Opinion Talk

By yankee

September 5, 2008 8:23 AM | Link to this

Politicians are no different than actors, they just play a part.Only a fool believes what they say.

By TomG

September 5, 2008 8:27 AM | Link to this

I don’t think we would want to ‘disqualify’ an otherwise good person simply because they cannot write their own speeches…thats why we have speech writers…got to keep them employed!

By Peadawg

September 5, 2008 8:43 AM | Link to this

who cares?

By Citizen of the World

September 5, 2008 8:50 AM | Link to this

I don’t think that politicians should necessarily write their own speeches — spare us the dull, ponderous results of that! — but I would like to think that they work very closely with their speech writers and that the results reflect what the politician really thinks and wants to communicate to his or her audience rather than some all-purpose, grandiloquent regurgitation of the party line.

By The Snark

September 5, 2008 8:52 AM | Link to this

They should at least provide the content to their speechwriters. Some politicians write their own speeches or outline what they want for the speechwriter (notably Clinton, Reagan and Obama). Others just hire good writers and read what they’re given (both Bushes.) Most of that speech that Sarah Palin gave this week was written by McCain’s staff BEFORE they even knew who would give it.

By Dennis

September 5, 2008 9:02 AM | Link to this

Writing is a talent. As is speaking. And acting, singing, sculpting; even leading is a talent.

Few talented leaders are also talented writers and speakers.

Few talented writers are also talented leaders.

And for certain being a talented speaker does not make one a talented leader

NO! Politicians should not be required to write there own speeches.

By Original Rick

September 5, 2008 9:20 AM | Link to this

I envision about 20 people gathered in a room, many voices trying to be heard, as they hammered out just what they wanted Sarah Palin to say. There is little doubt in my mind that those were not her words, coming from her mind to her hand to her paper.

Unfortunately, all upper level pols have pro writers putting words into there mouths. The speech is a form of group-think, a consensus of many minds.

I agree that the speech giver should be the speech writer.

My analogy is a musician that only sings someone else’s songs, who has nothing original to say, who can only voice another’s talent.

By AH

September 5, 2008 9:32 AM | Link to this

What a stupid subject.

Is this the best that the AJC could come up with? I know you guys fired half your staff because no one buys your liberal paper, but come on even you could do better than this.

By Rusty

September 5, 2008 9:32 AM | Link to this

Funny how this concern arises a day after the McCain/Palin speeches and not the day after the Obama/Biden speeches.It’s a sad day in America when the media so obviously leans toward one party without any apologies.

By Kent Mitchell

September 5, 2008 9:32 AM | Link to this

Rate this as dumb-to-brain dead. ALL pols have speech writers. The writers take the germ of ideas that the pol wants to get across and tries to turn it into something that passes for a great speech. Even Reagan had speech writers. So did FDR. Believe it or not, George Bush has speech writers. They probably cringe when they hear his butcher their prose. It’d probably be worse, though, it he wrote it himself. I guess this ed. was a good idea—for Liberals—since most Americans are ignorant enough believe pols write their own speeches.

By EastPoint

September 5, 2008 9:45 AM | Link to this

It’s always bothered me that candidates employ speech writers and no one is outraged. Not only is it disengenuine, but what does it say about a society that prefers charisma over intelligence? Politicians are the voice of the people. How can they be that voice if they can’t express it.

By Bubba

September 5, 2008 10:13 AM | Link to this

If W had to write his own speeches, and if didn’t have his father’s name to run on, he wouldn’t have gotten farther than maybe county commissioner in Midland, TX.

By Original Rick

September 5, 2008 10:30 AM | Link to this

I attribute this to Arianna Huffington: If you want some to really listen to you, always be 100% correct in what you say. If they know you are accurate, your words have more power.

While I am offended by a politician using someone else’s words, I am most disgusted by the little innuendos and half-lies that are spoken. To deride someone by taking something out of context is another form of lying. Misrepresentation is rampant nowadays.

This is the reason that FactCheck.org exists. They have a lot to do, verifying what everyone is saying.

Also, by listening to the candidate, we know that candidate. Do a search for “Bushisms” and you will know why we think so little of Bush’s intellectual capacity. Listen to McCain and Obama when they are in the middle of a crowd to understand who has the greater ability to think extemporaneously.

And you will understand why the United States needs an intelligent person, a scholar, in the Oval Office, not one who graduated second from the bottom of his class.

By The Snark

September 5, 2008 10:42 AM | Link to this

Good point Bubba. That’s why citizens need to hear their leaders (and would be leaders) speak in situations where they cannot use a script. You ought to be very, very worried about any campaign that works to keep the candidate away from unscripted questions, reporters, and open meetings (as opposed to meetings where they control who can be in the audience.)

Not a dig at either party or candidate, folks. Just friendly advice from someone with experience in government.

Hey, imagine if we had something like the British system, where the Prime Minister is required to regularly appear before Parliament and answer questions about his/her management of the government. It would be tough for Presidents without answers to hide. (Of course, we should insist that Congress act with more respect than they do across the pond — them folks is rude!)

By Incredulous

September 5, 2008 10:43 AM | Link to this

Really….Is it the speech that made George Dubbya win? Will it be a speech that makes any of these guys (and gal) win? Hmmm…….

