Clinton’s performance overshadowed the other 10 PM speakers last night, so here’s a little Sandra Fluke, who was promoted to “super prime time”. I like the way she combined calling Romney a giant wuss with some real anger and a nice run-down of the insane Republican policies on women.
Sandra Fluke
by @heymistermix.com| 85 Comments
This post is in: The War On Women
hep kitty (who is going to use lol, don't care if it's dated & uncool-deal w/ it-ppl deserve to know when they're funny & sometimes I'm too tired for snark)
I tweeted this quote but can’t remember where I got it from
Elizabelle
C-Span: live interview with David Axelrod just began. Discussing his and BHO’s “last campaign.”
Suffern Ace
@hep kitty (who is going to use lol, don’t care if it’s dated & uncool-deal w/ it-ppl deserve to know when they’re funny & sometimes I’m too tired for snark): Huh. I must have missed that convention where speakers were pelted with balloons. Was the 72 Democratic Party really that much fun?
scav
@hep kitty (who is going to use lol, don’t care if it’s dated & uncool-deal w/ it-ppl deserve to know when they’re funny & sometimes I’m too tired for snark): what did they do to you? I got the last of the un-parentheticized lols — I promise I’ll take good care of it, take it for walks and everything!
Robin G.
I really didn’t like her style, to be honest. She came off as really self-congratulatory.
Dennis SGMM
@Elizabelle:
LINK
Louise
@Robin G.: It might not work in the long term, but I thought it was hella effective last night — and her picture of the choice between parties for all women was spot on.
Dennis SGMM
@Robin G.:
Her point regarding having to re-fight battles that we’ve already won was dead on.
Cermet
@Robin G.:I listened to her speech and you are completely wrong – either you need some coffee or an education in reality. Her speech was brilliant and all about the subject and support for the President – really nothing about her but rather, just what happened to her and how this would impact everyone – esp. woman.
Kerry Reid
I kept thinking of that 1988 debate when Dukakis was asked about how he’d feel if someone raped and killed Kitty. Terrible question, of course, but what everyone remembered is that he didn’t respond with emotion. I think that is, in a way, what Fluke was telling us about Obama and Romney. The “daughters instead of donors” line was pretty effective, I thought, because it made clear that even if Mitt Romney HAD daughters, he would have wussed out on taking Limbaugh to task.
Not that Dukakis is like Romney, except for the Massachusetts connection — just that, sometimes, you have to be able to talk about how something really WOULD make you feel, even if that wouldn’t change your mind on an issue. Romney’s whole “Those aren’t the words I would have used” weak-tea response to the Limbaugh Slut-Shaming Fest is all anyone should have to point out to ANN Romney the next time she wants to try to tell Us Silly Little Wimmenz why we need to wake up and vote for her Personal Mr. Fix-it.
scav
@Dennis SGMM: And that point was eerily spot on with my mother’s reaction months ago: Not again. There were chords being struck.
scav
Still, RobinG can’t really be wrong about her reaction to the speach.
jwb
@Robin G.: I liked it, and I think she has a very bright future whatever she decides to do. But that’s neither here nor there. What’s important for this election is whether it fires up the youth vote—the main reason, I think, she was given this slot. I think it did, but we’ll see.
Steve
It’s AMAZING how much they hate her, from Rush Limbaugh on down the line.
You can talk about how much racist crap the President gets, and it’s true of course, but at least the haters have been forced to hide their racist rhetoric from public view at least a tiny bit. But when it comes to women, they still feel completely free to let that freak flag fly.
You never hear bi-CLANG. Women don’t even deserve a clang.
Shawn in ShowMe
@Robin G.:
I don’t agree but for the sake of argument, let’s say it was. Bill Clinton’s style is the epitome of self-congratulatory, yet last night’s speech is lauded as one of the greatest evah. Does it matter if a speaker does a little celebrating of oneself as long as they celebrate the group as well?
