The Power Of Oratory

A Great Speech Requires Eloquence, A Moment Of Consequence, And Ideas Of Importance

(CBS)  "MY FELLOW AMERICANS" is the frequent opening of a Presidential speech. And from Roosevelt to Kennedy to Reagan and beyond ... modern Presidents have strived to make their mark with oratory. How they do it is reported on in our cover story by Senior Political Correspondent Jeff Greenfield:

---

It is the oldest of political weapons, whose power has never waned.

When radio was king, a new president's powerful voice cut through the pessimism of the Great Depression.

"So let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear … is fear itself."

In the age of television, the youngest elected President spoke to our aspirations…

"I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the Earth."

A quarter of a century later, the oldest elected President spoke to our grief.

"We will never forget the last time we saw them, as they slipped the surly bonds of Earth to touch the face of God."

And today, in a time of Web casts and podcasts, when media assaults us in bits and bytes, is it really possible that the oldest of political tools - the spoken word - is still one of the most powerful? Yes, it is.

How else did an ex-governor of Arkansas, who began in cash-starved obscurity, become a contender? With a gift for speech and debate honed in his years as a Baptist minister.

"Jesus was too smart to run for office," Mike Huckabee said at one debate.

And how did a state senator with a funny name become a national phenomenon? With a single speech at the last Democratic convention.

"We worship an awesome God in the blue states and we have gay friends in the red states," Barack Obama said, in his plea for unity.

And, whether with carefully prepared formal speeches, or more informal give-and-take with voters, the candidates this year are proving that the gift of rhetoric is not some musty academic matter, as academics like Wisconsin Prof. Stephen Lucas note:

"People thought radio would kill oratory. It didn't kill it, it transformed it," Lucas said. "And Franklin Roosevelt became a maser of radio communication. And then people said, 'Television will kill oratory.' It didn't' kill it; Ronald Reagan became a master of it. And now people are saying. 'Perhaps the Internet will kill oratory.' And in act, it hasn't, because there's no substitute for that face-to-face communication between a speaker and an audience."

Michael Gerson knows something about speeches - he spent years as President George W. Bush's chef speechwriter. But his analysis is non-partisan:

"I don't think in a certain way that it is a coincidence that two of the leading candidates, Obama and Huckabee, are the preachers in the race in many ways," he said. "They know how to have a cadence. They know how to exhort with more language."

Gerson says in the sense of written speeches, Obama's are the most ambitious of all the candidates, to wit:

"They said this day would never come. They said we set our sights too high."

Gerson said his Iowa victory speech was a convention-quality-level speech.

There's a similar non-partisan seal of approval from Michael Waldman, who was President Clinton's chief speechwriter:

"Huckabee clearly learned his skills not in the bully pulpit, but in the actual pulpit. He's got a honeyed voice. He's got a twinkle in his eyes. He has found a way to say things that are very conservative, but to communicate it in a way that doesn't sound threatening to people."

But while Huckabee and Obama have garnered the most praise for their rhetorical skills, other candidates demonstrate that, when it comes to oratory, there is no one-size-fits-all model.

Consider John McCain, who says he much prefers speaking off-the-cuff to prepared remarks. "The people who come to the town meetings, they want Q and A," he said. "They're very disappointed if you stand up and give a speech, then leave."

Gerson was less approving of Hillary Clinton: "She is very substantive when she speaks. She's a master of policy, she's very knowledgeable. But she also, I think, has an annoying style. It can often be lecturing. It can be off-putting. So I think there are significant problems there."

Waldman attributes John Edwards style to his years as a courtroom attorney. "You can see how [he] made his living and won a lot of cases for ordinary citizens, by looking into the eyes of jurors and really convincing them to vote a certain way."

But Edwards disagrees. "The courtroom's actually a more intimate setting," Edwards said, "so you use a lower tone of voice, a more intimate speaking style. These crowds - I just spoke in front of a thousand-plus people - it requires a bigger voice, more passion, so it actually is a different feel."

All right … so the gift of effective speech may be a powerful campaign tool. But it's more than that. Sometimes, the right words change history.

Consider Martin Luther King, Jr.'s immortal "Free at last! Free at Last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!"

Or what happened in March, 1965, after civil rights demonstrators were met with violence by local officials in Selma, Ala. President Johnson spoke to a nationally televised joint session of Congress, urging lawmakers to pass the Voting Rights Act:

"There must be no delay or no hesitation or no compromise with our purpose," he said.

