Style over substance

Yes Obama gives a great speech. We all know that. The details of the speech make any conservative nervous though about the cost and direction of his vision, but those are overlooked by most due to his dazzling presence. Jindal, on the other hand, gave an poorly delivered rebuttal. I was really looking forward to it and I was disappointed. It seemed amateurish. He was all alone in front of the camera. No ovations. No autographs. No Pelosi jumping up and down like a giddy school girl behind him. His message stayed true to conservative values, but no one cared because they didn’t like the delivery. I think the prospect of Jindal being the great young hope of the party is still quite a ways off. Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin seem to still be the standard bearers for the party right now. At least their communication skills are above all other potential candidates right now. And don’t forget Ron Paul who now seems like a genius. Too bad he isn’t younger. Where is our next Reagan? It’s hard to compete in this entertainment age with just a message and no one to deliver it.

If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds

Post meta

This entry was written by Scott Allan and posted on February 25, 2009 and filed under Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post. Post a comment(Latest is displayed first) or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

Share with others

4 Comments so far (Add 1 more)

I thought the speech had both style and substance. What really matters, tough, is whether President Obama can deliver on his vision for the country.
If Sarah palin is considered a standard bearer for the GOP then the GOP is in trouble. Her communication skills are atrocious. I cringed every time I watched her with the press…which (for obvious reasons) wasn’t very often during the campaign.
Tim Pawlenty is a much better prospect for the futur of the party.

1. Silke on February 26th, 2009 at 6:22 am
Yes, Obama is a good speaker, he always has been… until the telepromter is taken away. But that wasn’t an issue the other night. So he uses pretty words… but what those words described is actually pretty ugly.

He wants to dramatically increase spending, raise taxes, and still somehow decrease the deficit? Most of that projection is based upon shaky economic figures. But what he wants to do is raise taxes by about $1 trillion, cut $2 trillion in overseas expenditures associated with the wars, and reduce the budget approcimately $800 billion. Can you see? That means he wants to increase spending by approximately $2 trillion over the next 10 years. Ouch.

I’m writing in detail about this on my blog at http://politicsalabama.blogspot.com. Lots of

Matthews last blog post..Change We Can’t Believe In

2. Matthew on February 27th, 2009 at 10:47 am
Hi Matthew,

He can’t possibly raise another $1 Trillion in taxes. Where is he going to get it from? He’s going to cut the deficit in half from what number? What it currently is? If he is going to cut it from what he is going to increase it to, well that’s not actually a cut now, is it?

3. Scott Allan on February 27th, 2009 at 11:20 am
For details from ABC news, directly from Obama’s budget, look here:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/02/obamas-budget-a.html

Matthews last blog post..Change We Can’t Believe In

4. Matthew on February 27th, 2009 at 11:24 am