Older_Wiser
Sandra Fluke was absolutely, terrifically, spot on. I hope she runs for office; we need women like her who aren’t afraid to speak their mind and stand up for the rest of us.
I’m 71 but would vote for this intelligent, thoughtful woman in a heartbeat.
Dennis SGMM
@scav:
I’ve had that feeling for a long time. The GOP Wrecking Crew is out to undo everything from Social Security to workplace safety to Roe v Wade to the ACA. People died for those things and yet the GOP wants to set a course that will have people dying for them again. How anyone with enough brain cells to tie their own shoes can vote Republican is incomprehensible to me.
Shawn in ShowMe
@Steve:
It’s AMAZING how much they hate her because she has an aura that makes them feel like the troglodytes they are, from Rush Limbaugh on down the line.
aimai
My god, Robin G, you couldn’t be more wrong if you were paid for it. I’m a 52 year old woman with two teenaged daughters and I and every other woman who saw that girl stand up for herself and for us was in tears–tears!–of pride. The audience? Man, the charisma of that girl was simply boiling off like steam. I saw people looking positively starry eyed at her–young, old, men and women. I thought for a moment when people got up to applaud her that they were going to rush the stage and carry her off on their shoulders. I’m planning on showing her speech to my teenagers today online and I am certain it will go viral. Women and girls–we are fucking sick of being attacked and talked down to by fat pigs like Rush Limbaugh and O’Reilly. She stood up for all of us.
aimai
bemused
@Steve:
And there was that vagina monologue tweet from Erick Erickson. These guys are pigs.
aimai
@Kerry Reid:
Prezackly: Daughters vs Donors is going to sting.
Speaking of the totality of the knocks on Romney this accusation by Fluke boils down to this: Romney is a trimmer, an opportunist, and a suck up. When it comes to having principles and empathy his pocketbook and his ambition rule whatever heart he ever had. This is basically the same point Deval Patrick made both on the News Hour and in his speech “More interested in having the job than doing the job” which, ultimately, is by way of saying what Dukakis said specifically about Romney “The Guy’s a Fraud.” The issue is laid out starkly at this point in a way that I want to see hammered home. Remember the old journalist’s line “If your mother says she loves you: check it out?” Romney’s campaigning for Big Daddy in Chief and Ann Romney as much as told us he’d husband the country they way he husbands her. So Sandra Fluke called him on this. When the chips are down Romney will always prefer his interest to the votesr.
aimai
TK421
Vote for Obama everyone, or reproductive freedom will be rolled back.
Obama Expresses Support for Plan B Decision – NYTimes.com
pattyp
Apropos of nothing, but I never noticed how much she looks like Siouxsie Sioux.
Robin G.
I agree with basically everything she said. It’s her style that came off as self-congratulatory to me. I didn’t like her inflection, I was put off by the way she did the blink-pause-sympathetinod every time the audience booed, and when she was trying to sound tough I only heard petulance. I liked the words she spoke, but the way she delivered them turned me off so much that I was barely able to sit through the whole six minutes. She really rubbed me the wrong way. I’m honestly surprised to hear I’m in the minority on that one. (But then, I really liked Elizabeth Warren’s style and apparently tons of others didn’t, so different strokes.)
bemused
Sandra Fluke was excellent. The daughters vs donors line was terrific. I loved seeing men smiling and standing up to cheer.
Hillary Rettig
I must be the exception because I found Clinton’s talk tedious with too much bipartisanship kumbaya. If you have to go back to Eisenhower to prove your kumbaya premise, maybe you should rethink the premise. He had a great opportunity to tell the truth about how truly despicable the Republicans are, and he sacrificed that opportunity and the party needs to those of his foundation / family’s ongoing political career / etc.
The Republicans are despicable and Democrats should say so. I note that Clinton got some of his biggest applause when he called out Ryan plainly for being a liar (“it takes some brass”) for criticizing the same Medicare budget cuts he proposed.
