Speeches should leave us speechless

Well, that was fun.

Both the Republican and Democratic National Conventions have come and gone, and the nominees are now official, despite being everything but for the past several months.

And after that wonderful cheer that looks more like a high school pep rally than a political campaign, it’s time for the real work to begin.

The first stage of that work is the preparation for the debates that will televise the only real “unscripted” opportunities for President Barack Obama and Republican Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney to address the nation.

Yet unscripted is a relatively meaningless term.

It was reported that while President Obama was becoming the official incumbent candidate for the Democratic Party, Romney rehearsed and prepared for the debates that will soon heat up.

If only he were listening to former President Bill Clinton’s address, he would know that maybe it isn’t preparation that wins the heart of the nation.

During his address to the DNC attendees, Clinton gave a speech that lasted about 49 minutes. During that time, he went off-script for significant chunks of time, at one point for as long as 14 minutes.

He was not rehearsed.

He was not scripted.

He was genuine, interesting and engaging. He knew how to move the crowd to action, and he knew how to speak in a way that would cause enormous emotional support.

It was his speech, not Obama’s, that left the best taste in the mouths of listeners. If only he could be the nominee for president.

Oh wait, been there, done that.

Throughout this election, it has been particularly difficult to distinguish between the propaganda and the real world. The candidates don’t make it any easier.

Unfortunately, it isn’t educated intellectuals who will win the elections for either man. It is the ignorant masses who will vote because of a pretty advertisement, well-worded speeches and elegant presentation even if every word were tested and monitored to be all too perfect.

The debates will be a good opportunity to compare the two candidates side by side as they present their ideas in as spontaneous a way as possible. But as viewers, we can’t take it all at face value.

It would be terribly ignorant of us to assume anything less than the calculation that must go into every answer.

Unlike President Clinton, we can’t assume the candidates will speak from their heads, let alone their hearts.

But since when was a political campaign supposed to be about the person with the best intentions for the direction of the country, and the one who delivers those ideas most sincerely?

­— azoot@indiana.edu