Barack Star!!!
Believe it or not, I listen to a great deal of right wing talk (aka hate) radio. I believe in the adage, “Know thy enemy.� Lately, Rush and Sean Hannity have been trying to get me to hate Barack Obama. They point out how Mr. Obama hasn’t done anything legislatively to warrant such attention. I have to agree.
And yet, Obama is a star.
The boys on The Right want their fans to believe they don’t know why. They want people to believe that Obama’s star is rising because of the media; that he is a creation.
They are partly correct.
Yes, Obama IS a creation, but he is not of the media’s making.
As to why Obama is so popular, I submit there are three reasons.
First, he’s pretty. That shouldn’t make a damn bit of difference, but it does.
Second, he’s not Hillary. She has been the presumed front-runner for a long time, and, as long as no more than 75% of Americans hate her—do the math—she would win in ’08. I know several people that would vote for her. I try to change their minds, but leftists can be just as hardheaded as dittoheads!
But, I digress.
Hillary, while worshiped by some, arouses negative passions in a large number of people. Some of those people own newspapers and other media. During her political tenure, she has had the chance to make many enemies. Obama’s inexperience is an asset.
It is the third reason though, that has the hate-radio guys in a tailspin. When you hear them devote that much verbiage to one guy, know that they—well, actually their bosses--are scared.
Listen to Obama speak! Better yet, watch him speak.
Have you heard the man? It isn’t necessarily what Obama says, it is how he says it. His oratorical style is truly a “talent on loan from God!�
I’ve heard the rhetoric before: new ideas, new directions, new this, new that. I’m not impressed. I don’t believe a word of it.
As an actor, I’ve long appreciated the fine art of proper public speaking. As a teacher, I’ve had the pleasure of showing others this art. I consider a well-delivered phrase a thing of beauty.
The ability to speak well is something that our current president is sorely lacking. President Bush may actually be an intelligent man; unfortunately, he does not communicate his intelligence well.
My girlfriend summed it up this way, “My God, after six years of listening to ‘duh,’ duh,’ duh,’ ANYbody would sound presidential.�
I would have to agree. However, it is much more than that.
Obama’s speeches are stirring. They strike a chord down deep. He has the ability to hold an audience in the palm of his hand. He makes the crowd adore him. A rare gift in politics. Again, the words aren’t new, but the packaging and delivery are spectacular.
Unfortunately for the Republicans, none of their current contenders comes anywhere close to Obama in style. This is going to be a serious problem for them. It is going to take one hell of a snow job to convince folks to vote for whomever they settle on.
The question for the Republicans will be, “Can we create someone bigger than a Rock Star?�
Comments
--Style over Substance--
So, is that the mantra for US politics today? I'll admit, the physical appeal (visual and aural) of a candidate will have a bearing on their success, but should we stop there? I think not.
It won't take long before Hillary's machine finds skeletons in Obama's closet. She can't have that upstart steal the nomination from her.
Anyway, Edwards looks to be a stronger candidate in the populist mold.
Posted by: Frank | January 18, 2007 10:25 AM
This is an interesting topic Quentin. Good pick.
I have my own misgivings about Obama. Let me first say that Bush is a terrible public speaker and many times I've listened to him and wanted to help finish the sentence for him. Not good.
I'm one of the few people who watched Bill Clinton's speeches and thought to myself "What does everyone see in this guy?" I can remember him stuttering a few times as well.
Hillary does come off as shrill sometimes too. But frankly (you'll hate me for this) I like that Hillary is shrill. If she does become President, I want her to be a mean [expletive]. I want her to be a hawk when it comes to our national defense! Hillary gets what many democrats don't: Our nation must be protected from terrorists! For that reason alone, I'd consider her, even if she did come up with the dumb idea to socialize health care.
As for Obama, (again, I'm in the minority here) I don't think he speaks to the working man. When I listen to him speak, I feel like he's talking down to me, like maybe he thinks he's better than me. If others share my feelings, it may not be good for Obama with working class voters.
Not to mention, he has a wierd name.
Posted by: Dane Langston | January 18, 2007 11:11 AM
Thank you, Dane.
It's impossible to hate you sir--you're reading my blog!
Seriously though, my own brother loves her too.
You're right about his name. He will really have a problem with that middle one.
Posted by: Quentin | January 18, 2007 04:40 PM
Just a question - same Quentin Colgan that attended St. Francis Grade School in Vista CA?
==========================================================================
One and the same!
Posted by: Kim Gustafson (Wall) | April 13, 2007 10:24 PM