I didn’t watch President Obama’s speech last night but I did read the transcript this morning. I think it may be the best speech he’s ever given. (I’ve been less taken than others by some of the earlier ones.) Here’s a good part–and a message worth hearing:
For the truth is none of us can know exactly what triggered this vicious attack. None of us can know with any certainty what might have stopped these shots from being fired, or what thoughts lurked in the inner recesses of a violent man’s mind. Yes, we have to examine all the facts behind this tragedy. We cannot and will not be passive in the face of such violence. We should be willing to challenge old assumptions in order to lessen the prospects of such violence in the future. (Applause.) But what we cannot do is use this tragedy as one more occasion to turn on each other. (Applause.) That we cannot do. (Applause.) That we cannot do.
This was almost a sermon. Happy to see that all the people had a president last night.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseBy "old assumptions" he, of course, meant the first and second amendments.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"But what we cannot do is use this tragedy as one more occasion to turn on each other."
Well it depends on what "we" he's referring to doesn't it?
My guess would be that Obama's using "we" to refer to Americans in general. Unfortunately for him and his speech, there is not a single sign of a problem of Americans using this as an occasion to turn on one another. There are only Democrats using it as a cudgel to beat people they disagree with politically. Obama should have said so. That would be true. He should have told Democrats directly to stop it. That would be right. As is, it reeks of cowardice and mendacity.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI could not disagree more. He talked about how we can do "better" and be more "civil". By giving these concepts credence, Obama implied that they actually have something to do with this crime. He never called out those people on the left who have furthered the ridiculous premise that political speech by those against big government is somehow destructive to the republic. Instead, he made this an "all of us" moment, when the idea of "all of us" does not and should not apply.
Also, this was less a sermon or a uniting speech than a campaign rally. It had much of the same unseemliness of the Paul Wellstone funeral.
As I mentioned elsewhere, Obama has called me an "enemy" who must be "punished" because I disagree with his political views. Let him make his own mea culpa before pointing fingers at the rest of us.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI wish I had teachers like John Miller when I was in school. He hands out an A+ for merely showing up and not making things worse.
Seriously, it was an acceptable speech appropriate for the event. He turned off the light on his whacko left and that's good for all of us.
Otherwise, this will simply be a speech that no one remembers, like all of his other speeches.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI give O points, but the crowd turned it into a Obama Love-Fest!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI was (borrowing from John Podhoretz) appalled and it sickened me.
Totally inappropriate.
For the first time in my adult life, I am proud of this president...
He did a great job. I hope he was sincere; he sure sounded sincere.
I also appreciated the scriptural references. We probably wouldn't have seen those pre-November.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseEt tu Miller?
You guys just don't get it. Obama wasn't interested in squelching the absurd claim that conservative hate speech led to the Tucson attrocity. If he had wanted to do that he would have referred to that claim directly and said it was despicable. He pointedly didn't do that. He meandered around talking about challenging old assumptions, blah, blah, blah to muddy the waters and then said we shouldn't turn on each other. Here he is affecting to be exquisitely neutral between the perpetrators of an attack and the people they attacked. He is bracketing the blood libel with the response to it and suggesting that each side should just stop squabbling.
This is the left's old moral equivalence ploy and no conservative should fall for it. Obama is trying to talk conservatives into rhetorical disarmament as he tries to convince everyone else that conservative ideas are outside the bounds of civilized discourse, just like utterly unsubstantiated charges of complicity in a multiple murder.
Obama had no legitimate grounds for discussing civility in Tucson at all. To bring the subject up was to conjure a link between the state of our political discourse and the shootings. Any hint that there is such a link is deeply offensive and even more deeply idiotic. This wasn't one of Obama's best speeches it was one of his worst, and that is really saying something. You can't really grasp just how awful it was without seeing it complete with the (literally) sophmoric, cheering crowd. Watch the video, consider what Obama is really saying and then ask yourself whether your first take on this wasn't way off base.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI thought the speech was fairly well written. Unfortunately I am somewhat forced to sit here and watch it in stereo, so I read the speech, then saw the delivery, then saw and heard the delivery. It's classic Obama speech 1.0. It works okay the first couple of times you see it, and then you can't stop yourself from playing briefing room bingo with him. He learned a certain set of oratorical flourishes, along with a set of coached gestures. Neither the inflections nor the gestures are sincere, except that they are sincerely rehearsed. It shows.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI must have awoken this morning in Bizarro World. This public spectacle masquerading as a memorial was appalling and repulsive. If you want to hold a memorial to honor the passing of loved ones with quiet dignity, it may help the atmosphere if you don't hold it in a sports arena.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseUgh. I'm literally nauseous at reading all the fawning over Obama at NRO today.
I'll just give the link to what I said on Jim Geraghty's post.
External Link
Summary:
The last half of the speech sounded more like a campaign speech than a memorial service, and the whole "Christina would want us to..." part just fell flat. It was too cliche, and too politically motivated.
Still, it was far better than I expected. I can't give it an F, but no better than a C-, and I'm being generous with that.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseA+? Methinks thou hast flunked Logic 101.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI wish Palin had waited until after the President's Tucson speech to comment, if at all. I agree with Krauthammer that her video-taped response was unnecessary. If, after Obama's speech, she still felt the need to respond, she could have referenced his repudiation of the Leftist narrative that arose in the wake of the shootings.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI applaud President Obama's words. But, they are just words, just like Palin's. Isn't fighting discourse with more discourse just hypocrisy? Are the GOP's vitriolic attacks any more damaging or influential than the Democrats? We've read the words of people like Krugman, Matthews and Beck. Like Obama's and Palin's, they are just words.
We are tired of words. We are watching for actions.
Obama is the only person that can do it. Palin holds no office, has no power, does not own a bully pulpit. Obama does. He first has to tone down his administration. Without Rahm and Gibbs, that's much easier. He then has to tone down his party. He then has to tone down his enablers (MSNBC, NYT, WaPo, etc.). Having done that, he has then earned the right to tone down the GOP and Tea Party.
We are watching.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWow, given Obama's self-serving history I would hardly give this speech an A+. Like Zman said, I wish I had professors like you in college.
That is a good excerpt you've selected, but the other parts regarding civil discourse and the need to use it to make the victims proud was too much. If that excerpt was all he said about it, then maybe you could rave about this speech.
What we heard last night was a man lecturing us about the need for a more civil tone who has done as much if not more given his position to increase the harshness of the debate with his characterizations of his opponents.
He acted above the fray when he is clearly in the middle of it. Yes, he needed to be above it all, but a mea culpa on his part is necessary for him to get there.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseDo we know who ghost-wrote it?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhere was Boehner?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOh yeah. He was on TV last night. Yawn.
Now let's get back to the business of the people. Something the president hasn't done for the past couple years. Bring on the repeal vote.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe transcript was better than the actual speech. If you watched the whole thing it was Wellstone 2.
Note to people planning Memorials: Don't do it on a College Campus.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI disagree. Like nearly every speech he gives, he manage to taint this one with the implication that America just isn't good enough for him -- and in this case, also not good enough for Christina Green, who serves the same rhetorical purpose here as the spirits of the unborn babies John Edwards channeled -- a voice for his own opinions.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse