Let me criticize your ability to keep more than one posting in mind. I was responding to his post and others that preceded it such as using a question mark.
Or commas.
Then you may wish to avail yourself of the multiquote feature, which lets you quote multiple posts at once.
I didn’t quote anything in that posting. It was a reference to many of the posts. That I was responding to a particular quote was your idea. Not mine.
Just to be clear, we’re talking about post #15, yes?
Silly me. Where could I possibly have gotten that idea? Ah, yes:
I was responding to 16 in particular and others that preceded it in general.
Huh. You know, question marks aren’t grammar or spelling either. They are called punctuation. Now, *this *post is a critique of your grammar. 
The thing that bothers me about Obama’s speeches is when he adopts the down-home folksy tone.* To me, it sounds condescending and false. He was raised in Hawaii and spent his latter years in Chicago. There is no folksy in either of those places. I would be amused if he’d bust out some pidgin once in awhile, but after eight years of fake good 'ole boy and Palin’s false Minnesoooohta, I’m downright sick of folksy and it doesn’t trick me into thinking you can relate to my ordinary lifestyle. Please make it stop.
- At work, so I can’t link to an example, but it’s there. He usually lapses into folksy when he feels comfortable in a casual interview, but sometimes he does in more formal speeches when he’s trying to sound relateable.
Let me be try to address your question. First, few American national politicians are “liberals” (leftists). The Demos are mostly center-right. (The Repugs are so far gone that to call them right-wingers is to besmirch right-wingers.) Obama is considered a left-wing Demo; that makes him a centrist as such terms are used in Europe.
Today, a public health option is advocated by most sane centrists, including Obama. Even if one does not accept compassion as an argument, a public option is the best chance to get costs under control for America’s economic health. I believe Obama would have pushed for a public option if he thought he could achieve this politically. He didn’t; rightly or wrongly he thought preemptive compromise was preferred. I think Obama has been wrong not to stick more to his centrist (“liberal” in American diction) principles, but I don’t think he’s a hypocrite. The Demos didn’t have the votes; the Repugs have found it too easy to get the stupidest and most bigoted Americans to rally against anything Obama wants.
A big problem is campaign financing. Recent Supreme Court decision took a giant step backward there. I’m sorry not to offer anything more optimistic.
I agree with this, as well. It hits me with the frequency that he even uses the words “folks”. It just sounds false coming from him, for the reasons you mention. I feel the same when he falls into his sing-song black preacher mode, where he lets his speech get a little lazy, dropping the "g"s in gerunds, for example… It smells of affectation.
Actually, I find it impressive. Presidents and presidential candidates are always trying to fit in with particular crowds- John Kerry donning work boots for an AFL-CIO rally, George W. Bush not flinging poop at the G-8 summit, etc.- but Obama actually adopts entire new dialects. It ain’t easy.
It sure is annoying as hell when he says folks, though.
Are we talking only since he’s been in office? Because I think his speech on race before he was elected was fantastic in every way, especially that he made it at all.
And brevity having value for itself is bullshit. Too much brevity and you lose depth. I don’t want a president who tweets.
:dubious: No, he does not, but he does knowingly appeal to liberalism. The only hypocrisy is in his failure to follow through.
Its that thick Hawaiian accent.
I think it’s a natural word to him, because he uses it when it doesn’t even work, in the middle of more formal sentences. It’s also a word that is very commonly used by a lot of black people, and while he grew up surrounded by whites he’s spent the last 15 or 20 years in Chicago surrounded by black folks. 
I think his speeches are designed to be inspirational but generic and relatively non-threatening. As a result people can put their own interpretations on them.
He doesn’t back up his speeches with action though, if anything he acts in the opposite direction. I don’t know if he realizes how that is going to hurt him if he tries the same tactic in 2012. He isn’t a bad leader per se, but he can’t live up to his speeches. Most people know that everyone except the wealthy have more or less been left behind, and that the plutocracy is even more cemented than it was before. So inspirational speeches in the future will likely just be taken as signs of trying to put words above action and just make him unpopular.
But he did parlay his preacher speech skills to help him win the presidency. So you have to give him credit for that.
Actually, we consider him a right-wing centrist.
I think that if remembered in history at all — and few presidents or prime ministers are household names a hundred years later — he will be named ‘The Great Continuator’.
Most felt there would be a sharp break with his predecessor’s policies, but he has been a better guardian of the Bush Legacy than any crazy old Republican could have managed.
Presidents are expected to act as national cheerleader. President Obama has a good speech writer. Nothing new here. Mouth opens, focus-group words spill out.
I totally want to hear him call someone “brah”.
Except when he kicks Republican ass in their own hiz-ouse, amirite?