Norvell Rose
Failure to communicate? By the Supreme Communicator??
By Norvell Rose
Okay, so this isn't the first time that someone writing about Barack Obama and his mystique of magniloquence has referenced the famous line in the 1967 movie Cool Hand Luke. But, as you'll see, I'm shooting for a somewhat different take.
"What we've got here is...failure to communicate."
That's the line delivered by the imperious prison official called The Captain — played by Strother Martin, to Luke, the inmate — portrayed by Paul Newman. The context of the line is this: the rebellious, non-conformist young prisoner, Luke, refuses to submit to the system and sacrifice his dignity under the dictatorial direction of the brutal boss of the chain gang.
So, now, our imperious President and his Obamatons want us to accept that the growing rejection of his plans and policies by a rebellious electorate represents a "failure to communicate." They would have us believe that we don't buy into his radical-left system of government only because the merits of this system have not been sufficiently explained to us. Not that the system itself is corrupt and cruel; only that the efforts to sell the system have, somehow, been inadequate or ineffective. In their opinion, they simply haven't found the right pitch to peddle the programs.
But they are programs that, in fact, America doesn't want.
The day after the Massachusetts special election, Obama went on TV to blame the Democrats' stunning loss of their filibuster-proof majority in the Senate on his administration's failure to give voice to the economic frustrations of the middle class. Say what? The false humility in his verbal and body language were seeping through his barely cloaked disgust at having to make this admission, as disingenuous as it was..
Obama said the relentless pursuit of his domestic policies — and a failure to adequately explain their virtues — had left Americans with a "feeling of remoteness and detachment." Not that his actions have been wrong, mind you. Only that the objects of his actions — us — have been wrong in our reactions. At least he communicated the insult.
The President went on, "One thing I regret this year is that we were so busy just getting stuff done . . . that I think we lost some of that sense of speaking directly to the American people. . . . I think the assumption was, if I just focus on policy, if I just focus on the, you know, this provision, or that law, or are we making a good, rational decision here, that people will get it." Again, Obama's true confession becomes startlingly clear, once you know what you're looking for: he must confess his deep disappointment at the sad inability of the people to understand his intellectual and moral superiority.
It's akin to MSNBC's Keith Olberman apologizing for his latest foul, cruel or ridiculing remark — you know he doesn't mean it. In fact, his apology is a winky-wink to his tittering faithful.
A failure to communicate? Well, let's see, just how often has Mr. Obama tried? Seems we in the muddled masses have been communicated with more than, oh, umpteen times.
In his first year as president, Obama has broken all records for talking directly to the American people. According to CBS News, he has delivered 411 public "speeches, comments, and remarks" and 158 interviews — more than one public statement per day and roughly an interview every other day.
Obama is a near-permanent fixture at the news-stand, on magazine covers including Men's Fitness and American Dog. He's laughed it up with Oprah and gotten plenty serious on 60 Minutes.
According to US News, in his first six months, "Obama gave three times as many interviews as George W. Bush, four times as many prime-time news conferences as Bill Clinton, and more interviews than both combined: 93 for Obama and 61 for his two immediate predecessors. He appeared on five Sunday talk shows on the same morning, followed the next day by David Letterman, the first-ever presidential appearance on a nighttime comedy show. In another week, he squeezed in addresses to the U.S. Climate Change Summit, the U.N. General Assembly, the U.N. Security Council, and a variety of press conferences."
I've written before that I love irony. Ah, yes, 'deed I do. Ironically, the ability to communicate, inspire and even move some to tingly thrills and chills has always been billed as Obama's strong suit. Why, we should be in awe of his eloquence. Smitten by his Olympian rhetoric. Left breathless by his inspired oration. It would follow, then, that We the little People ("little" in their opinion) must be too dense, too uneducated, too base and boorish — just too dumb — to grasp the intellectual goodness, nay greatness, of their superior ways and means.
Just for fun, let's recall a few precious drops of the endless stream of hyperbolic praise for Obama's oratory — the shameless media reinforcement of the myth of magniloquence.
We could never forget Chris Matthews, host of CNBC's "Hardball," remarking about "the feeling most people get when they hear a Barack Obama speech. I felt this thrill going up my leg. I mean — I don't have that too often!"
People "come in droves — by the tens of thousands at times" to hear Obama speak, observed a gushy correspondent on the CBS Early Show. His "soaring rhetoric," she says, "is moving his audiences not just politically, but emotionally," even moving audience members to tears on occasion. (I must say that I've been moved close to tears, but not for the same reasons.)
"Even in the age of YouTube and the soundbite," observed another media Obamaton, "Barack Obama has proved that soaring, sustained oratory still has great power. His victory address to crowds in Chicago last week was widely regarded as one of the finest speeches in modern politics, delivered by a master."