However, I love Fluke’s talk – thought it was spot on in content and tone – brilliant. Last night I saw it on MSNBC.com because the networks idiotically and incompetently featured talking heads during her speech.
becca
SF was just on Stephanie Millers’s show on CurrentTV.
She is an excellent conteporaneos speaker, as well as scripted.
BTW- Al Gore gave glowing commentary to Clinton’s speech last night.
On Current, of course.
Culture of Truth
I got the feeling she is reluctant to become an even bigger and more controversial figure by speaking out in venues like this, but that she is still really, really pissed at Rush and Romney.
spiffy
@Hillary Rettig:
From what I heard, CBS and ABC completely cut out her speech (Fluke’s speech I mean).
PurpleGirl
@Hillary Rettig: If you can live stream on your computer, tonight use http://www.C-span.org for truly commentless and complete coverage. Arguingwithsignposts (IIRC) recommended it to me Tuesday night and it was very good to bypass any TV/cable channel.
bob h
I liked “He thinks of his daughters, not his donors or his dollars”.
Culture of Truth
Clinton methodology is show, don’t tell. He can tell you, like Ann Romney tried, ‘hey the GOP is desicable, now you people go vote for the Democrats,’ or he can show you how the GOP used to be under Eisenhower, and show you how they have behaved for 12 years, and you walk away concluding, ‘hey the GOP seems pretty despicable now.’
hep kitty (who is going to use lol, don't care if it's dated & uncool-deal w/ it-ppl deserve to know when they're funny & sometimes I'm too tired for snark)
@scav:
I just keep hearing how that is tired and not “hip” anymore and I don’t see it much on this blog anywhere. But no one here has criticized me for using it.
Anyway, glad I’m not alone
LOL, lol, lol! ;)
hep kitty (who is going to use lol, don't care if it's dated & uncool-deal w/ it-ppl deserve to know when they're funny & sometimes I'm too tired for snark)
Funny, Fluke was a non-public figure until Rush so viciously attacked her. The R’s made her into an activist! heh. And we like having her on our side. Thx repubs!
Ash Can
@Hillary Rettig: It’s funny how reactions can differ so widely to different people speaking. It’s nuanced. Different people pick up, or don’t pick up, on different cues. And that’s the beauty of a convention format — with all the various speakers, there’s that more of a chance that viewers will find something that resonates with them and that they can latch onto.
hep kitty
@Suffern Ace: yeh, gotta consider the source there
Ash Can
@Culture of Truth:
“Show, don’t tell” is a fundamental rule of writing, and with good reason.
hep kitty
@Hillary Rettig:
Only, keep in mind this is Obama we’re trying to re-elect here. Clinton, also a rather centrist president.
hep kitty
@bemused: I posted that last night – stock response these days for republicans: “if anyone was offended . . .”
Steve
I like how there’s 99 people like “Clinton is the best ever!” and 1 person like “meh, he’d be good if only he would take my advice.” This much I know: don’t teach your grandmother to suck eggs.
@VividBlueDotty
I’d been looking forward to her speech for days, and I was disappointed, not in the content, but in the delivery. I don’t think her speaking skills were strong. I don’t know where anyone would pick up self-congratulatory, but I just didn’t think she spoke that well. Cecile Richards was also a disappointment in that regard. There’s an oratorical style that works in these big venues, and it can vary to allow for different styles of voices. It’s about pacing, about making pauses work FOR you, and IMO neither Fluke nor Richards were proficient at that. However, I loved every word they DID say and also enjoyed seeing Piers Morgan follow up with them afterward. And I am glad they were on the stage for Obama.
maody
Robin, could you have mistaken real anger for the self-congratulatory note? As a 57 yr old woman, I wanted to jump out of my seat screaming, “You tell ’em Sister!” the whole way through. Fluke was short and to the fucking point and did not forget to mention truly self-congratulatory angry white men trying to shut her up by calling her a slut.
