Bring it on, Obitcha!
A more nuanced interpretation might be not that Arabs are the sole (or even largest) source of oil to the U.S. but the U.S.'s demand for oil compels them to become involved in the Middle East lest a major supplier be cut off (and annoying various huge and influential American corporations), forcing more involvement in the area than necessary or desirable.
But, hey, it’s a rhetoric-laden speech. Better to save minute analysis for his policy decisions and proposed legislation.
This is pretty much how I felt, and I think it was exactly the right message to give. It was overall an optimistic speech, but it didn’t gloss over anything, nor did he make it sound like the road ahead will be easy. He is right, this will be a time for tough choices, and I’m certain that he will have to make unpopular decisions at times, to do what needs to be done and not what the voters want to be done.
In short, the road ahead will be difficult, but we can persevere.
I’m not actually complaining that hard about it’s use in Obama’s speech; I actually am glad he at least acknowldge those of us that aren’t religious (to further water things down).
I was just railing at the word in general. I’m sure if the line were, “realists and non-realists,” there would be equal irkitude from the other side.
I have heard for years and years that using gender neutral language was awkward, pointless, and not important and no one should feel excluded when men is used because it includes women too so would I shut up already?
My president thought it important to say men and women when those who preceded him would not have bothered.
When I saw Bush looking at Obama during his speech, I couldn’t help but imagine this impossible scenario:
Bush walks to the podium at the end of the program (after the speech, poem, and prayer), turns to look at Obama and says into the mic, “Despite what I said before, I voted for this man, too. He’s gonna be a far better President than I was. Get’er done, Barack.” He walks to the President, shakes his hand, and exits stage right into a waiting limo, never to be seen speaking in public again.
Expecting Bush to be this classy is kinda like expecting Hitler (omg Godwin) to be baby Goldstein’s mohel, but it was fun to think about.
Did anyone else see the Daily Show last night, where Jon Stewart took selected phrases from Obama’s speech and found almost identical statements from George W? Hysterical.
As they say when talking about good science fiction, you make one great big leap of faith and try to make everything else fit. My suddenly classy and humble imaginary Bush didn’t suddenly develop a Lincolnian eloquence, as well.
You know I deplore Bush’s policy blunders as much anyone but I do think he has shown class on some occasions especially in the last few months. His statement after Obama’s victory was definitely classy. So was his reaction to the Iraqi who threw a boot at him. And by all accounts he has done a good job of handling the transition. Let’s give the man credit when it’s due.
I also have to say that IMO Bush’s second inauguralwas a better, more powerful piece of writing than Obama’s; though obviously most of the credit goes to his speechwriters. I say this as someone who thinks the vision in that speech is fundamentally misconceived and that Bush betrayed its ideals deeply in practice anyway. But purely at a literary level it’s very eloquent IMO. In fact I read it a few hours before the inauguration and was surprised at how good it was. I was expecting something even better from Obama and was disappointed.
Ultimately it doesn’t matter much. Communication is hugely important for a President but big setpiece speeches aren’t that important anymore. Clinton’s big speeches were often pedestrian but few matched him in the use of the spoken word. Regardless of what else happens I am sure Obama will be a fantastic communicator perhaps even the best ever in the White House.
Personally I find it hard to get irked over the non-use of “atheists”, because if you get three people in a room you’re likely to get four totally different opinions about what the word’s definition is. (Doesn’t believe? disbelieves? Believes the opposite? Believes the opposite is proven? Includes/disincludes agnostics - whatever those are?)
At least with “non-believer” there’s no confusion about who’s being talked about.
Saw it, but it didn’t strike me as particularly comical or even especially insightful - it just demonstrates that political speeches have certain broad and standard themes. Given that one has eight years of GWB speeches to draw from, matching excerpts from Obama’s inaugeral to something Bush once said takes little more effort than just running a search and some basic video editing software. Heck, any President has likely used rhetoric similar to Obama’s. They could have copied in Carter or Reagan clips.
Manthous’ right-wing, gun-toting, Bush-loving, e-mail-rumor-forwarding co-worker said that after that speech he was getting totally behind Obama. He thought Obama’s words were clear and powerful and he was very impressed and felt newly confident about the man who has our future in his hands.
I don’t expect that a Lincoln/King/Kennedy-esque speech would have moved him in the same way. And I bet Obama knew that it was not in his best interest speak to scholars and poets and writers who would preserve his words for eternity, but instead to speak to people like this very guy, whose help he needs now more than anything.
Just like to throw a link to my LiveJournal post about my trip to the inauguration last week, and accompanying Flickr set, if anyone is interested. I was on the southwestern corner of the Washington Monument for the ceremony.
The speech sucked from the standpoint that it wasn’t memorable. The reporters on whatever channel I was watching said the same thing. They were expecting something along the lines of JFK. It wasn’t a bad speech but it lacked anything of note. Writing it himself was a mistake. He had the best speechwriters of the campaign by far and was capable of delivering a good line.
Given the historic nature of his presidency and the size of the crowd/audience I was disappointed in most of the event. The opening invocation and the poem were train wrecks which didn’t help. The ending prayer was a 60’s throw back that might has well have been given by Reverend Wright.
I disagree. I thought there were several really nice turns of phrase. I loved the ending:
"Let it be said by our children’s children that when we were tested we refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn back nor did we falter; and with eyes fixed on the horizon and God’s grace upon us, we carried forth that great gift of freedom and delivered it safely to future generations. "
