So Tom Hanks has endorsed Barack Obama, comparing him -- according to the clip I just saw on Hardball -- with FDR, HST, JFK and RWR (that last would be Ronald Reagan -- apparently the Dems have the monopoly on names that can be reduced to catchy three-letter-initials, though of course it didn't help John F. Kerry).
But of course one of these things is not like the others, and I don't mean that the former presidents are all white guys. FDR, JFK and Reagan were all remarkably gifted practitioners of political speechmaking -- the three best of the modern presidential era. In fact, each invented a style and persona that their successors and would-be successors have often struggled (and failed) to immitate.
As I recount in White House Ghosts: Presidents and Their Speechwriters, Truman had a tough time with unenviable task for following FDR. For the first couple of years of his first term, Truman's speeches even read more like Roosevelt speeches. But Truman could not read a speech -- he had poor eyesight and a flat delivery.
Truman's aides were puzzled -- he was so engaging and funny in private, why couldn't he translate that into an effective speaking style? Things turned for Truman when his aides hit on the idea of liberating him from his speech texts: They gave him talking points and let him extemporize.
Obama? If elected he could become a magic speaker in the vein of the Big Three; the extent to which he can go off-the-cuff in a Trumanesque manner remains unclear.
In the mean time, I suggest you check out these and other great stories in White House Ghosts.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
The utter buffoonery of you people discussing and ignorantly trashing Harry S. Truman is the kind of stupid crap George W. Bush and his followers are counting on to resurrect the reputation of his failed and traitorous presidency.
I like Schlesinger butr this seems more like a plug for his book than a real post.
I didn't follow the comparison but I don't want Truman acc. regarding some better presidential accountability. That whole A-bomb thing strikes me as a Hillary issue.
Truman was kind of a douche. But the desegregated military was cool, thanks Harry!
Speakers who are good at extemporaneous comments are usually loaded with ideas and opinions on the subject that they are happy to advance. Obama prefers to craft long speeches which emphasize style over substance to advance the speaker not the ideas.
What exactly is this guy trying to say? Thank God Obama is no Harry Truman.
Harry Truman is a much over rated president.
Instead of continuing FDR's great legacy, he did his best to roll back as much as he could.
Truman's 'straight talk' was worth pretty much the same as (maybe a bit more) McCain's.
Truman was the president who started the great American corporatocracy. No President since FDR has favored people over corporations ever since. Obama may be our last chance.
Yes, it is Hillary who wants to Harry Truman Iran.
So he's not a racist who would commit war crimes, like nuking the Japanese?
Do you mean war crimes like what the Japanese did to the Chinese? Or like Pearl Harbor? I must have lost my revisionist history 101book.
And yes, Obama does have racist leanings, we all know that by now.
Listening to Roger Clinton and the Rodham Boys using their "n" words we know that their sibs simply have learned to through handlers and political savey clean up their language. Fortunatly ( or unfortunatly for Clintonistas) they have shown their true colors (no pun intended) during this campaign.
The Clintons are in fact racists and have used race-baiting to define Obama and to bring out the back- woods "Deliverence" style "working class whites" a'la Rodger Clinton and the Rodham boys
No, John, we don't know that. 'Cause we live in the world of reality.
20 years in a racist, anti-American church. Now THAT'S reality.
It's too bad that Obama never ACTUALLY does anything. I suppose he could spend 8 years talking but you fill find that people will soon stop listening.
The Clintons were in position to make real change that would have benefited the lives of many american middle class citizens, and they did nothing either. Eight years in the whitehouse two of those with a majority of the house and senate and did we get any progress on healthcare? or how about some energy policy, CAFE standards increased? and jobs? yeah NAFTA has worked out well for working people hasnt it? We had good ecomonic times when Bill was in office mainly thanks to a team of people that were keen on economics. So what is it that Hillary has done again? Second chance Clintons is what they are. Sorry we didnt change things our first try but vote us there again and we promise we will now. I dont see where the Clintons have actually done anything of substance either.