Rob in Buffalo
Great speech, especially the “daughters, not delegates or donors” line and her calling Romney a coward. I thought her delivery was very effective.
curiousleo
@Culture of Truth:
This. At one point when she was talking about the vicious attacks on her from the right and the support she got from others, you could tell she was very emotional and I thought struggling to hold it together and not cry. The attacks on her were very, very personal and cruel and clearly hurt her.
Cermet
@scav: You too need some coffee or also need to learn about reality; what you feel is your is your own personal issue but when you write this on a blog then you ARE stating this as your opinon relative to the topic at hand. THat can and mostly certainly IS open to debate and will be discused as what you believe, not just feel.
aimai
I can’t believe people complain that Sandra Fluke “blinks too much” –I think she’s an ordinary person who has a slightly lazy eyelid that was tremoring uncontrollably. The Bitchiness of micromanaging what was–from the actual audience reaction–a stunningly successful speech is just mindblowing to me. I get it. We all think we are entitled to each speaker reaching out and massaging our egos as well as our eyes at all times but Christ on a Fucking Pogo Stick if Sandra Fluke wasn’t beautiful enough, well put together enough, angry enough, honorable enough, tested enough to give that speech who the fuck was? It ought to be acknowledged that the “real people” who were brought out–like the Army Mom who introduced Michelle–were distinctly not ready for their closeups just like real americans.
Out there in this beautiful country of ours people who are just regular workers are overweight, in bad health, have stained teeth, squint, freckles and etc… etc…etc… By some fucking Miracle Sandra Fluke is the total package and one person in a thousand thinks she sounded “self congratulatory?” and “Blinked too much” in the “pauses” during her speech. WTF? I don’t even have words for that level of entitlement or the depth of Missing the Point of the convention and all the speakers.
aimai
Hillary Rettig
@Culture of Truth: To “show not tell” you actually have to show. He kind of did that at times, but the message was lost and diluted in all the kumbaya blather, in which he “showed” the Republicans to be oh so reasonable collaborators. He didn’t just praise Eisenhower; he even praised Reagan AND GWB fer gawd’s sake.
Fluke gave a much more focused “show not tell” talk and was thus much more powerful.
I’m sure pundits and consultants will have all kinds of la, la, la about how he has to maintain a dignified stance, but I hope we eventually get a leader who can tell it like it is. Something like FDR when he said of the bankers, “I welcome their hate,” and we know how unpopular he was. /s
Patricia Kayden
I loved Fluke’s comments about two alternative futures — one scary as hell and the other supportive of women’s rights. She has a future in politics.
1badbaba3
She was wonderful. Absolutely wonderful. So aware of the gravity of the situation, but not the least bit overwhelmed. To be able to hold yourself together in that situation is impressive indeed. Thanks in part to Rush and his flying monkeys for boosting her visibility and name recognition with their failed verbal gang bang. You really cannot buy the kind of publicity that being on 600 radio stations can bring (funny how that cuts both ways). Now we have another articulate spokesperson for the cause. She can write her own ticket from here on out. More please.
scav
@Cermet: No, Whether her response exemplifies the bulk of reactions is up for debate, not her reaction as her reaction. Or, are you putting yourself up as arbitrator of people’s internal perceptions? Hell of a reality you’ve got going there and no, I don’t want your brand of coffee. I don’t see how stating anything on a blog chances it. “I love my partner.” “No you don’t, as others disagree with you.” Right.
gnomedad
@maody:
She could have, and that’s the point – effective public speaking is tough. It’s no slam on Ms. Fluke to point out where her delivery needs work. Hell, everyone needs works compared to Bubba.
Hillary Rettig
@aimai: if Sandra Fluke wasn’t beautiful enough, well put together enough, angry enough, honorable enough, tested enough to give that speech who the fuck was?
LOVE THIS. you’re 100% right.
scav
@gnomedad: Moreover, perfect effective speaking that works the same on all people is probably impossible. The very imperfections some are harping about might have provided the stamp of authenticity that convinced others.
