O! So anti-business

"Barack Obama is the most antibusiness president in a generation, perhaps in American history," writes Dinesh D'Souza, president of King's College in New York City, in the Sept. 27th edition of Forbes.com Forbes.com. Indeed, BHO is living out the frustrated dreams of his father, who D'Souza describes as a "philandering, inebriated African socialist, who raged against the world for denying him the realization of his anti-colonial ambitions."

DC Democrats are the richest pols

Wealth is not in and of itself bad, but when the wealthy run around wildly spending other people’s money that’s practically criminal. So, we find it less than amusing that the spendthrift Democrats — check Omaba’s recent spending spree — are also the richest elected officials in Washington, DC.

The Web political publication, The Hill , just issued its list of the 50 richest politicians in DC, and eight of the top 10 are Democrats, which we list below.

Of the 50 richest members of Congress, The Hill says 26 are Democrats and 24 are Republicans.

What’s especially irritating is that Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry heads the list and he’s the guy we recently wrote about because he docks his new $450,000 sailing yacht in Rhode Island to avoid paying the Bay State’s sales and excise taxes. What a hypocritical cheapskate!

Of course, after the story hit every newspaper in America and many abroad, Kerry said he’d pay the $70,000 in taxes even though his boat would still be moored in RI. Kerry is the poster boy for adage, “Do as I say, not as I do.”

Here are the top 10 richest elected officials according to The Hill , where you can read the full list.

S. John Kerry, D-MA, 167M
R. Darrell Issa, R-CA, 164M
R. Jane Harman, D-CA, 112M
S. Jay Rockefeller, D-WV, 80M
S. Mark Warner, D-VA, 72M
R. Jared Polis, D-CO, 71M
R. Vern Buchanan, R-FL, 50M
S. Frank Lautenberg, D-NJ, 48M
S. Dianne Feinstein, D-CA, 43M
R. Harry Teague, D-NM, 40M

Richest Politician Skirted Taxes

It only took two days of bad press to get the Democrataic Senate hypocrite John Kerry to cave in and pay his tax bill, as the AP reported.

Kerry is a free spender of tax dollars, but when it comes to his own money, he's obviously a bit tighter. Of course, all of that money really isn't Kerry's, a good bit of it comes from his wife who inherited the Heinz ketchup fortune from her late husband, also a politician.

Kerry recently commission the 76-foot yacht, christened Isabel, at a boatyard in Rhode Island. Therefore, it was naturally convenient for Kerry to have the boat legally moored in Rhode Island. The location also allows Kerry to avoid paying the sales tax plus annual excise tax, which total about $70,000 in Massachusetts.

If Kerry were only as stingy with tax dollars that would be nice.

We might note, too, that the Isabel is said to spend a good bit of her summer moored off of Nantucket Island, the millionaires island, where the Kerry family has a summer home.

A couple of broadcast reports the Kerry Yacht Fiasco and interesting. One is WBZ-TV, Boston, and the other isFox News'

US Says Repeal ObamaCare

60% of US voters want Obamacare repealed — “the second straight week that support for repeal of Obamacare is at 60% or above,” according to the Rasmussen Report.
And...
36% Oppose repeal.
45% Strongly Favor repeal.
27% Strongly Oppose repeal.

Plus…
62% believe Obamacare will increase the federal budget deficit.
58% think it will raise the cost of healthcare.
51% say the new law will hurt the quality of healthcare.
(Rasmussen 5-31-10)

Obama’s disaster: Unemployment

Gallup Daily tracking finds that 20.3% of the U.S. workforce was underemployed in March — a slight uptick from the relatively flat January and February numbers.

A rise in the percentage of part-timers wanting to work full time (from 9.2% to 9.9%) is responsible for the March increase in underemployment.

Unemployment saw a slight, but insignificant, decline in March.

Six in 10 underemployed Americans are not hopeful they will find work or move from part-time to full-time work in the next four weeks. That translates to 12% of the workforce that is both underemployed and not hopeful they will find their desired amount of work.

The lack of change suggests that underemployed Americans anticipated long-term difficulties in finding work well before the administration's formal announcement was made.

The Gallup report was released April 1, 2010.

US 47-50% Pro-Con On Obamacare

"Americans are now about evenly split in their reactions to the healthcare bill's passage: 47% consider it a good thing and 50% a bad thing. The divided, but slightly negative, assessment is similar to what Gallup found in recent months prior to the final House vote," the polling company reported today, Monday 3-29-10.

Poll: Kill ObamaCare

A week after the House passed ObamaCare, 54% of voters favor the law’s repeal, including 44% who Strongly Favor repeal, according to the latest Rasmussen survey.

The poll also shows that 42% oppose repeal, including 34% who Strongly Oppose repeal.

Rasmussen said these number are “virtually unchanged” from last week’s poll results.

84% of Republicans favor repeal.
59% of Independents favor repeal.
25% of Democrats favor repeal.
1% of black Democrats favor repeal.
55% say the plan will increase healthcare costs.
17% say it will reduce healthcare costs.
49% say it will reduce care quality.
60% say it will increase the federal deficit.

The Rasmussen president Scott Rasmussen said: "The overriding tone of the data is that passage of the legislation has not changed anything. Those who opposed the bill before it passed now want to repeal it. Those who supported the legislation oppose repealing it."

Remember Scott Brown? That vote didn’t count either

In voting for Scott Brown to fill the US Senate seat left vacant by the death of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, the Massachusetts voters demonstrated:
1. Dissatisfaction with the direction of the country,
2. Antipathy toward federal government activism, and
3. Opposition to the Democrats' health-care proposals.

Those are the conclusions (1-22-10) drawn from a Jan. 20-21 poll sponsored by The Washington Post, the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation and Harvard University's School of Public Health, and released by The Post, which says the statistics show “how dramatically the political landscape has shifted during President Obama's first year in office.”

63% of Massachusetts’ special-election voters said America “is seriously off track,” the newspaper reported. “Nearly two-thirds of Brown's voters say their vote was intended at least in part to express opposition to the Democratic agenda in Washington.”

Among all Massachusetts voters — including those who voted for Brown’s opponent, state attorney general Martha Coakley — 48 percent oppose said they oppose Obama’s healthcare proposals while 43 percent support them.
Among Brown's supporters, however, eight in 10 said they were opposed to Obama’s healthcare proposals, and, 66 percent of them strongly opposed them.

President Lincoln would have cried

In 1863, President Abraham Lincoln declared and prayed at Gettysburg Pennsylvania that "...government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."

But a little over 200 years later, 219 self-important Democrats in the House of Representatives voted FOR Obamacare; this despite the fact that the majority of Americans had repeatedly told them that they did not approve of the proposed legislation.

Before the House vote was taken, 56% of American voters said they opposed Obama's plan while 40% approved of it. And for six months before the House vote, all major national polls demonstrated close, but consistently negative, public attitudes of both Obamacare and Obama himself, to say nothing about House Speaker Pelosi and Senate Leader Reid.

Oratory - The Obama Style

“A certain talent for rhetoric” is the way Barack Obama described his own oratorical skills in “Audacity of Hope,” his 2006 memoir. Achieving consensus on that claim is a child’s errand, while deciphering the under-girding influences that support the ability is more complex. Yet, in the end, business communicators can benefit from the outcome.

For most Americans, Obama emerged from out of nowhere; he was a minor player in the shadowy world of Chicago politics, where he also was ensconced in the exclusivity of legal academia. Then suddenly he burst headlong into the spotlight of immediate fame replete with fawning fans. It seemed that almost overnight he became a “pop-culture phenomenon,” as Ken Wheaton characterized him in AdvertisingAge.

“Barack Obama [was] treated like a rock star…. People wait hours to hear him speak. He draws huge crowds,” raved CBS News in February 2008.

“People come in droves, by the tens of thousands at times” The Early Show’s national correspondent Tracy Smith exulted. His “soaring rhetoric is moving his audiences not just politically, but emotionally even to tears on occasion.”

Even some political commentators who’ve reported for decades on political ups and downs couldn’t help but gush, according to the CBS’s Web report, “Obama’s Oratory Grabbing Spotlight.”

Chris Matthews, the host of “Hardball” on CNBC’s, remarked, “The feeling most people get when they hear a Barack Obama speech. I felt this thrill going up my leg. I mean — I don’t have that too often!”

And veteran Republican strategist and pollster Frank Luntz, told “Early Show” host Harry Smith that he’s “more than impressed” with Obama’s oratory. “I’ve been mesmerized.”

Obama’s popularity among a key target demographic, 18-to-29, spread like a summer evening fog and became so compelling that his mantra, “Yes we can!” transcended into hip-hop and emerged as a music video at Dipdive.com and on YouTube.com where it received thousands of viewings.

This ability “to move people through soaring rhetoric and [the] appealing rhythms of his delivery is now the stuff of legends,” wrote Aileen Pincus in “The Lessons of Obama’s Oratory Skills.”

The wellspring of oratory

But, from where does this ability to attract and convert emanate? Ekaterina Haskinsbelieves she knows.

Dr.Haskins is an associate professor of rhetoric at the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy, NY. Her department is Language, Literature and Communications. Her PhD is from University of Iowa, M.A. from Wake Forest, and B.A. from Moscow State University, Russia. And she is extensively published.

Dr. Haskins knows from where rhetoric comes, and told the BBC News that, “I believe Barack Obama embodies, more than any other politician, the ideals of American eloquence… and that his speeches consciously echo epic political presentations over the ages.”

Obama “has certainly studied all of his predecessors, [and] is quite aware of the rhetorical heritage that he draws on. He clearly sees himself as a descendant of Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King,” said Dr. Haskins.

How deep is the word?

The professor believes that Obama overcomes some of the traditional pejoratives associated with mere rhetoric, which “always has the connotations of being about appearances rather than reality.” But Obama “doesn’t sound false.”

By contrast, “He plays with the patriotic abstractions that allow for a certain kind of rhetorical maneuvering and fills them with specific concrete examples.”

Obama’s rhetoric may have begun with references to lofty ideals like hope, change and promise that justifiably garnered him criticism for their high sound and low depth. However, as his campaign progressed, Ms. Haskins believes that the fathoms of Obama’s presentations increased.

While Professor Haskins believes that Obama increasingly added substance to his oratory using “specific concrete examples,” other Obama observers disagree.

Indeed, some journalists believe quite to the contrary, that Obama’s ability to captivate audiences reflects little more than a triumph for style over substance yielding largely hollow rhetoric devoid of any meaningful depth.

After covering Obama during the campaign years, New York Sun and Washington Post Writers Group columnist Robert J. Samuelson recalled that initially he was “deeply impressed by his [Obama’s] intelligence, his forceful language, and his apparent willingness to take positions that seemed to rise above narrow partisanship.”

But, in the end, Samuelson reassessed his conclusions: “Mr. Obama has become the Democratic presidential frontrunner precisely because countless millions have formed a similar opinion. It is, I now think, mistaken.”

“The contrast between his broad rhetoric and his narrow agenda is stark,” Samuelson continued, “and yet the press corps — preoccupied with the political ‘horse race’ — has treated his invocation of ‘change’ as a serious idea rather than a shallow campaign slogan.

Reaching a similar epiphany, political observer Jack Shafer wrote in the online magazineSlate that Obama’s speeches are “criminally short on specifics.” Shafer wrote:

“Barack Obama bringeth rapture to his audience. They swoon and wobble, regardless of race, gender, or political affiliation, although few understand exactly why he has this effect on them.

“No less an intellect than The New Yorker’s George Packer confesses that moments after a 25-minute campaign speech by Obama in New Hampshire concluded, he couldn’t remember exactly what the candidate said. Yet “the speech dissolved into pure feeling, which stayed with me for days.”

An ancient legacy

Whether well deep or puddle shallow, some believe Obama’s skills have a legacy reaching into antiquity.

Andy Lark, a global marketing executive who studies the origins of public communications, believes that he recognizes the foundations of the Obama style.

Obama’s “speeches are filled, thrillingly, with highly formal rhetoric of the sort that would be recognizable to ancient philosophers and scholars of the medieval trivium — in which rhetoric, along with grammar and logic, formed one-third of an education.”

Closer to home, another observer believe Obama’s oratorical connections more aligned with Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King Jr. and even Ronald Reagan, according to Richard O’Mara writing in a Christian Science Monitor story on April, 2009.

Others believe Obama more closely echoes previous Democrats Teddy Roosevelt and FDR.

Writer and scholar Garry Wills disagrees. Obama’s speeches are not “full of mesmerizing tricks and rhetorical flourishes as many think; nor are they out of the black church culture of oratory, which produced Dr. King, Jesse Jackson and other like that.’”

No, Wills states, Obama’s speeches “manifest his time as a teacher.”

Despite Wills’ claim and Obama’s years teaching constitutional law (1992-2004) at the University of Chicago, the black Protestant church has clearly proivded a stylistic foundation for his oratory.

In America, the black church sprang up among the slave communities, and was later represented by such aggregative names as AME Church, African Methodist Episcopal. Founded in 1816, the AEMC was “the first major religious denomination in the western world that originated because of sociological rather than theological differences.”

From its beginning, the local black church served as the social, cultural, political and entertainment hub for black communities. It was in the church that black felt free to express themselves, to develop their talents, to test out their political bounds, and to find succor and safety.

So, it is not surprising to read that Dr. Kenton Anderson, dean and professor of Homiletics at the Northwest Baptist Seminary, believes that Obama was “Nurtured in the African-American preaching tradition.” And it was from the black church that Obama learned “his sweeping rhetoric” and where he discovered the essence of a “truly effective public speaker.”

“Those of us who are interested in preaching and biblical communication ought to watch closely what he is doing, not just because of the homiletical heritage of his speaking, but because we can learn something from him,” professor Anderson wrote.

In support of this observations, Anderson quoted Philip Collins, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s speech writer, saying that Obama’s “style of delivery is basically churchy, it’s religious: the way he slides down some words and hits others – the intonation, the emphasis, the pauses and the silences.”

If nothing else, Obama’s style is complex, simultaneously ancient or modern, casual and deliberate, embracing and piercing.

Say it again, Barack

Whatever the style and from wherever it is derived, the global communicator Lark has dissected Obama’s speech syntax to find the key to its effectiveness. “Repetiton” is one of Obama’s rhetorical potions, Lark wrote.

“Repetition, particularly in the form of anaphora – where a phrase is repeated at the beginning of successive lines – is another of the prime tools of political oratory and one that Obama revels in,” Lark wrote, choosing Obama’s January, 2008, Iowa caucus speech as one example.

Obama spoke:

“You know, they said this time would never come. They said our sights were set too high. They said this country was too divided, too disillusioned to ever come together around a common purpose.”

Then the candidate declared:

“I’ll be a president who finally makes healthcare affordable … I’ll be a president who ends the tax breaks … I’ll be a president who harnesses the ingenuity … I’ll be a president who ends this war in Iraq … ”

And: “This was the moment when … this was the moment when … this was the moment when … ”

And finally: “Hope is what I saw … Hope is what I heard … Hope is what led a band of colonists to rise up against an empire.”

This mesmerizing cadence created a tone painting, not so much communicating words to rememeber, but of emotions to be felt, Chris Matthews’ “thrill going up my leg.”

Obama’s “speeches are written to be heard, not read. His syntax is simple to follow at the moment. The transitions between sections offer no speed bumps in understanding,” writes Lee Cary in The American Thinker.

Instead of conveying information, Cary believes Obama’s speeches “create eloquence. He could read the small print disclaimer on a TV auto ad and his followers would chant, ‘Yes, We Can,’ because he speaks to their hearts not their heads.”

The emotions generated fulfill needs in his audiences. Indeed, Cary believes that Obama’s rhetoric is akin to that of a revival preacher completing the leap of faith from promise to redemption.

Obama’s audiences “need to be identified with an historical moment, and he [Obama] fulfills that need. And because he is of utmost importance to the future in their eyes, they, too, have enhanced importance by identifying with him. That is a powerful tonic, particularly for those who feel weak.”

Lessons for business communicators

While most Americans have never met Obama, and never will, “They do feel connected to him because of the power of his pre-election speeches,” according to The Oratorical Prowess of Barack Obama. It is “Obama’s ability to overwhelm an audience and make it his, [that he] mesmerizes.”

This is power stuff, and it is not the exclusive domain of politicians. Business communicators need persuasive messages and compelling delivery as well.

So, what are  the elements of The Obama Style that corporate communicators can adopt and use to improve their own relationships with their audiences.

Johns Hopkins humanities professor Richard Macksey told the Christian Science Monitor’s O’Mara that Obama’s style has seven key elements.

  1. He speaks in whole sentences.
  2. His body language gives the impression of relaxation.
  3. He listens.
  4. He’s quick to admit when he’s made a mistake.
  5. He is not quick to anger.
  6. His rhetoric is empty of fire and brimstone.

While not all observers would agree that Obama’s delivery always adheres to these points, their soundness remains.

Aileen Pincus, media coach and principal of The Pincus Group, emphasizes in “The Lessons of Obama’s Oratory Skills ” that “Any executive looking to improve presentation skills or public speaking confidence must first understand the basics.”

“Obama has developed his strengths as a public communicator precisely by understanding the links between his ideas and the way those ideas can most powerfully persuade others,” she added.

And the ability to effectively establish that link between the communicator and his audience is based on six fundamentals.

  • Start with what you know.
  • Don’t speculate about what you don’t know.
  • Be clear; never leave an audience wondering what your position is.
  • Your audience is listening, not reading; so write and speak “for the ear,” the way you normally communicate orally.
  • Understand that your audience is looking for your perspective, not just data.
  • Let them judge.

As Obama, and his proposed policies, move from the euphoria of campaigning to the brutal arena of governing, his ability to actually transform words into results is being tested. But, regardless of the outcome, the nation and the world will have experienced an oratorical phenomenon unique in recent years, and communicators have the opportunity to learn from the experience.