|
 resident Bush's
State of the Union address last night wasn't the best speech he's
ever given. It wasn't even one of his better speeches, relative
to remarks he's delivered on other occasions (his last address to
Congress, his inauguration, etc.). But that's only because the quality
of his speeches, in general, have been so high, especially if we
judge them by their memorable lines alone. There were several last
night:
"States like these, and their terrorist allies, constitute
an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world."
The word "axis" conjures images of Nazism without stooping
to the level of a direct Hitler reference, which is overused in
our politics. The word "evil" is jarring, too — if
only because we're so used to political rhetoric neutered by relativism.
"Our enemies believed America was weak and materialistic, that
we would splinter in fear and selfishness. They were as wrong as
they are evil." There's that word "evil" again; Bush
used it five times last night.
"For too long our culture has said, 'If it feels good, do it.'
Now America is embracing a new ethic and a new creed: 'Let's roll.'"
This was unfortunately followed by the speech's lamest moment —
a call for government make-work projects — but it's a powerful
summation of how we at least hope our culture has changed since
September 11.
Will any of
these phrases make it into a future edition of Bartlett's? Hard
to say — and with Bush only a year into his presidency, the
number of possible entries available to the editors of that famous
quote-book is already large.
The irony is
that Bush has a reputation for being tongue-tied. It's deserved;
his off-the-cuff rhetoric is full of malapropisms and poor syntax.
Remember how he recently promised Democrats would only raise taxes
"over my dead body"? Actually, he said it would happen
"not over my dead body" — making the phrase
mean the exact opposite of what he intended. But everybody listening
knew what he meant.
Bill Clinton
is a telling contrast. He's famous for his speechmaking. Yet he
leaves behind a legacy of impoverished rhetoric. In his book POTUS
Speaks, the ex-president's former top speechwriter admitted,
"Clinton does not leave a long trail of chiseled phrases."
Indeed, does
anybody even know the name of Clinton's former top speechwriter?
(It's Michael Waldman.) Bush's top speechwriter, Michael Gerson,
may not exactly be a household name, but he has a much higher profile
than any speechwriter from the Clinton administration — and
it has everything to do with the high quality of his work. The guy
certainly does not yearn for the spotlight.
Clinton has
exactly three entries in the latest edition of Bartlett's:
"I experimented with marijuana a time or two. And I didn't
like it, and didn't inhale, and didn't try it again."
"I am going to say this again: I did not have sexual relations
with that woman — Miss Lewinsky."
"It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is. If the
— if he — if 'is' means is and never has been, that is
not — that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was
a completely true statement."
That's not
much of a rhetorical legacy. In fact, it's an embarrassing one,
full of lying and dissembling, and not a single one comes from the
speeches crafted by his White House writers.
It would be
a mistake to say Clinton wasn't an effective communicator. Clearly
he did something right over eight-plus years: He used television
extremely well, from mastering the new 24-hour news cycle to running
good advertisements. Yet even the speech most people say was his
best — to a black audience at a Memphis church in 1993 —
doesn't contain any obvious Bartlett's moments. It may have been
a powerful speech to watch, to experience, to see performed, but
its words won't last through the ages.
Clinton was
skilled at impromptu speech. Isn't that appropriate? For him, everything
was about the moment.
Nobody knows
how long past the present moment Bush's words will last. One thing's
for sure: The man is our best presidential speechmaker since Ronald
Reagan.
|