Robin G.
@aimai: Sigh.
At no point did I say that I didn’t agree with the substance of what she was saying. But I found the way she delivered it to be off-putting — in tone, in feel, and, yes, in mannerisms. (As far as “blinking” goes, my specific issue was the affected way in which she would turn her head to the side, slowblink, and do the sympathetic frown-nod. My complaint is with method.)
You liked it; fine. But not every speaker’s style is going to appeal to everyone. (Hell, just look at the discussions on Elizabeth Warren.) She didn’t appeal to me. I fail to see how this makes me entitled.
Robin G.
@gnomedad: Thank you for making my point far more effectively than I did :)
aimai
You are accusing her of “doing the smile/nod” as though she were a performance artist. She’s not a performance artist. She is a private citizen who through no fault of her own was catapulted onto the public stage. I think she did a damned fine job for being that person. And not only do I think it, as a matter of personal privilige, but it was clear from the audience reaction that literally thousands of people thought it. You are entitled to your own feelings about her speech delivery, of course, but you are not entitled to assert it as at all significant given that the people in that room, who saw her speech on the Jumbotron, were practically screaming in ecstasy. In other words as a critic of the style and delivery you are simply overborn by the general reaction. Its like watching a roomfull of people devour a dish in a restaurant, moaning in ecstasy, and then complaining because your piece of parsley garnish wasn’t plated to your taste. Of course you are entitled to say it and think it. But you will forgive the rest of the diners, won’t you, if they reach over and take your leftovers and eat them with relish?
aimai
LABiker
She should send Rusty the Clown a box of cigars for making her so damned famous.
geg6
@maody:
THIS. The only difference is that I’m 53.
My John turned to me (and yes, I had tears in my eyes and had stood up to cheer in our sunroom) and said, “That girl better go run for something.”
He got it. And he’s 64.
gogol's wife
@hep kitty (who is going to use lol, don’t care if it’s dated & uncool-deal w/ it-ppl deserve to know when they’re funny & sometimes I’m too tired for snark):
I’m probably too late for you to see this, but sometimes I too just want to tell somebody they’re funny, and I’m too tired to do anything but LOL. Like a 12-year-old. Maybe it will get cool again if we just wait, like platform shoes.
Robin G.
@aimai:
When you’re giving a nationally televised speech at the Democratic National Convention, yes, you’re engaging in performance art. Public speaking is performance art.
…okay, so, the position here is that my feelings on her speech delivery are by definition insignificant because other people did like it?
Please do. At no point did I level any sort of judgement on people who disagreed with me about Sandra Fluke’s delivery. You’re the only one who did that.
1badbaba3
@becca: I concur. She was quite personable in a one on one setting as well. I don’t know if she wants to be a public figure, but it’s there for her if she does. Just the fact that her mere existence whips the right into a froth of stupidity is enough for me to at least answer the doorbell.
I am also quite fond of purple.
scav
@aimai: Might be politer or more big tentish and respectful of minority opinion if everyone didn’t sneer and browbeat people for not marching in lockstep. Some of this thread reads more like the authoritarian “you will be assimilated” on all subjects meaningful or not uber alles frogmarch — I’ll put it down to the convention frenzy.
aimai
@Robin G.:
Yeah, you know, I do think your feelingson her speech are “by definition insignificant” because the bulk of people who watched it disagree with you.
In addition, I’ll go farther. The reason I take issue with your point is the same reason you feel free to take issue with her delivery–how do you like them apples? She put herself out there and risked herself in order to testify to congress, got slammed and turned from private citizen to public figure, was asked to give a massive public speech and did it in a way that rocked the house and some blog commenter gives her a “4.5 out of ten” and a sad shake of the head because she “didn’t stick the dismount?”
