed two very slight changes to his standard speech which I believe are very wise, very smart.  I think Obama has increased, ever so slightly, the repetition of the phrase "Turn the Page."  IMHO, this simple, powerful, shorthand way of distinguishing himself from the Clintons should become one of the major "shorthand themes" for his candidacy.  It works.  

I additionally believe that this shorthand phrase will provide considerable traction for Obama when Gingrich enters the race for the Republican nomination.  The entry of Gingrich, I believe, will harm Hillary Clinton's chances.  When Gingrich and Hillary Clinton are juxtaposed before us, a substantial majority of Americans may very well be receptive to idea of "turning the page" on the 90's.  

The second slight change seems to be a slightly greater emphasis on promising universal health care by the end of his first term...which of course, is in contrast to Hillary Clinton's promise to get it by the end of her SECOND term.  Edwards first pointed out this significant difference in February of 2007, at the very first Presidential forum in Nevada, when Hillary dropped her "second term" bombshell right in front of him and the world. (Hillary was no doubt following the advice of her cautious, "don't lead on this particular issue Hillary" advisors.)

Hillary Clinton's stance here renders her EXTREMELY vulnerable to both Edwards and Obama.  Yet, neither one has come close to really taking advantage of this vulnerability, something I find very puzzling.  Sometimes differences must be made explicit.  If less than 1% of the electorate is aware of an important difference (which applies here), you are doing the electorate a disservice in not pointing it out.  For Obama and Edwards, the time to do this was...uhm...yesterday.

by Demo37 2007-06-19 09:07PM | 0 recs
Re: The 2004 DNC Speech

Agreed not as good as the DNC speech - which I've watched dozens of times now, although I'm a big fan of last year's sojo speech.

"Turn the Page" and Healthcare seem to be the second act - to the war oppo first act... I'm really hoping for someone (maybe Obama) to say "Mrs. Clinton if you don't provide healthcare to all Americans in your first term you ain't going to have a second."  I think it would set a light under either Obama or Edwards.  Hillary already thinks she is "entitled" to a second term? Exposing her since of "entitlement" is a sound strategy when the mud starts to fly.

by gb1437a 2007-06-19 09:28PM | 0 recs
The First Term/Second Term Divergence

There is a difference between "throwing mud" and simply, and straightforwardly, pointing out factual differences between candidates.  There is no need to throw mud or invective at Hillary Clinton on the first term/second term divergence.  Mud throwing is to be avoided.  

Instead, Obama and Edwards simply need the mainstream media to report the divergence, and thereby, inform the electorate of the divergence.  At this moment, the electorate is completely unaware of the divergence.  That is partly the fault of both Obama and Edwards; both campaigns should have put this divergence in cement back in February.  It should, thereafter, have been in every single article discussing the top three candidates, as it is a major point of distinction...at least for Democratic voters.

by Demo37 2007-06-19 10:38PM | 0 recs
Re: The First Term/Second Term Divergence

Yeah, it seems like all of the articles are about Obama and Edwards "attempting to distinguish" themselves from Clinton, rather than about the actual differences between them as candidates (like the 2nd term health care thing, or the fact that she doesn't even have a hc plan)

by Max Fletcher 2007-06-20 12:25PM | 0 recs
Re: The 2004 DNC Speech and Some Slight Changes


..take a look at his Selma speech if you want to see something REALLY unique.

One of the places where his speech today strayed from the stump speech was in his working in some of the themes from the Selma speech, and it was perhaps the most effective part of the speech. It actually was the ramp down before the final ramp up, when he got very quiet and personal and talked about the brutality the marchers encountered on that bridge in 1965 and how millions of people across the country saw that and turned to each other and said, hold it, that's not who were are as Americans, that's not what this country stands for.

And now all of us have witnessed another Selma moment, we've all seen prisoners on dogleashes and our Government turn their back on an entire city and we all watched and said to each other, or at least to ourselves, that's not who we are, that's not what we stand for.  And I believe firmly it is those moments and that sentiment which is going to sweep Obama into office and offer us our first real opportunity for change in a very long time.

by Doug Dilg 2007-06-19 09:55PM | 0 recs
Re: The 2004 DNC Speech and Some Slight Changes

Did the arc of justice bend?  I love that arc.

by Shaun Appleby 2007-06-20 07:31AM | 0 recs
Can you summarize it?

25 words or less would be great.

Thanks.

by dpANDREWS 2007-06-20 04:23AM | 0 recs
Re: Can you summarize it?

But But But ....If he would have left anything out, all the little Edwards Bratz would have started whining about no substance again.

by ObamaEdwards2008 2007-06-20 04:46AM | 0 recs
Re: Can you summarize it?

the video of both are above

by icebergslim 2007-06-20 06:17AM | 0 recs
Re: Can you summarize it?

Twenty-five words is barely more than a sound-bite DP.  And they ask us "Where's the beef?"

by Shaun Appleby 2007-06-20 07:34AM | 0 recs
Ice correct the url.

Update the URL for the AFSCME video because you have a space in there that does not belong.

This is the right URL

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PpYx_LECD UQ

You have:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PpYx_LECD UQ

The space between the D and the U do not belong.

by lovingj 2007-06-20 06:21PM | 0 recs
Wow the post

automatically adds the space.  I did not know that.  That is why both urls look the same in my last post but yet the bottom does not link to the right video.

You have got to fix the url in the href tag.

by lovingj 2007-06-20 06:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Ice correct the url.

FIXED!!

by icebergslim 2007-06-20 07:05PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------