Originally Posted By ecdc To go without a teleprompter. And in this is a microcosm of the remarkable difference between the parties. A Republican leader - not a talk radio guy, not some nut on the street, not bizarro Michael Moore - but a leader who will be head of the Judiciary committee if Republicans win, just said the President of the United States is too stupid to think on his feet and give a speech without reading one. It encapsulates the total disrespect they have for this man.
Originally Posted By barboy It would be refreshing if Chief, as well as other high profile politicians, would rely more on "intuitive improvisation". What happened to spontaneous thought? As far as speeches go I trust the unrehearsed word far more than the polished script delivery.
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost Just out of curiosity, are you saying that you think that if you were about to address the convention, with millions of people watching you wouldn't be using a prepared speech? When there are multitudes of very important areas to cover and important things that needed to be said, you would just "wing it"? Would you go into high level negotiations without planning and forethought? Just fly by the seat of your pants when so much is riding on the outcome? Really? I'm almost speechless, wish I had a teleprompter.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 Good god - what is the issue with using a teleprompter? He's giving a prepared speech - in the old days, he would either have had to memorize the whole thing, or have it written on paper. What's the problem with using current technology to help deliver a set speech. It's not like these things are supposed to be "off the cuff" remarks. The fact that people have a problem with his use of a teleprompter just shows how nuts these people really are.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox I believe it's the only way they can feel better about themselves as aging conservative white guys. Gotta insult and take down the younger diverse newcomer in order to not feel completely worthless.
Originally Posted By DDMAN26 Shouldn't Apple have invented like some mini-retnal type device that beams in the words to the candidates? Teleprompters are so 2008.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper I think Eastwood is probably a smart man who showed us all why it might not be a bad idea to use a teleprompter during a nationally televised speech.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 FWIW, the late great Barbara Tuchmann (eminent historian, and if you don't know her work, shame on you) once said that she considered the telepromptr to be one of the most dangerous inventions of the 20th century, because it "allows an inadequate, minor individual to appear to be a statesman." She was referring to Ronald Reagan. Carter was the last president not to use one almost exclusively for important speeches. Everyone since has done so. This obsession the right has for Obama using one is both weird and ahistoric.
Originally Posted By ecdc Ezra Klein, who you should read often and follow on Twitter, posted a link to a video of Obama without a teleprompter. It was his now-famous takedown of Republicans at their own retreat.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer Check out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zi6JRvJDAKw - it's the audio from an appearance he had on NPR's "Wait Wait Don't Tell Me" in 2005. He's not a dumb man.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 He's a highly intelligent man. But some people (like my crazy uncle) just can't handle that particular truth, so they explain it away by saying he can only be intelligent with a telepromtr. With most it's probably just sour grapes, but with some (including my uncle, sadly) there is absolutely a racist component as well.
Originally Posted By ecdc It's what I just don't get. I'd never call Romney stupid. He's clearly a competent, very capable human being. I just don't like his ideas for government and don't trust that he'd lead as a centrist because of the Tea Party. I have no interest in questioning the man's intelligence, decency, or motives, so again, why is it that so many on the right need to do that with Obama? And let's reiterate, this is Chuck Freaking Grassley! It's not James O'Keefe or Crazy Redneck 437.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>I think Eastwood is probably a smart man who showed us all why it might not be a bad idea to use a teleprompter during a nationally televised speech.<< Took the words right off my teleprompter.
Originally Posted By barboy I've seen 20 or more Christian pastors orate exceptionally well using just a basic skeleton for notes. I've also seen several university professors lecture on the fly. If one knows where he speaks, then one should not have to use a script.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 That ship has sailed. Every president since Reagan has used the Telepromtr, and will continue to do so until they invent something better. At least for major speeches. Though, as ecdc's and Tom's links show, Obama is perfectly capable of going without and coming off as the intelligent man he is. But for major speeches they all use it.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "Good god - what is the issue with using a teleprompter? He's giving a prepared speech - in the old days, he would either have had to memorize the whole thing, or have it written on paper. What's the problem with using current technology to help deliver a set speech. It's not like these things are supposed to be "off the cuff" remarks. The fact that people have a problem with his use of a teleprompter just shows how nuts these people really are." THIS a million times over.
Originally Posted By barboy ///Just out of curiosity, are you saying that you think that if you were about to address the convention,/// First things first: when you say "you" do you mean literally me/barboy? Because I don't orate. If I were an elected or appointed figure, then I should be able to speak well enough without a script.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>If I were an elected or appointed figure, then I should be able to speak well enough without a script.<< Ever since the invention of paper, people have been using notes to stay on track during a speech. This is such a non-issue. I am sure both candidates can elaborate just fine off the cuff on various issues. That's what interviews and debates are for. But to expect them to just start rambling at a convention speech is kind of out there.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer Obama actually thinks when he's speaking, which makes him "um" a lot. If you don't think about what you're saying, then you can just let the words flow. For example, here's Sarah Palin speaking off the cuff today: "Yeah, I did say in Alaska you can see Russia from our land base and I was making the point that we are strategically located on the globe when it comes to transportation corridors and resources that are shared and fought over (in) Alaska, and I as the governor had known what I was doing in dealing with some international issues that had to do with our resources that could help secure the nation."