There’s a great sports movie called Stick It which is about the rebellion of a group of gymnasts–after years of being treated like meat by all the parents, coaches, and judges they decide to seize control of the entire process of competition by choosing amongst themselves who they feel has the best routine and then throwing all the other performances in the competition by doing technically flawless routines but at the last minute, showing a bra strap or sticking out their tongues or doing one of the gazillion things for which Judges have been critiquing them.
I get it that you didn’t like Sandra Fluke’s eye blinks. I also get it that you feel entitled, somehow, to a flawless, eyeblinkless, performance by this woman. But your detatchment from what she was actually doing. Your lack of empathy for her situation. Your inability to get past judging and on to responding just shows that you are not the average viewer and not the average voter towards whom she was directing her very successful speech. You are an epicure and your opinion matters as little as someone who didn’t like Clinton’s speech because his hands were trembling or because of some other petty detail.
What matters in a speech, from the point of view of the people who commissioned the speech, is not whether Robin G got his or her taste buds tingled but whether the vast majority of people seeing it were on their feet cheering and screaming for more. In that sense, no, your opinion really doesn’t matter. Its not reflective of anything but a solipsist’s perfectionism.
aimai
Omnes Omnibus
@aimai: I thought she was smart, articulate, righteously angry, and very attractive. This speech was really her big stage debut and I think she killed it. In my opinion, she will only get better.
Also, on a more shallow note, I thought she was gorgeous. Of course, I think beautiful, smart, and passionate women are hot. So sue me.
aimai
@scav:
I’m not borging it up–I’m voting for Warren and I was not crazy about her speech. But I am fucking sick and tired of the reality that a young woman giving the speech of her young life gets criticized for everything from her hair to her fucking eyeblinks. No wonder its hard to get good people to go into politics. Doesn’t it strike you as kind of…sick…that what matters to this commenter is not the reality of the speech, not the context of the speech, not obvious audience response to the speech but a purely personal revulsion at the speaker’s minor imperfection? Thank god the dems didn’t drag out some really ugly people, or people in wheelchairs, during the convention because that would really have harshed all of our mellows.
aimai
Robin G.
@aimai:
That’s an argument for persuasion or effectiveness of the speech. If I had said “I feel that her style of delivery did not persuade others,” then yes, that would be disprovable and therefore irrelevant. My feelings are, however, relevant to my feelings, which was all I was talking about to begin with.
Yes. I’m just watching the speeches and calling them like I see them; I’m not grading anyone on a curve. (Though I think she made far more mistakes than only failing to stick the dismount. There was almost nothing about her delivery that I liked. But we’re back to differing preferences again.)
I feel entitled to nothing. But this is a blog post on the subject of this woman’s speech, and I said she did not deliver it in a manner I enjoyed. And no point did I say she owed me anything.
I’m pretty sure I was in her target audience — young liberal women whom the DNC is hoping will volunteer for canvassing and phonebanks — and no, she didn’t do it for me. There were lots of other people who did, though even if they hadn’t it wouldn’t have mattered. I’ve volunteered for causes I believe in even when I haven’t enjoyed the speeches representing those causes, and I imagine I’ll do so in the future, too.
I agree. By the people who commissioned it, this was clearly a successful speech. Therefore I don’t see why my opinion seems to bother you so much.
Ash Can
@aimai: It’s pointless to argue with someone about how they perceived someone’s speaking style. Different people respond/pick up on different cues, auditory and visual alike. It has nothing to do with our opinions and everything to do with the way our individual brains are hardwired. Finding fault with someone for criticizing someone else’s speaking style is like saying, “How can you possibly think cilantro tastes like soap? You’re crazy.” As has been emphasized here, criticizing the speaking style and criticizing the content are two entirely different things. What’s more, marketers of every kind, including political campaigns, recognize this; hence the extensive use of focus groups.
Robin G.’s reaction may be an outlier in this limited community here, but maybe not within a different one — and one that may be broader and more representative of the DNC’s target audience. We don’t know, but it’s the job of political campaign workers to find out.
