Those who came to Invesco Field on Thursday witnessed something they are unlikely ever to forget. Barack Obama gave an electrifying speech that silences--for the moment at least--doubts in the Democratic party that they have backed the right candidate. He commanded this vast sports stadium with calm authority, there were no false notes, and the attention of his audience never wavered. His listeners were enthralled, and they left believing they will win in November. After this, they were asking, how could the country fail to elect their man president?
The event started slowly, with enormous lines at security, a dreary succession of second-rate speakers, and a clutch of by-the-numbers political videos. Al Gore, Sheryl Crow, and Stevie Wonder raised the standard only a little, with dull renditions of their greatest hits, and the thought that this entire mega-production was going to backfire was impossible to suppress. Who in the world thought that the Greek temple stage-set was right? If the designer's brief had been "low-budget hubris", it worked; by any other standard it was a calamity. With the Republicans calling Mr Obama a vapid celebrity, this was outright self-parody. Yet none of it mattered when Mr Obama started to speak.
He began with a brief but seemingly sincere tribute to Hillary Clinton--who had given a well-received speech earlier in the convention. He wove vignettes of ordinary people's struggles during the past eight years--the human element said to be missing from his campaign of late--into a statement of his own political philosophy. You cannot connect with people in a space of this size, but this was the next best thing. Part of his speech then crisply listed specific policy proposals, addressing the charge that he is too vague. He directly rebutted John McCain's insinuation that he fails to put the country first: "We all put the country first," he said with a touch of anger, to one of the loudest cheers of the night.
He attacked his opponent, but there was nothing vicious or vindictive in his criticisms. He said Mr McCain was for the wrong policies not because he did not care about people, but because he did not understand them and was out of touch. He gently contrasted his own modest upbringing with Mr McCain's wealth. In that way, Mr Obama stayed true to the positive tone of his campaign, yet wounded his adversary as well. He closed by reiterating his earlier theme that this is not red America or blue America but the United States of America--in other words, with a renewed appeal to tolerance, moderation, and patriotism. More deafening cheers.
The costs of the policies he listed do not add up, of course: affordable college, affordable health care for all, subsidies for clean energy and every other good thing, and tax cuts for 95 percent of households. This is not exactly the count-every-dime accounting he claimed. Yet the measured force of Mr Obama in full flight is not to be denied. In modern American politics, he is peerless. How it looked on television will matter most for his campaign, but in the stadium it was a triumph.
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
Did you notice the way that he was able to look straight to camera - in between using the teleprompters and the crowd.
It made a huge stadium event have elements of a fireside chat. None of the others can do this -HRC doesn't, nor did Kerry or Gore and I don't think I'd like to see McCain doing it.
It was incredibly effective and added a lot to the
TV visual image.
For the last time, it was not a Greek temple anything. You've been to DC right? Half the buildings in the District have neoclassical designs with columns. And the "windows" and lines of American flags make it pretty damn obvious that was the intent.
Yawn.
Peggy Noonan said this morning on the Today Show that the stage was an evocation of the Lincoln Memorial where MLK gave his "I have a dream" speech.
Yes, he speaks well. Meaning?
when he said "we all put america first," a shiver ran down my spine, whereas my cognitive self said "we're going to see that line in lots of commercials."
and justifiably: in one thrust, obama made mccain look mighty, mighty small.
Did you notice the way that he was able to look straight to camera - in between using the teleprompters and the crowd.
Agreed -- I thought that was very eye-catching. Speakers at televised rallies rarely look directly into the camera.
Obama was centered,elequent, and did, I think,
point out the differences between his opponent and himself, without invective. He did show his appreciation for Hillary's truly wonderful speech, and the only thing that made me waver a bit was his laundry list of "promises." There are some things he will not be able to do when elected..though all may wish otherwise.Still, for the first time in a long time, I have hope for an election that will result in a true leader.
BB August 29
I was expecting something more ambitious -- soaring rhetoric, an attempt to redefine political divisions, transcending this or that. Instead he gave a very typical convention speech. Safe but quite effective. I felt I had heard most of it before.
I think in sports the equivalent would be trying to win with high percentage plays and a proven, traditional strategy. He didn't hit it out of the park, as everyone likes to say -- he advanced the runners.
Clive, if this was your reaction then I need to watch the speech again. I clearly missed something.
Clive,
It is true that you have three testicles?
Obama "speaks well", James, because he sees clearly, and is thoughtful.
It was a Vonnegut character, mad scientist, Felix Hoenikker who said, "Anyone who can't explain what they're doing to a five year old is a charlatan."
Under that criteria, most people don't command the material they speak about. The exceptions are rare and obvious: Tony Blair, Bill Clinton, and now, Barack Obama.
It is not smooth BS, it is clarity of perception. Obama's is a rare intelligence, and I respect it greatly.
Just what makes you think that Obama's policies don't add up? There are a lot of tax loopholes and tax havens that can be closed, and the plain truth is that that top 5% of Americans have truly staggering amounts of money. If Warren Buffett is pro-Obama, I don't see why you should be a skeptic.
(See also: "Advanced Obamanomics," in last Sunday's NYT magazine.)