Numerous left-leaning pundits marvel unabashedly at Obama's supposedly powerful and persuasive speechmaking style, noting how it plays no small part in his sustained appeal. One groupie in the political press wrote in her love-letter column on the eve of Obama's inauguration, "Your rhetoric will be judged by great expectations based on little evidence. But it will also be judged on the commonly held opinion that oratory is one of your strong suits."
And just the day before I'm writing this commentary, Frank Rich of the New York Times hailed Obama as "the master communicator in the White House." This after the Massacre in Massachusetts and the growing message panic among Obamatons.
Remember, what the high-and-mighty on the lofty left really, truly think is this: the problem is not their failure to communicate, but our failure to receive the communication — to grasp it, embrace it and duly fall in line. Maybe it's a problem of expressive nuance, but certainly they believe, not one of legislative substance. How else could the pols and pundits of the liberal left rationalize the glaring inconsistencies otherwise inherent in their undying Obama worship? How else could one explain the people's refusal to eagerly accept with unquestioning, obsequious adoration the guilded leadership of Barack Obama, the Supreme Communicator (if Reagan was considered "Great," then Obama would surely have to be "Supreme")?
And so the fountain of prolific praise for Obama the Magniloquent continues to gush with grandiosity. And so the tidal wave of liberal scorn and disdain for those of us somehow not receiving the magniloquence with eternal gratitude continues to build. All the while, they don't seriously question their political ideas and policy agendas. Instead, they shake their heads in disdainful disbelief at our stubborn refusal to submit with hearts aflutter to their clear superiority.
"What we've got here is...failure to communicate." So sneered the cruel Captain to Luke in the line from the film. Of course, what The Captain meant — the message delivered between the lines — was that the form of communication would just have to change. No more "Mr. Nice Guy" (when in fact he never was). Time to get tougher. More action. Fewer words. Make sure there would be no more failure to accept the communication.
Barack Obama's slick style does fail — it fails to mask the sick substance of his politics. His way with words and his ability to deliver a speech fail to mesmerize those of us who are not susceptible to his oratorical charms.
Now we shall see if the future communication to be practiced by the Obamatons relies less on the bullhorn and more on the bullwhip. Less on a string of pretty words and more on a succession of ugly deeds. If so, I firmly believe that, in the resounding rebuke that We the People will deliver with ever greater resolve, there will be no failure to communicate the absolute truth and tenacity of our unmistakable message to Obama, The Captain:
"Our will cannot be broken. Our spirit cannot be confined. Our freedom cannot be fettered, for we refuse to submit to the indignities of your illegitimate chain gang!"
© Norvell Rose
January 25, 2010
Okay, so this isn't the first time that someone writing about Barack Obama and his mystique of magniloquence has referenced the famous line in the 1967 movie Cool Hand Luke. But, as you'll see, I'm shooting for a somewhat different take.
"What we've got here is...failure to communicate."
That's the line delivered by the imperious prison official called The Captain — played by Strother Martin, to Luke, the inmate — portrayed by Paul Newman. The context of the line is this: the rebellious, non-conformist young prisoner, Luke, refuses to submit to the system and sacrifice his dignity under the dictatorial direction of the brutal boss of the chain gang.
So, now, our imperious President and his Obamatons want us to accept that the growing rejection of his plans and policies by a rebellious electorate represents a "failure to communicate." They would have us believe that we don't buy into his radical-left system of government only because the merits of this system have not been sufficiently explained to us. Not that the system itself is corrupt and cruel; only that the efforts to sell the system have, somehow, been inadequate or ineffective. In their opinion, they simply haven't found the right pitch to peddle the programs.
But they are programs that, in fact, America doesn't want.
The day after the Massachusetts special election, Obama went on TV to blame the Democrats' stunning loss of their filibuster-proof majority in the Senate on his administration's failure to give voice to the economic frustrations of the middle class. Say what? The false humility in his verbal and body language were seeping through his barely cloaked disgust at having to make this admission, as disingenuous as it was..
Obama said the relentless pursuit of his domestic policies — and a failure to adequately explain their virtues — had left Americans with a "feeling of remoteness and detachment." Not that his actions have been wrong, mind you. Only that the objects of his actions — us — have been wrong in our reactions. At least he communicated the insult.
The President went on, "One thing I regret this year is that we were so busy just getting stuff done . . . that I think we lost some of that sense of speaking directly to the American people. . . . I think the assumption was, if I just focus on policy, if I just focus on the, you know, this provision, or that law, or are we making a good, rational decision here, that people will get it." Again, Obama's true confession becomes startlingly clear, once you know what you're looking for: he must confess his deep disappointment at the sad inability of the people to understand his intellectual and moral superiority.
It's akin to MSNBC's Keith Olberman apologizing for his latest foul, cruel or ridiculing remark — you know he doesn't mean it. In fact, his apology is a winky-wink to his tittering faithful.
A failure to communicate? Well, let's see, just how often has Mr. Obama tried? Seems we in the muddled masses have been communicated with more than, oh, umpteen times.
