Did the McCain camp read Herbert Armstrong’s autobiography?

Wow — now I wish even more that I had seen more of the Democratic National Convention.  As a public speaker, I enjoy watching other speakers and do so with a clinical eye when possible, trying to examine the style and delivery of the speaker, as well as the wordsmithing done to create the message, itself.  Given the oratorical skills of Senator Obama, it might have been nice to have seen his speech, but I did not.  However, I have had the chance to see the last five major speakers at the Republican National Convention: President Bush, Fred Thompson, Joe Lieberman, Rudy Giuliani, and Sarah Palin.

I wish I could list here my thoughts in detail, as I have had many!  I will say, though, that of the five, the last two seemed the most natural and effective.  (Whether you agree with his point or not, Giuliani’s riff on voting “present” was pure rhetorical gold.)  Thompson seemed oddly less natural than I would have expected, yet his speech was very effective for its purpose and he was very probably the best choice of those in the party’s batting line up to give that one.  I suppose this last comment highlights the difficulty of comparing the speeches: their purposes are different, and comparing them can become a matter of comparing apples to oranges.

However, that’s not really the point of my post tonight!  Rather, I’d like to weigh in on one of the hot topics of the moment, motivated by an unexpected comparison that came to mind tonight.

Many have debated the wisdom of the McCain camp’s choice of Mrs. Palin as his running mate, and I’m sure that the debate will continue until the consequences of the choice become more obvious (unless the end is controversial or the election is close; then the debate may never cease in this age).  But as my wife and I were discussing the speech tonight, the example that hit me was that of Mr. Herbert Armstrong’s advice to his young brother-in-law, Walter Dillon, while helping him in a college oratorical contest.

Mr. Armstrong advised his brother-in-law to speak in a completely different style than what would have been expected from the five young men he would be competing against.  The idea was that if Walter spoke in the same “flossy, flowery” style as the others he would be playing it safe in one sense, but he probably wouldn’t stand out in any significant way.  The judges would simply see him as one of six similar fellows.  Yet, if he went for a passionate, fire-breathing speech and really “let it fly Billy Sunday style” he would completely change the dynamics of the competition.  In that case, he would completely stand out in such a way that he would either get first place or last place, but nothing in between — instead of being seen as one of six, he would actively define the judges’ role as one of choosing one of two: him or the other guys.  Herbert Armstrong recommended that his brother-in-law adopt a bold, all-or-nothing approach.  Make ’em love you or hate you.  Be seen as a remarkable standout or be seen as more of the same — understanding that some judges happen to like “more of the same.”

It seems to me that the McCain camp has done the same thing.  This came home to me as I considered the other choices that had been discussed as possible McCain VPs — e.g., governors Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, or Tim Pawlenty.  Such choices (generally speaking) would have been “more of the same” choices.  Senator Joe Liberman could have been a contest-changing choice to a certain degree, but (1) not nearly so much as the choice of Mrs. Palin has been, and (2) such a choice would have been like punching the conservative-core of the Republican party right in the face right before spitting in their eye.

But by choosing Governor Sarah Palin, the McCain campaign has, indeed, completely changed the contest in a way none of the other options could have.  In my opinion, he has dramatically increased the probability that votes will move in more extreme directions — bringing either great gains or great losses, but nothing in between.  The other choices would have changed virtually nothing in such a significant way, much as Senator Obama’s choice of Senator Joe Biden changed little.  Even the “experience argument” against Barack Obama that some think the choice of Palin has diluted is, IMHO, still very much in play — in fact, possibly more dramatically so.  In saying so, I consider that the discussions so far have been comparing the experience of the Republican Vice Presidential candidate with the experience of the Democratic Presidential candidate.  And Mr. Giuliani and Mrs. Palin’s speeches tonight tell me that the McCain camp might even be hoping that the choice of Mrs. Palin lures the opposition into discussions about experience.  (And surely we all expect to hear multiple references to Mr. Biden’s primary race reference to “on the job training” between now and election day.)

Of course, the title of this post was typed tongue-in-cheek, but in many situations Herbert Armstrong’s advice to his wife’s brother is good advice, and time will tell if the “Walter Dillon” approach will win the day for the McCain-Palin ticket.  But I think that those who are dismissing the choice of Sarah Palin as unsound and ill-considered on the part of John McCain are both too quickly dismissing the effects it has already had as short-term, only, and also failing to properly compare what the McCain has gained through the choice to what it would have had (or failed to have) with any of the others.

It’s certainly a different game than it was one short week ago.

[UPDATE, 9/4/2008: I notice that in Peggy Noonan’s commentary for the WSJ yesterday, she came to the same conclusion as I did — although she didn’t seem to remember the story about Herbert Armstroing and Walter Dillon. 🙂

Her commentary can be found here: Open Mic Night at MSNBC.  She also discusses the embarassing reminder she experienced concerning that great rule of thumb: “If you’re near a bear, assume he’s hungry.  If you’re near a microphone, assume it’s on.”  Whether her thoughts on Palin will bear out remain to be seen.  There’s certainly a lot of campaigning ahead and fates and fortunes have reversed in less time than the stretch we still have between here and November…]

8 thoughts on “Did the McCain camp read Herbert Armstrong’s autobiography?

  1. Carolyn

    I did listen to the speeches that the Obamas and Bidden made at the DNC. I was very impressed with their delivery and wondered how the Republicans could ever hope to come up with someone that could balance out the ticket to compete with what the democrats had going. Well, I do believe with Sarah Palin, they have indeed hit on something.

  2. Craig

    I also like to study the greatest speakers (and leaders) that I can find. Been watching the growth of a certain WGS on TW. 🙂

    You owe it to yourself to see Obama’s speech on YouTube. It was called “less a speech than a symphony” by CNN’s David Gergen, and “magnificent… the greatest convention speech” by Pat Buchanan. He writes his own material, and delivers it with amazing ability.

    As a non-American, the first time I ever heard an Obama speech I stated “he will be the next President.” Whether he is qualified or will be a good President is irrelevant. His power to move the average American with his rhetoric is truly frightening.

    Sorry, but Giuliani cannot compare, and Palin is nothing special. Obama is the master craftsman. The televised debates are going to be r-e-a-l interesting.

  3. rakkav

    Given the viciousness of the leftist editorials and editorial cartoons against Mrs. Palin of late, my take is that the Democrats are running scared. Yet their attacks (as a recent Newsmax.com article points out) may well have the effect of alienating the very swing voters (among women) that Obama needs to attract to win and that Palin as an archetype represents very well.

    Craig (and CNN and Pat Buchanan) may be right about Obama as a speaker, but the same could be said about any demagogue of classical Athens. Intelligence and wisdom are not at all the same thing, which is the last thing that many intellectuals of any stripe ever come to understand. And there are many who would totally disagree that Palin’s speech was “nothing special” — in fact she’s been called “America’s Margaret Thatcher”. If anyone could show just how empty Obama’s fancy rhetoric really is, it’s Palin.

    In my opinion (so far as I have the facts in hand), Obama is about style; Palin is about substance. It will be interesting indeed to see which the American voting public prefers.

    But whether I’m right or wrong on that one, Aristotle’s question arises yet again: is “democratic behavior” what a democracy likes, or what will preserve a democracy? Which America prefers will decide this election as it probably hasn’t in a very long time.

  4. I belonged to a speech club many years ago. Though not a gifted speaker myself (what a laugh), I also watched the covention speeches with a clinical eye.

    I looked for the rhetorical devices that we were discouraged from using.

    One is called a “turn around.” The most famous example of this was President Kennedy. “Ask not what your country can do for you, but ask what you can do for your country.”

    Another device is heavy repitition. “Vote for the people. Vote the people now. Vote for the people tomorrow. Vote for them at last.”

    Still another device is to speak lower your voice while shortening your sentences. Then suddenly you talk in a loud voice with a very long sentence.

    At any rate, here’s what I noticed: The Democrats used a lot more rhetorical devices than the Republicans did. McCain used the heavy-repitition device at the very end of his speech, but otherwise, he and Sarah Palin spoke in a much more natural style than their opponents.

    In that sense, I agree with you, Mr Smith. Mr Armstrong had that “straight from the shoulder” style of talking to people. He didn’t use rhetorical devices. Maybe the McCain camp did read HWA’s autobiograhphy??

    And I can’t believe that my comment is so long. Sorry!

  5. Deano

    I just don’t get it! How could she possibly forget the story about Mr. Armstrong and Mr. Dillon?

    Another sign o’ the times I guess . . . LOL

What are you thinking?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.