"The speaker and the moment and the issue came together," Lucas said. "You had the historical significance of the quest for civil rights, and you had Lyndon Johnson, a Southerner, standing up, speaking in that slow, Texas drawl, appropriating the anthem of the civil rights movement."

"Really, it's all of us who must overcome the crippling legacy of discrimination," LBJ said. "And we shall overcome"

"So it was a moment that resonated powerfully with the people who lived it," said Lucas.

In that moment, Johnson's oratory skills were clearly an asset to his governing … but is that always the case?

"Ronald Reagan was once asked, 'How can you be an actor and be President?'" Waldman recalled. "And he thought about it and said, 'I don't know how you can be President without being an actor.' The ability to persuade people is an essential part of the job."

And sometimes, the right words aren't enough - it's the moment that matters.

"To have a great speech in a historical sense, you need at last three things," Lucas said. "One is something important to say. [Another] is the ability to say it well. And the third is some moment of consequence that you're responding to, that will get the attention of the people, and indeed, perhaps posterity."

"People always turn to words, elevated words of comfort and inspiration and idealism," Gerson said. "I don't think that's every going to change."

[crackergal-2009]

I''m with pdabs. The only woman mentioned in the whole piece was knocked down-praise for all the rest,deserving or not. Take an objective look at what''s going on in virtually all the media. Wolf Blitzer, Chris Matthews, Lou Dobbs,etc-and now CBS Morning News? I hope the people of America, this time, look at not just what the person says, but what they have DONE. I think Hillary Clinton''s actions (read about the facts, not what you think you know) and experience is worth all the oratory in the world. I like Obama, but he''s all talk.

[samrlim]

TO: SENATOR OBAMA
SPEECHES ARE BEAUTIFUL ONLY WHEN YOU PRACTICE IT AND USELESS WHEN YOU DON''T PUT IT INTO ACTION. THAT''S THE IRONY OF IT!

[madmaciii]

The media has decided that the BIG stories this year are Huckabee and Obama (the rise from humble beginnings, opression, etc), and so we are stuck with these candidates and stories, which have far greater gravity than they would standing alone. Hillary running is obviously not a story worthy of coverage. Hillary losing, now there''s a story.

[madmaciii]

The media has decided that the BIG stories this year are Huckabee and Obama (the rise from humble beginnings, opression, etc), and so we are stuck with these candidates and stories, which have far greater gravity than they would standing alone. Hillary running is obviously not a story worthy of coverage. Hillary losing, now there''s a story.

[pdabbs-2009]

This overall piece about the power of presidential oratory seemed an obvious setup for dissing Hillary Clinton. She was the only woman mentioned and she was dismissed for being substantive, while all the men were awesome orators. What about the persuasive skills of all the women in leadership positions in government, the clergy, corporate life? What about Congresswoman Barbara Jordan? She addressed the Democratic national conventions in 1976 and 1992. She had a better take on "change" in her 1992 speech than anything Mr. Obama has suggested as his vision. As for me, I could do with some substantive realism about what it takes to be president of the US.

When will features like this one be fair to everybody involved?

[notopennshut]

posted by CBSverified

Agreed!! People must come to their senses. You look around and you see who has garnered the support of many established leaders of the Democrats, who they think will be the best leader of the party, and they feel that it will be Obama. Come on, all you silent majority, time to speak out and let us find a worthy leader who will bring us into change and not another of the same old B&H again.

[cfin5]

........And Governor Huckabee thinks that the Constitution is a Living and breathing document that can be changed to fit in with our oh, so modern lifestyles of today. Basically folks, he just told you that he will break his oath to the Constitution before he has even taken it. Why wouldn''t he anyway? He and a lot of "ministers" change their preference of Bible versions every other year. The new ones seem to just keep getting more watered down and "swiss cheese" holes in them with each new book. Think I lie?.....Grab a modern Bible and compare them to the KJV with just a few of these verses I''ll give,....1 John 5:7, Colossians 1:14, Mark 7:16, Romans 8:1, Philippians 2:6, Luke 2:33, Acts 8:37.........If these "Bible Scholars" can sneak these discrepancies past the believers discernment, then there is no one kind of person better in the world to destroy our Constitution.

