Obama's Speech

2008-8-30 05:14:00

Like most of the country I listened to Obama's acceptance speech Thursday evening.

Overall, it was a good speech and is apparently giving him a bounce, but there is several things that irritate me about the speeches of politicians today on both sides of the aisle.

First, they do not write their own speeches so we are not hearing what they have to say from their own hearts. It is true they will review and rehearse the speech before it is given, but this is similar to what an actor does when he plays a part. Do we want to watch a politician act or just tell us what he really thinks and believes?

Secondly, almost all politicians speak by reading the prewritten speech from a teleprompter. Usually there is more than one screen so they can look about and give the appearance of speaking without notes.

Through using professional writers and teleprompters most anyone who can read well can give the appearance of a good speaker. President Bush is a good example. Often when speaking off-the-cuff he will stumble over the right words to say, but when he uses his writers and teleprompters he can do pretty well. The speech he gave right after 911 was a prime example. This speech was flawlessly delivered and the content very well thought-out.

Now many do not realize that Obama also stumbles without a teleprompter and this is one reason he has rejected town hall meetings with McCain where there will be no prepared speeches and teleprompters. To listen to Obama without a speechwriter or teleprompter go to:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsJLdE9DELs

It is interesting that he and Bush have a similar problem. We just know of Bush's stumbling because the press jumps on it to make fun of him, but so far have sought to protect Obama from embarrassment.

That said, Obama must be given some credit for making a good delivery of his speech and any part he may have played in the final approval of its words.

He said several things I liked. He stated:

"And for the sake of our economy, our security, and the future of our planet, I will set a clear goal as president: in ten years, we will finally end our dependence on oil from the Middle East."

This sounds good. It would be nice to let those guys know that we no longer need them.

How does he plan on doing this?

He says:

  1.   "I will tap our natural gas reserves."

The problem is that his party has tied up many of the natural gas reserves so they cannot be accessed. Is he going to stand up to the environmentalists and much opposition in his party to accomplish this? I would doubt this because he has been very much a party line voter so far in his career and I have never seen him buck his party when it means going the Republican direction.

  1.   "Invest in clean coal technology."

The problem is that the greatest reserves of clean burning coal are found in Utah and the Democrats voted overriding Republican support to access this. These reserves are thus not legally available for our use.

Again, is Obama willing to take his party kicking and screaming in a direction promoted by Republicans?

  1.   "And find ways to safely harness nuclear power."

This is encouraging that he says this when in the past he has voiced opposition to nuclear power. Has he changed his mind?

Also the statement is not correct for we already have the technology to safely harness nuclear power. France gets about 80% of their power from advanced nuclear power plants that have a great safety record.

The Western Hemisphere has not had one death related to nuclear radiation in the development of electrical power -- not one -- ever. How much safety do we need? Many people have died from coal burning plants, and the pollution created from them.

  1.   "I'll help our auto companies re-tool, so that the fuel-efficient cars of the future are built right here in America."

The trouble is that when the government helps businesses by giving them money the money is often misused and nothing good comes as a result. Hopefully, Obama will get lucky if he becomes president.

  1.   "I'll make it easier for the American people to afford these new cars."

How will he do this? Make the down payment for us?

  1.   "And I'll invest $150 billion dollars over the next decade in affordable, renewable sources of energy -- wind power and solar power and the next generation of biofuels; an investment that will lead to new industries and 5 million new jobs that pay well and can't ever be outsourced."

Throwing money at a problem often produces little results. I think he needs to concentrate on removing obstacles for private enterprise and dangling carrots before them.

Overall I really support the idea of freeing us from depending on foreign oil. I would like to see a believable plan on this from either candidate.

Another thing that sounded positive was this statement:

"I will cut taxes -- cut taxes -- for 95% of all working families. Because in an economy like this, the last thing we should do is raise taxes on the middle-class."

This first problem we have with this statement is that only about 50% of American citizens even pay income taxes. How's he going to cut taxes on people that pay nothing?

He could cut social security taxes, but the system is already in trouble and the fear is we will not have enough money for the retirement of the baby boomers.

He plans on raising taxes on the richest 5% but that will not pay for the trillions needed to support his planned social programs mentioned in his speech which are:

  1. Universal Health Care.
  2. He'll "invest in early childhood education." And "recruit an army of new teachers, and pay them higher salaries." According to his website he wants "universal pre-school" for a "zero to five plan." This includes pre-kindergarten education.
  3. He will spend the money to make sure all can get a college education.
  4. Fixing Social Security.

He plans on paying for these and numerous other social programs by:

"Closing corporate loopholes and tax havens that don't help America grow. But I will also go through the federal budget, line by line, eliminating programs that no longer work and making the ones we do need work better and cost less -- because we cannot meet 21st-century challenges with a 20th-century bureaucracy."

Jimmy Carter promised something similar to this and we wound up with the most paralyzed economy within my lifetime. As soon as someone seeks to save money by eliminating a program the screams of those threatened with loss of jobs reaches to high heaven and the politicians give in and let the bureaucracy remain.

I won't go through the whole speech but one statement in particular concerned me which was:

"The fundamental belief that I am my brother's keeper; I am my sister's keeper. That's the promise we need to keep. That's the change we need right now."

It's easy to be our brother's keeper when we do it with other people's money but how about when it is our own? Obama has a brother in Kenya living in a hut on one dollar a month. If he truly believes in being his brother's keeper then why doesn't he take a hundred bucks out of his personal millions and send it to his real brother?

I'm sure he would support helping him from other people's money, but how about using some of his own abundance?

See story at:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008
/barackobama/2590614/Barack-Obamas-lost-brother-found-in-Kenya.html