Or, better, Hillary Clinton could give YET ANOTHER speech about how Obama supposedly only gives speeches, ignoring that he has actually pushed more (and more consequential) legislation in less time than she has. Then she could laugh nervously if someone should ever happen to ask her just what, exactly, she has achieved other than -- ahem -- giving speeches. (I, personally, am still waiting to hear how she managed to "cross the commander-in-chief threshold" now that her SPEECHES about being under sniper fire in Bosnia turned out to be nothing but, well, SPEECHES about totally fictitious events.)
Oh, but she says "solutions" and "experience" "proven record" in her speeches -- so she must have those things, right? Just like if I keep saying that I have $3million in the bank it will be true too, as long as nobody ever asks to actually see it... Or will I have to just settle for the $28 dollars from the gas tax holiday (certainly that's worth laying off 300,000 people and allowing our infrastructure decay...).
Sorry, Steve. His record in Illinois and in the U. S. Senate does not support your evidence-less conclusions.
Spoken like someone who has never been to an Obama town hall meeting. Obama is even BETTER at off the cuff than he is at delivering the big rally speech.
What he's not good at, for some reason, is the debate question. All the "ums" and pauses really drive me crazy. But answering real people's real questions -- he's great at that. Go to a town hall meeting, then retract this column, please.
The "ums" and pauses are because he actually thinks before he speaks. He doesn't have rehearsed and parsed recitations to questions like Clinton does.
I have to give it to Clinton - she IS a good actress. She reads her script well, and plays roles well.
Maybe she doesn't regard herself as lying - she's just reading from a script....
Speeches are cut and dried presentations, often assisted with a teleprompter. Rally town hall meetings have the disadvantage of not knowing the questions in advance, but the advantage of being able to formulate some answer out of campaign talking points without any critical comeback or followup needed. Debates are free for all formats where the questions are not known and the answers are subject to immediate challenge or rebuttal, demanding a clarification. They are also closely compared in real time to an opponent's answer. Scripted speakers like Professor Obama don't do well in debates unless the question closely matches their knowledge base; otherwise they tend to flounder.
Meanwhile,obama does nothing. Where is Obama's bill to balance the budget. Where is Obama's bill to fix Mediare. Where is Obama's bill to fix social security. Where is Obama's bill to save the economy. Where is Obama's bill to make gas cheap again?
Oh that's right. Obama is "hope" and "change"....we can make him president and hope he changes and does something.
Right...then we have "off the cuff" Bosnia Billary...say it often enough and it becomes a fact.
We have Bubba telling us to make allowance for her failing memory...after all she is 60 years old. Swell!
Spoken like a true ignoramus, parroting the talking points by hillary. how about you do some reading instead of spewing the shallow arguments that you hear on television or from Clinton mailers.
Where's Hillary's bill to balance the budget? Whoops she doesn't listen to experts. Where's her bill to fix Medicare? DOA from when she failed in the 90s. Where is Hillary's Bill to save the economy? Again, economists are elite, so she's going to fix it with her gut instincts. Where is Hillary's bill to make gas cheap again? Oh right, a gas tax holiday to save you $30 over the summer.
Hillary is "lie" and "pander". but yeah, she has "35 years of experience". but oh wait, why was she over the weekend criticizing Washington for not listening to the little guy? Isn't she the embodiment of the Washington system? What a world.
Clinton's policy proposals are found at: http://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/
go to his website and download his .pdf files.
Why is it that every time McCain blunders the media goes out there way to say something negative about Obama to take the focus off McCain. Thank you Tom Hanks. Go Obama
Truman was the only President in the 20th Century not to have graduated from college. He was selected to replace Henry Wallace because the conservative faction of the party thought Wallace was to liberal. Truman was not even aware of the atomic bomb program until Roosevelt's death, was he then going to over ride George C. Marshall? Marshall ran Truman's foreign policy. Truman is sooo overrated.
Obama's speaking style betrays a thoughtful deliberate mind. Careful in his choice of words, keen in his insights, he is less likely to say "bring it on" or speak of obliterating foreign nations.
Obama could be a great visionary leader, a statesman who holds himself above the fray, but it is the media who claims leadership, unelected, unaccountable except to their corporate masters so we will hear nothing but Willie Horton, er Jeremiah Wright until we get Hillary.