In his first year as president, Obama has broken all records for talking directly to the American people. According to CBS News, he has delivered 411 public "speeches, comments, and remarks" and 158 interviews — more than one public statement per day and roughly an interview every other day.
Obama is a near-permanent fixture at the news-stand, on magazine covers including Men's Fitness and American Dog. He's laughed it up with Oprah and gotten plenty serious on 60 Minutes.
According to US News, in his first six months, "Obama gave three times as many interviews as George W. Bush, four times as many prime-time news conferences as Bill Clinton, and more interviews than both combined: 93 for Obama and 61 for his two immediate predecessors. He appeared on five Sunday talk shows on the same morning, followed the next day by David Letterman, the first-ever presidential appearance on a nighttime comedy show. In another week, he squeezed in addresses to the U.S. Climate Change Summit, the U.N. General Assembly, the U.N. Security Council, and a variety of press conferences."
I've written before that I love irony. Ah, yes, 'deed I do. Ironically, the ability to communicate, inspire and even move some to tingly thrills and chills has always been billed as Obama's strong suit. Why, we should be in awe of his eloquence. Smitten by his Olympian rhetoric. Left breathless by his inspired oration. It would follow, then, that We the little People ("little" in their opinion) must be too dense, too uneducated, too base and boorish — just too dumb — to grasp the intellectual goodness, nay greatness, of their superior ways and means.
Just for fun, let's recall a few precious drops of the endless stream of hyperbolic praise for Obama's oratory — the shameless media reinforcement of the myth of magniloquence.
We could never forget Chris Matthews, host of CNBC's "Hardball," remarking about "the feeling most people get when they hear a Barack Obama speech. I felt this thrill going up my leg. I mean — I don't have that too often!"
People "come in droves — by the tens of thousands at times" to hear Obama speak, observed a gushy correspondent on the CBS Early Show. His "soaring rhetoric," she says, "is moving his audiences not just politically, but emotionally," even moving audience members to tears on occasion. (I must say that I've been moved close to tears, but not for the same reasons.)
"Even in the age of YouTube and the soundbite," observed another media Obamaton, "Barack Obama has proved that soaring, sustained oratory still has great power. His victory address to crowds in Chicago last week was widely regarded as one of the finest speeches in modern politics, delivered by a master."
Numerous left-leaning pundits marvel unabashedly at Obama's supposedly powerful and persuasive speechmaking style, noting how it plays no small part in his sustained appeal. One groupie in the political press wrote in her love-letter column on the eve of Obama's inauguration, "Your rhetoric will be judged by great expectations based on little evidence. But it will also be judged on the commonly held opinion that oratory is one of your strong suits."
And just the day before I'm writing this commentary, Frank Rich of the New York Times hailed Obama as "the master communicator in the White House." This after the Massacre in Massachusetts and the growing message panic among Obamatons.
Remember, what the high-and-mighty on the lofty left really, truly think is this: the problem is not their failure to communicate, but our failure to receive the communication — to grasp it, embrace it and duly fall in line. Maybe it's a problem of expressive nuance, but certainly they believe, not one of legislative substance. How else could the pols and pundits of the liberal left rationalize the glaring inconsistencies otherwise inherent in their undying Obama worship? How else could one explain the people's refusal to eagerly accept with unquestioning, obsequious adoration the guilded leadership of Barack Obama, the Supreme Communicator (if Reagan was considered "Great," then Obama would surely have to be "Supreme")?
And so the fountain of prolific praise for Obama the Magniloquent continues to gush with grandiosity. And so the tidal wave of liberal scorn and disdain for those of us somehow not receiving the magniloquence with eternal gratitude continues to build. All the while, they don't seriously question their political ideas and policy agendas. Instead, they shake their heads in disdainful disbelief at our stubborn refusal to submit with hearts aflutter to their clear superiority.
"What we've got here is...failure to communicate." So sneered the cruel Captain to Luke in the line from the film. Of course, what The Captain meant — the message delivered between the lines — was that the form of communication would just have to change. No more "Mr. Nice Guy" (when in fact he never was). Time to get tougher. More action. Fewer words. Make sure there would be no more failure to accept the communication.
Barack Obama's slick style does fail — it fails to mask the sick substance of his politics. His way with words and his ability to deliver a speech fail to mesmerize those of us who are not susceptible to his oratorical charms.
Now we shall see if the future communication to be practiced by the Obamatons relies less on the bullhorn and more on the bullwhip. Less on a string of pretty words and more on a succession of ugly deeds. If so, I firmly believe that, in the resounding rebuke that We the People will deliver with ever greater resolve, there will be no failure to communicate the absolute truth and tenacity of our unmistakable message to Obama, The Captain:
"Our will cannot be broken. Our spirit cannot be confined. Our freedom cannot be fettered, for we refuse to submit to the indignities of your illegitimate chain gang!"
© Norvell Rose
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
