The Worst Inaugural Address, Some Say
I thought that our new President’s inaugural address was magnificent, and said so in my post yesterday.
Of course, as many will point out, I am biased. And, of course, there are many other unbiased bloggers and pundits just rearing to point out how horrible, how “wretched” the speech was—the worst inaugural address in U.S. history.
And, of course, having called the outgoing president “one of the worst presidents in U.S. history,” I cant not call the kettle black.
But I can make some observations.
One of these bloggers who found the inaugural speech actually worse than that “other wretched speech” (referring to Barack Obama’s famous March 28, 2008, Philadelphia speech), wasn’t “going to waste much time on it” except to ridicule and deride several passages of Barack Obama’s speech. For example:
“We have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord.” I dunno, looks from here more like discordant Americans just took counsel of their fears, and put a “hope” blanket over their majority head.
An “end to petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn-out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics.” Unless he just fired Congress and resigned, then petty grievances, false promises and worn-out dogmas remain the order of the day. Jury’s still out on the recriminations.
The question immediately arises: Where were these bloggers and pundits when ex-president George W. Bush made such excellent remarks as (Courtesy of About.com:Political Humor ):
“Oh, no, we’re not going to have any casualties.” —discussing the Iraq war with Christian Coalition founder Pat Robertson, as quoted by Robertson
“My plan reduces the national debt, and fast. So fast, in fact, that economists worry that we’re going to run out of debt to retire.” —radio address, Feb. 24, 2001
“The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.” —State of the Union Address, Jan. 28, 2003, making a claim that administration officials knew at the time to be false .
“Major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed.” —speaking underneath a “Mission Accomplished” banner aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln, May 1, 2003
“We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories … And we’ll find more weapons as time goes on. But for those who say we haven’t found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they’re wrong, we found them.” —Washington, D.C., May 30, 2003
And, of course, “We don’t torture.”
Sorry, I forgot, we must let bygones be bygones and move on—to ridicule our new President. Is this a great country or what? And, I do mean that about America: my right to criticize even a President, and others’ right to also criticize a President—and me.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
10 Responses to “The Worst Inaugural Address, Some Say”
Of course the Critter doesn't have a single bias.Now if Bacevich or Larison said this I could at least listen to their arguments. But the Critter…
These guys are almost as bad as the punks and low-lifes who bade Bush farewell yesterday as Bush left the White House in the helicopter for his ride into obscurity — they waved goodbye to him with their middle fingers. Left-wing talkers I was listening to correctly said that this was undignified and out of place, then of course snickered among themselves about it. Bush hatred has been pathological.
There was nothing wrong with Obama's speech. It was fully consistent in content and style with the nature of his campaign speeches and how he has delivered them.
The man is already getting to work. He even makes for a good photo (and good caption) in the following news story about it.
(_Very_ good photo, in fact. He just scored psychological and political points for the Democratic Party with this photo, if you ask me — a fitting representative of this country, showing confidence and pride, and scoring points for the Dems in so doing.)
http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-01-21-voa23…
Personally, I thought it a very good address. But, as Rudi says, at least critics of Obama's speech are unbiased hahahahah (as, in fairness, are many of his adovates).
Two things I thought were interesting about it:
How Obama avoided the catch phrases that seemed to litter Clinton's and some of Bush's speeches, as both men seemed desperate to catch the attention of history.
Also, how themes of work and labour seemed to dominate the speech.
I wonder what other folks here thought?
Reaction to the inauguration address was another example for me of how poorly too many Americans understand public speeches. The reality for me is that they are too ignorant of the problems and reality we face, or they are in denial of them.
I had never been as taken by Obama's oratory as many people seemed to think all of his supporters were. I am one of many – despite the meme- that found John Kerry inspirational and excellent in his speeches. What I do like about Obama's speeches, and it was very extensive in his inaugural, is the statements and references to stuff Americans should be very aware of. That he doesn't use ideology to convey his message and ideas, but a combination of left and right brain styles. (See Drew Westen).
He doesn't use a lot of flowery stuff. I find his words more meaningful and memorable because of it. One of the really good ones from yesterday:
“…people will judge you [leaders] not on what you have destroyed, but what you build.”
Obama may not be saying as strongly as some of us would like that war is not the answer, but in that statement, he shows how well he understands the essential problem behind it. Gaza is the current example of this stupidity.
I thought it was crummy, but that's to be expected; but it should make you hesitate, Dorian, that many Obama supporters said the same thing. Jeff Toobin, for example, will never be accused of being anything but a reliable liberal shill, and even he couldn't bring himself to say the speech was any good.
SimonDodd says: “I thought it was crummy, but that's to be expected;”
As I said, Simon, I will not call the kettle black. But you can, that's what makes this country great.
Dorian: If I call the kettle black, I suspect that the kitchen staff will call me racist.
Great speech. I watched the whole thing. I'd like to think that Obama can bring a new tone to Washington, but have lived long enough to know this never happens. Carter, Reagan, Clinton, and two Bushes promised the same, and no one delivered. Washington will be Washington, and like all Presidents, Obama will have people resign in disgrace, or get fired. And BTW, isn't Rush Limbaugh a total idiot?
OK Simon, let me explain. “The pot calling the kettle black” means to say something about someone else which is actually true of you yourself..
I said, I, (as an Obama supporter,) can not call the kettle (i.e. Bush/Bush pundits) “black” (i.e. black with soot from a wood stove) because “the pot” (i.e. Obama/Obama supporters) is still copper-shiny….has only been on the stove for less than a day…has not had the chance to do something bad, yet—so how can we say something bad/black about the kettle that is not true of ourselves (the shiny pot).
On the other hand, Bush/Bush supporters (having been on the stove for eight years, and thus black with sut from the stove), can call the kettle (Obama/Obama supporters) “black” any time, even if the kettle is brand new, becvause that is exactly what the adage implies.l
I guess it sounds complicated, but believe me, nothing sinister or racial is implied by it. Just trying to use and old adage in an odd way…
Have a nice day
The speech was hard-hitting and truthful. What's not to like? I personally am very tired of hearing glossy rhetoric and drippy, sappy patriotic nonsense..
For once a president stood up at the inaugeral and said, “hey, we're in really bad shape”. What a relief from the last 8 years of “don't worry, everything is just peachy…” from the sinking Titanic.
I'm a big fan of finding out where the leaks are and finding who put them there and reporting them accurately.. to make sure the ship floats in the future; and it doesn't happen again…