Truman was both incisive and decisive; he alone made the awful decision to use nuclear weapons against Japan based on estimates of potential American military and Japanese combined military and civilian deaths which would result from an invasion of the home islands, which were much higher than deaths from use of the bombs. Also, in a protracted battle for Japanese home soil, Stalin would have had time to occupy all of Korea plus the northern Japanese islands. Truman was an ex-artillary officer with combat experience, and made his decision quickly. Barack is no Harry Truman.
I read McCullough's Truman book and studied him a lot in college. I think he deserves some credit on an "official history" level, but on a deeper level, he was at the mercy of both the New Deal Democrats and the Prescott Bush Republicans, who were impatient to get Nixon--ahem--Eisenhower into office.
He did some horrible things because I think he was fooled by these two groups. The atomic bombs for sure. But I think the creation of the CIA has caused just as many deaths, if not more, and has arguably created an even scarier world than nukes have.
Point is this: America is really in some deep trouble, completely beholden to financial and military interests, and some really gutsy changes need to be made before it really is too late. Hillary, who is a completely owned candidate, will only make cosmetic changes to the power structure. We can not settle for a soundbite-spitting flag-pin-flaunting politician who appeases the powers that be when there are such major issues on the table.
Barack has the intelligence, the will, the principle, the courage, and the judgment to make the right decisions on REAL problems where Truman barely understood what he was facing and could only respond in a two-dimensional manner. I think Truman was an honorable man, just not very sharp, maybe just too 19th century to keep up.
Obama's speaking style details, empty, vacuum and blank...
That's only true when you're not listening. xcrunner77 raises Obama's town hall style, which is thoughtful and honest. For those who don't support and, by extension, don't listen to Obama speak it's easy to write him off. To someone who listens he has various styles of speech that are tailored to the event and the crowd. It's also easy to hear one speech and think that that must be his only way of communicating. He's inspiring to thousands, sure, but he's just as breathtaking in a quiet group of 10 or so when covers specific issues.
I have no doubt that Hillary has different styles of speaking as well. I don't pay much attention because I'm not a supporter, but I certainly don't intend on suggesting that she's inferior to anyone.
Maybe you can string together a coherent sentence next time, hun. Run along.
What's so hot about Truman? He dropped two atomic bombs without full knowledge of their possible "fallout." Can't see Obama doing that. Bush is more like Truman.
Spoken like a person who would not have had to put their life on the line in the invasion of the Japanese island, NTFourSale.
Why do liberals always hate the United States? Odd.
Read King Lear.
To ever suggest that an entire group of people always do anything--particularly to say they all hate something--is ludicrous. Just because most liberals don't equate patriotism with blind loyalty doesn't mean we hate America. Because we are willing to stand up and point out what is wrong or misguided about our country means we love it all the more for the things we know it COULD achieve and has so far fallen short. How's this, I'll try to stop believing all conservatives are religious fanatics with no ability to understand science, who will rally against their own self-interests in order to prevent someone unlike them from enjoying the same constitutional protections, who would willingly follow a flag into a fire rather than ask why they are dying for something AND I'll admit too many of us liberals do, in fact, won't stop accusing America of every evil under the sun if you will have a real conversation with a true liberal and listen without fighting back about nonsense, distraction politics just once.
Hairy Ass Truman definitely knew what the effect of the atomic bombs would have. And if he really didn't know the effect of the first one beforehand, he definitely knew what the effect of the second one would have.
A quarter of a million killed. Hillary would beat that by a huge amount. She's shooting for 71 million in Iran.
So you used Tom Hanks to make a lame plug for your book? Desperate, desperate. This was 30 seconds of my life I won't get back.
Eggs-ackly!...thank you!
You failed to mention that though you can't seem to equate or compare him to Truman, JFK's daughter, sister in law (wife of Bobby) and niece (that would be Arnold's wife, Maria) have endorsed Obama, stating in fact that Obama is even "remindful" of JFK. That from Caroline Kennedy's lips. Does that help you?
Posted May 5, 2008 | 05:38 PM (EST)