The New York Post reports that Barack Obama tapped the team that designed the set for Britney Spears' last tour to design the set for his Acceptance Speech-palooza event at Invesco Field.
This is important. It's not meant to be a temple. The set is meant to evoke thoughts of the Lincoln Memorial, today being the 45th anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech.
Got that?
It's not a temple.
Obama has not constructed a temple. He's made a mockup of the Lincoln Memorial.
Is that supposed to be OK?
Yes, Barack Obama has the audacity to package himself as the fulfillment of Dr. King's dream, complete with a plywood memorial.
Any attempts by Obama to say that he's humble or aware that he's standing on the shoulders of all those activists and heroes that came before him to make this moment possible will ring hollow.
This set is inappropriate.
Since Obama was stuck in Denver and couldn't actually stand where Dr. King stood, the Spears' team is bringing a fake Lincoln Memorial to a football stadium to be a backdrop for his acceptance speech.
Are we being given cues to put Obama's speech in the same league as Dr. King's "I Have a Dream" speech?
Obama's ego is absolutely out of control.
He wants to be seen as the embodiment of the common man and the realization of the American Dream, but it's an act. This is a massive advertising campaign and Obama is the product.
Where is Obama's humility?
Someone needs to tell Obama that he's not Martin Luther King. He's a very fortunate son.
Where is Obama's gratitude to his country for giving him the opportunities that he's been blessed to have?
I haven't seen it.
I certainly didn't see it when "citizen of the world" Obama spoke in Berlin.
I think Obama would have been wise to take a minimalist approach to his set design. A simple podium, sans the cheesy Obama presidential seal, would have sufficed.
Why does he need such elaborate trappings?
His message, his words should be enough.
What Obama has to say is sure to get lost in the special effects.
Obama is like a Hollywood production that's heavy on special effects but missing a plot-- an empty experience.
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Barack Obama, the Lincoln Memorial, and Martin Luther King
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
People who say Obama has no substance have not been listening.
As former President Clinton said last night, the evidence is not in favor of the Republicans. That is why the GOP has to launch personal attacks.
The GOP can't run on the substance of the issues. Incomes are down, debt is up, rich/poor gap is widening, etc... since Bush and the Republicans took power.
People across the country support the Democrats in their economic plans, their education plans, and their healthcare plans. Anyone who cares about respecting our environment gave up on the Republicans long ago.
Obama will deliver a lot of substance tonight, but a stadium speech is also appropriate for a lot of symbolism and inspiration.
Tens of thousands of Colorado voters in the seats is not the time to play small ball. I like the idea of making the stage reminiscent of the Lincoln Memorial. Obama isn't the culmination of Dr. King's Dream, the millions of us who will vote for Obama are.
Obama has no authenticity on any of these issues. Obama and Biden both voted against a 30% interest rate cap. What do you think a sub prime mortgage is. Biden voted for the bankruptcy bill, Obama for the Cheney Energy bill. Obama ran in the primary attacking universal health care, and against Hillary's plank of a housing interest rate cap. Obama + Biden = McCain.
Yes, he has substance, like Biden has experience. But its all bad, bad, bad.
That's true, Proletariat.
Obama's resume, though shallow, does have some substance. And yes, it's bad.
By empty experience, I was referring to the tremendous amount of flash in this spectacle versus the actual amount of light. It's been magnified out of proportion.
PIA, You're saying that those voting for Obama personify the culmination of Dr. King's dream?
Really?
Perhaps I don't understand Dr. King's dream.
I thought Dr. King believed that we are all God's children and all the same in God's eyes. I thought he believed it was morally wrong for society to institutionalize inequality. I thought his dream was about justice for all of God's children.
So if I don't vote for Obama, and I won't, I'm not part of the culmination of Dr. King's dream?
That doesn't seem right to me.
Correct.
Republicans have an ideology that institutionalizes inequality.
Republicans talk a lot about freedom, but rarely mention justice.
So if you vote Republican, you are not supporting Dr. King's dream.
So if you vote Republican, you are not supporting Dr. King's dream.
I think you should reconsider that statement.
I don't mean to raise your blood pressure, but for the purpose of this debate, I'm pretty confident Jesus would never vote Republican either. He probably would be a pro-life Democrat.
In fact, a sandal wearing long haired radical who made arguments against the imperial rulers of his day while talking about helping the poor and turning the other cheek would probably be laughed out of most Republican events.
That is so old.
Do you really think Jesus would be pro-abortion?
Come on.
I said Jesus would probably be a pro-life Democrat.
It is so old because it is so obvious.
We need a party that is pro-life before and after birth. Just doesn't make sense to have religious people voting for economic conservatives.
I make a distinction between being pro-life and anti-abortion.
By far, more elected Democrats back the killing of the unborn than Republicans.
Maybe Jesus would call himself a pro-life Democrat but he wouldn't vote for the Dems' Culture of Death agenda.
Post a Comment