By StopIt

September 5, 2008 10:48 AM | Link to this

I do not believe that this is a totally useless topic. I think people do get caught up in the words and excitements of speeches and forget about the speech writers. I believe some people became more endeared to Sarah Palin based upon the speech that she gave. It feels disingenuous(?) when you come to your senses and realize, “hey this was written before she was even thought about.” It’s all about manipulation and charisma and I think most people like it that way, otherwise we would not put up with it.

By BeeJay

September 5, 2008 12:07 PM | Link to this

Why did this question just come up NOW? I wonder. Obama has been on the trail for almost 2 years, apparently electrifying with someone else’s words. Let a Republican get up there, someone with whom the liberal media must find fault somehow some way, and suddenly a question about an age-old condition arises. Can’t wait for the debates. No speech writers.

By BlueRidge Bob

September 5, 2008 12:31 PM | Link to this

Of course this inane letter comes from an English professor who decides to demean Sarah Palin. Has he written on this subject before—of course not.

His snarky comments on President Bush are par for the course in the oh so tolerant hothouse atmosphere of our protectors of the language. Like so many of his profession he suffers from anger that the general public does not recognize that the liberal “intelligentsia” should be our lords and masters. Perhaps the writer himself will give us the benefits of his wisdom and authentic writing skills by running for office. Perhaps he will show us that he can write a credible argument without petty envy and stacked “evidence.”

What a silly letter.

By jld

September 5, 2008 1:09 PM | Link to this

Politicians should not be writing their own speeches, but should just let their ideas be known and let the scribe present those ideas in an exciting form. Without speech writers Obama would be very funny to watch. I love it when he gets an unexpected question. He simply fails.

By jld

September 5, 2008 1:09 PM | Link to this

Politicians should not be writing their own speeches, but should just let their ideas be known and let the scribe present those ideas in an exciting form. Without speech writers Obama would be very funny to watch. I love it when he gets an unexpected question. He simply fails.

By jd

September 5, 2008 1:13 PM | Link to this

Politicians should not spend their time writing speeches. They give their ideas to the writers, like judges give their opinions to clerks. They are still their opinions. Obama is lost without his writers. Asked an unexpected question and he falls all over himself. I am sure he would not want to do away with speechwriters. I think Palin and McCain would do fine. They are telling it like it is.

By gttim

September 5, 2008 1:19 PM | Link to this

Actually, this would not be an issue if most politicians did off-the-cuff interviews with real journalists asking tough questions. Or had real town hall meetings where real people could ask serious and tough questions. Sadly most press conferences are all staged now. Bush was given a list of who to ask for questions, and frequently the questions were vetted in advance. The GOP’s town halls are always scripted. Now we find out that Palin will not be taking any questions from any press members- she will give a few speeches, and that is all.

In England the Prime Minister has to go to Parliament and take questions. It gets heated. You know that their PM can speak on all topics, however.

By ron

September 5, 2008 2:24 PM | Link to this

I don’t know who wrote Mrs.Palin’s speech,but I know who delivered it and I saw how it was delivered.It was very effective.It would not have been as effective coming from John McCain.

It would be very ineresting to hear the four candidates deliver a speech they had actually written.I suppose if you take this to it’s logical conclusion,only speech writers would be elected to office.

By Chaz

September 5, 2008 3:43 PM | Link to this

“I am SHOCKED, SHOCKED I say, to discover that politicians might not be writing their own speeches!”

And if you believe that, you’re a moron. Isn’t it funny people (ie, the media) would only start objecting to speechwriters once one good speech offends the delicate sensibilities of The Chosen One. Palin took a good speech and made it a blockbuster because you know she was right, and believed every word of it. And so did I. Palin 2012!

By Fred

September 5, 2008 3:56 PM | Link to this

Joe Biden had to leave the 1988 campaign because he was blatantly stealing other politicians’ speeches. And do you honestly believe Obama writes his own speeches?

This whole thread is ridiculous.

By Original Rick

September 5, 2008 3:58 PM | Link to this

“I don’t know who wrote Mrs.Palin’s speech,but I know who delivered it and I saw how it was delivered.”

The point of this discussion is this: I could have delivered that speech and you have loved me. I passed my college Speech 101 class, so I know how to gesture and make eye contact.

By the dingbat

September 5, 2008 3:59 PM | Link to this

the smiley faces over the “i’s” would take all the shrill venom out of palin’s speeches

By Ben

September 5, 2008 4:34 PM | Link to this

If being a good speechwriter was necessary in order to be a good President, then I might care, but it’s not. Nor is it necessary to be charismatic, or pretty, or white or a bunch of other things. What I care about is what kind of a decision maker they will, and what sort of decisions they will make.

By Ron

September 5, 2008 5:59 PM | Link to this

Well gosh Rick, if you’re so good on the stump, maybe you should run for office. After all, you passed a college class. It would seem you’re at least as qualified as Palin. Or Obama.

By Chuck

September 5, 2008 6:06 PM | Link to this

The slippery slope of this argument is that anyone with good stage presence and a well-written speech can be adored. That said, are you ready to question the qualifications of Palin? Obama? Bill Clinton? Ronald Reagan? JFK? FDR? MLK?

Ultimately you have to listen to what candidates say, trust that they mean what they say, and intend to follow through on it… whether they say it well or not.