[cfin5]

"There exists a law, not written down anywhere, but inborn in our hearts, a law which comes to us not by training or custom or reading, a law which has come to us not from theory but from practice, not by instruction but by natural intuition. I refer to the law which lays down that,if our lives are endangered by plots or violence or armed robbers or enemies, any and every method of protecting ourselves is morally right." - Marcus Tulius Cicero (106-53 B.C.)---------------Not much has changed since then no matter what McSenator''s "TROJAN SHEEP" ideology believes what the 2nd. Amendment means.

[searingtruth]

"Today, in a major speech, Barack Obama addressed homophobia, anti-semitism and xenophobia among black Americans.

Could you ever imagine Hillary making the same principled comments in front of an interest group?

There is only one Democrat speaking sense to the American people and playing it straight at the same time, and that candidate is Barack Obama.

Martin Edwin "Mick" Andersen"
andersenme


Ummm...

Did he say anything about the indefinite incarceration of illegally abducted anonymous American and foreign citizens in secret prisons where they are subject to institutionalized torture and murder?

Did he say anything about the illegal mass surveillance of the American people without warrant?

Did he utter a word about the current administrations numerous crimes against our Constitution and humanity?

Did he say anything about restoring our Constitution and the rule of law it embraces, and bringing all those, from all parties, who have subverted it to justice as a deterrent for any who may attempt it again?

I didn''t think so.

And if he doesn''t address these critical issues first, then nothing else he says, or plans, or hopes, means anything.
ST


"We need not debate the existence of our three branches of government, only the punishment for those who would destroy them."
SearingTruth

A Future of the Brave - www.searingtruth.com

[andersenme]

Today, in a major speech, Barack Obama addressed homophobia, anti-semitism and xenophobia among black Americans.

Could you ever imagine Hillary making the same principled comments in front of an interest group?

There is only one Democrat speaking sense to the American people and playing it straight at the same time, and that candidate is Barack Obama.

Martin Edwin "Mick" Andersen

[searingtruth]

"Peace and Love Searing Truth
...but you speak nonsense
Peace and Love"
nwihoosier


Well thank you. That''s the nicest insult I''ve ever received. Honestly.
ST


"Our first duty is to always uphold The Constitution of the United States of America."
SearingTruth

A Future of the Brave - www.searingtruth.com

[nwihoosier]

Peace and Love Searing Truth
...but you speak nonsense
Peace and Love

[searingtruth]

"Let''s not forget that up until last month, there wasn''t a word that came out of Mr. Obama''''s mouth that wasn''t mud-slinging at Hillary Clinton.

He never discussed the issues other than to say he could change them. He never spoke in details. ..."
RowdyTexan2


And if I could only find another link to the interview you would see why. Besides his praise of Republicans, he really couldn''t articulate any real plan for anything, and seemed to get rather disheveled when he tried.

Even when asked what his top 3 priorities would be as President, he couldn''t articulate them. Here is a synopsis of what he said:

1. Some vague statement about "changing the mission" in Iraq and "getting out responsibly".

2. A strong initial statement that he would implement health care for all in his first year, immediately followed by vague statements and backtracking that seem to nullify his initial declaration.

3. Vague statements about improving "energy policy".

That''s why I really want people to see the entire video for themselves. It is very surprising, and as I''ve said numerous times now, disturbing. I cannot fathom how this man ever became a Senator, much less a candidate for President.

And by the way, in the interests of full disclosure, I''ve been asked numerous times who I support and have always said no one. However, I''ve decided to support Edwards if the viable Independent candidate I''ve been advocating and hoping for does not materialize.
ST

A Future of the Brave %u2013 www.searingtruth.com

[rowdytexan2]

"And I think I know why. He seems to be completely unaware of all of it."

That is my point exactly!

It''s like everywhere he goes he changes his stance to what whoever it is wants to hear. He never takes a definitive stance. It''s because he doesn''t have one.

He''s constantly trolling for an answer because he hasn''t any experience, of listening for years to the arguments on the issues, of being able to sort out all the arguments to find a direction.

Again, he has a law degree, has taught constitutional law...anybody can parrot out what they''ve learned. He''s done some good work in neighborhoods, good for him! He''s been a senator for two years and sponsored six pieces of legislation! He can''t even stand on the voting record he already has, and keeps contradicting it.

That''s it folks! That''s ALL he knows!

Joe Biden has 20 something more years experience, a great record and we didn''t even give him a look in!

Gov. Richardson has done great work and nobody gave him a look in!

Why are we even talking to this young man?????

