I have already given my view of the Inauguration Speech. However, I just read MSNBC’s Chris Matthews comparison of this unremarkable speech to the Gettysburg Address. I previously tweeted about the now formulaic approaches of Fox and MSNBC to covering the president. However, this comparison demonstrates the detachment from the actual observed news once filtered through these cable programs.
I liked the speech but I thought it was unexceptionable in both content and delivery. It was a safe speech that had a few good lines. I do not see how anyone could rank the speech as in one of the top inauguration deliveries, let alone akin to one of the greatest speech in the history of the Western World.
Within minutes of the end of the speech, Matthews said “It reminds me of another second inaugural, Lincoln’s, so much of Lincoln in that speech, from the Gettysburg Address to the second inaugural itself. He talked about the government that we want, which is infrastructure, education, regulation, all the good things, and then recognizing that government can’t solve all the problems.”
Really? I am not saying it was a bad speech but it was not a memorable speech in my view. It was predictable and largely contentless (not unlike most such speeches). I can understand liking the speech but to compare this to Gettysburg seems entirely detached from reality.
I am currently listening to MSNBC as another commentator, Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., is picking up the comparison to Gettysburg and agreeing with Matthews. Listening to MSNBC sounds entirely like White House press releases. That is a problem for any journalistic organization.
MSNBC has been looking for ways to stay competitive in the cable news (their ship has been sinking every since they fired their $10 million man Keith Olbermann; and if it wasn’t for “Morning Joe”, I wouldn’t turn on MSNBC).
There has been some historical debate about the significance of the Gettysburg Address. Was it just a speech to motivate the Union troops? Or was it a speech or eulogy given to those who have fallen at the Battle of Gettysburg? The speech or winning the battle didn’t free the slaves (the Civil War lasted 1.5-2 more years after this battle). What was the significance of the battle? Did it prevent the Confederacy from capturing the White House?
To the slaves, the Gettysburg Address was meaningless (there were some slaves fighting on the side of the Confederacy; the Confederacy ‘lied’ to these slaves by telling them that they would be free it they helped fight; most slaves, according to historians, didn’t know that on of the reasons for the Civil War: their freedom).
nick spinelli:
wasnt Tip a pretty good old irish politician? maybe a little left of Truman? An old fashioned democrat?
mespo:
“The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here . . .”
maybe he was talking about this?
I am not surprised….. This is a happy lucky speech….. I bet he is a lot more divisive in the State of the Union address….. His loyalty ardent support will be like….. Did I really vote for him……
Funny, I liked Moynihan. And, Russert worked for Moynihan as did Lawrence O’Donnell I believe. The buffoon Matthews worked for Tip O’Neill. That makes sense now, doesn’t it.
Nick,
You’re right about Matthews and O’Neil. Somehow how in my memory I transposed his mentors. What’s funny is I liked O’Neil, but dislike Moynihan, so at least had a chance to vent on the senator once again. uUnfortunately my reason for venting was incorrect. Thanks for making me aware of it. Good catch.
You have commented before about the laziness (my word) of readers/viewers whose reading/viewing habits reinforce their existing beliefs.
True. But it is also getting harder to find commentators who think.
While my political philosophies differ from Mr. Matthews, nothing that he has said recently is likely to sway my opinions. If Mr. Matthews cannot be clear minded in his analysis, he cannot win my attention, let alone sway me.
The polarization that you mentioned is the fault of both readers and writers.
JT if you have a problem with CNN or other commercial networks then do what I did and watch the program on CSPAN. USA Today is the last newspaper I read. We keep a copy in the outhouse for when we run out of tollet paper.
I don’t dislike Chris Matthews, buy I also don’t respect his opinions. All one really needs to know about him is that he is the protege of Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan. That Senator was a flunky for the MI Complex and helped Reagan hide his huge tax increase on the middle class by pretending to save social security. Moynohan was as a professor responsible for spreading a mythology about Black people and poor people that is still in use on the Right today.
I was there. Good speech, not Lincoln.
Best part was hearing a few hundred thousand people boo Newt Gingrich and his latest wife, number four or five?
But at least Newt showed. W had a game on TV, I guess. What Mitten’s excuse? It’s not like he HAS a job.
I did not watch the speech. Deliberately. I figured it would be more of the same, and apparently I would not have been disappointed. I have reached a point in my life where I am tired of most of the fare on the television machine. Marshall McLuhan was right.
A friend of mine, a hard core Democrat, said he was at a political rally a few days ago. Said he told one of the speakers, “You are looking at the dumbest sumb!tch in the country.”
The fellow smiled and asked him why he said that. My friend replied, “For the past four years I have been telling people that Obama is not coming for their guns.”
Matthews is a political hack, plain and simple. Of course he’s got plenty of company in that regard. None of them should get any respect at all. Period.
But did the speech tickle Matthew’s leg? He’s a court jester not a journalist.
What a great day in America, after a hateful campaign. Chris Matthews has captured the essence of what is positive about President Obama, his speech and the America we want to see.
Shows a clear ignorance of history…
“So much of Lincoln in that speech,” observed Chris Matthews. “He talked about the government that we want, which was education, infrastructure, regulation – all the good things. And then recognized that government can’t solve all the problems. I thought that was a reaching out, if you will. A shout at, eventually, the tea party-right that’s rejectionist”
There is nothing wrong with making a comparisoin of what Lincoln called for and what Mr. Obama did.
Mr. Obama allso called for civil rights, of inclusivity in America.
I think sometimes the professor’s apparent disdain for Mr. Obama colors his interpretations of anything positive said about him or what he says.
I thought the speech was a good one, but only Chris Matthews could make that comparison. Consider the source.
It seems the greatest success of Fox news is that they have forced the “liberal-biased” media to become just like them.
“Chris Matthews comparison of this unremarkable speech to the Gettysburg Address.”
*************************
Well, Chris, it must be the one Lincoln made in 1860 on the campaign trail ’cause it sure ain’t the one he made in 1863. But thanks for the excuse to repeat it:
Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.
Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation, so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.
But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate, we can not consecrate, we can not hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.
The listeners of today can judge against the words of the past.
Remember that Tweety is the same guy who got a huge erection when Boy Blunder paraded around an aircraft carrier in a flight suit with a pair of gym socks stuffed in the crotch. He shared that (verbally only thank gawd) with us live on TV.
The guy substitutes hyperbola for common sense and perspective. I don’t know if he is genuinely that in awe or if he just plays it for the attention. Sadly, this is the sate of what passes for journalism and the dawn of a new century.
Chris has a penchant for bloviating.
No president has to be like any other to be valid.
What is required is a president’s advocacy of sane government policy and a populace that appreciates it.