One day he could be a fine president

[searingtruth]

"... ST because he didn''t say he liked Reagan''s ideology, he said he likes his out-of-the-box way of thinking. ..."
SamTheTVCat


But the problem is that he didn''t say anything about ideology, the rule of law, human rights, or justice, fellow patriot.

After praising Reagan for changing "the trajectory of America" he didn''t mention union busting, our first masses of homeless, secret government, or the general road to tyranny that Reagan started us on. Nor the financial catastrophe he left us in that took a decade to recover from.

And then only a few moments later he shockingly praises the Republicans as the "party of ideas" for the last 10,15 years, again without mentioning their numerous crimes against our Constitution and humanity, the dire peril our Democratic Republic faces today, or the disgrace of our nation.

And I think I know why. He seems to be completely unaware of all of it.

Really. The overall impression I got from the interview was that this man is incredibly naive, and dangerous.

As I said, I think it''s important for all Americans to see the interview in its totality, and I''m trying to find another link to it. However, it has really been devastating the Obama campaign and it looks like they''re desperately trying to keep us from seeing it anymore.
ST


"If only we could turn back time, before madness gripped us."
SearingTruth

A Future of the Brave - www.searingtruth.com

[rowdytexan2]

Let''s not forget that up until last month, there wasn''t a word that came out of Mr. Obama''s mouth that wasn''t mud-slinging at Hillary Clinton.

He never discussed the issues other than to say he could change them. He never spoke in details. He only spoke about what he had done, which was work in some neighborhood projects, teach constitutional law, and support six pieces of legislature. He couldn''t speak about plans or action or anything else because he didn''t have any, and still hasn''t a clue about running this country''s business.

Finally when he and the Edwards hypocrite got booed at the debates, he and Obama figured they''re better sit down and think up a plan, but there wasn''t any time now. So they took Hillary''s plans, jiggled them around a little and decided they were the ONLY ones with a plan!

This young man is a great orator and possibly motivator, but you have to have some idea of what you''re going to be leading a country into.

Mr. Obama hasn''t a clue!!!

[samthetvcat]

"Do you wonder why the republicans have owned the White House over the last 50 years?"
Posted by trapbreak

Not when you open your mouth . . .

[searingtruth]

"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XaoYD7iZG9w"
george2221


Thank you george2221. Do you have any idea where the full 49 minute interview might be?

As I said it was very disturbing and I think it''s important that Americans see the whole thing. I just wrote to the Senior Editor Mark Lundahl at rgj.com asking why the video, which must have been drawing many new visitors to their site, would have suddenly been pulled.
ST


"Judge not a word conflicted by deed."
SearingTruth

A Future of the Brave - www.searingtruth.com

[samthetvcat]

"And Obama must agree, or how on earth could he emote %u201CRepublican%u201D and %u201Cparty of ideas%u201D in the same sentence?"
Posted by SearingTruth

ST because he didn''t say he liked Reagan''s ideology, he said he likes his out-of-the-box way of thinking. It''s the same way I as a Democrat like Obama and Romney even though they''re on polar opposites of the spectrum. But I do understand how many ppl might have interpreted her words in terms of ideology.

[searingtruth]

Here''s the second excerpt from the disturbing 49 minute interview in which Obama reveals his true innermost self. As I said before the entire video was posted at http://news.rgj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080115/VIDEO/80115026, but it looks like Obama had it taken down.

Get ready for a shocker folks.

%u201CI think its fair to say the Republicans were the party of ideas for a pretty long chunk of time there over the last 10, 15 years in the sense that they were challenging conventional wisdom, now we''ve heard it all before you look at the economic policies you know when they''re being debated among the Presidential candidates it''s all tax cuts well you know, we know, we''ve done that, we''ve tried it, uh (unintelligible) that''s not really going to solve uh our energy problems for example.%u201D
Barack Obama, 1/16/2008


Yikes!!! again. The only ideas the Republicans have brought us is that secret prisons, indefinite detention without charge or representation, the torture and murder of prisoners, universal surveillance without warrant, preemptive war of conquest, and one mane rule is a %u201Cgood%u201D thing.

And Obama must agree, or how on earth could he emote %u201CRepublican%u201D and %u201Cparty of ideas%u201D in the same sentence?

Right wingers, here''s your guy. And he can speak in coherent sentences!. Hallelujah!
ST

"Once again, a mirage of salvation condemning all."
SearingTruth

A Future of the Brave - www.searingtruth.com