1badbaba3
@Robin G.: Because we’re trying to have a party here, celebrating one of our own who used her smarts to turn a bad situation good, and in you come in with the negative waves (always with the negative waves, Moriarty!) and try to block out the sun. Because the trolls are out in force all over the innerwebs doing the same. Because we’re winning and we don’t have to put up with this shit anymore. Because of all the things you could have said about it, you chose the way you did. Choices have consequences. These are yours.
Robin G.
@1badbaba3: Okay, fair enough. Given the amount of fairly intense debate going on in almost every other thread about the nuances of Elizabeth Warren’s speaking style and who she is or isn’t persuading, I admit, I figured that in a post about Sandra Fluke’s speech, it was okay to talk about the delivery of Sandra Fluke’s speech. I also honestly didn’t expect to be generating such a backlash, because I didn’t think my opinion of her mechanics would be so far in the minority. Still, you’re right. I said I personally felt her style of delivery was self-congratulatory, I stand by that opinion, and if it bothers other people that I feel that way, okay.
Ash Can
@1badbaba3: See my comment @ #67.
Ash Can
@Robin G.: And FWIW, I think you’re being treated unfairly in this thread.
Robin G.
@Ash Can: :) Thank you. Again, I had no problems with the content of her speech. And not everyone’s style appeals to everyone; if Fluke clicked with more people than she didn’t, then it was a success. But (being as I came in predisposed to like her), I was really surprised at just how much I was put off by her delivery — and I’m even more surprised to find that I seem to be alone on that. Again, though, there seems to be lots of people who really don’t like listening to Elizabeth Warren, and she was one of my favorite speeches of the night. (I actually find these things to be crazy interesting, but that seems to be another place I’m pretty alone.) Anyway, I’m not knocking people who did like Sandra Fluke’s speech, and it’s sort of weird to me that my not liking her speech is being taken so personally in some quarters.
northquirk
@aimai: I totally agree with you! (enough to de-lurk ; )
I was going to write more, but just heard the Beasties on KEXP & think they say it best: “A lot of people get jealous, they’re talking about me; but that’s just ’cause they haven’t got a thing to say.”
1badbaba3
@Ash Can: No one has attacked her personally. Just standard (yet passionate) disagreement with her statement. We could all move on, but I get the feeling (oops, sorry), the impression rather, that some of us are a little protective of Ms. Fluke ‘cos she faced down their dark overlord and lived to tell. Granted, it’s not quite Rosa Parks, or Joan of Arc, but FFS, she’ll do just fine. Like it or not she has become a symbol of the struggle. You either treat her with respect or get lumped in with the other side (eeeeewwwwww!). And you wouldn’t want that, would you?
Robin G.
@1badbaba3: So far I’ve been called entitled and a solipsist (as an insult, I believe), and told that I am lacking in empathy, engaging in bitchy micromanaging, unable to get past judging, and that my feelings are not at all significant. So it’s gotten a little personal.
1badbaba3
@Ash Can: And cilantro does taste like soap. ; b. : )
gogol's wife
@Ash Can:
Me too. It’s ridiculous.
Ash Can
@1badbaba3: And you’re missing my point. Passionate disagreement? Fine. Arguing about it? Pointless. Here’s the point:
No, she won’t do just fine, in situations where she has to speak to people, if too many of her listeners are put off of her message due to her speaking style. It’s the same basic idea I encountered when I was an editor. I told the writers I was editing that their perfectly good points would get lost if they weren’t written out well enough — that their readers would be too distracted by the quirks and problems in their writing and miss the ideas that they were trying to get across. This applies to speaking as well. As I said, this is why marketers test advertising campaigns on focus groups. They want to make sure that their points are getting across most effectively, to the greatest number of people. It has nothing to do with the quality of their ideas or of them personally, and everything to do with the sheer, prosaic mechanics of the delivery system of their ideas.
You’re reacting emotionally to something that, in fact, has no foundation in emotion. And political campaigns realize this. Furthermore, since she’s a law student at a decent school, I’m sure no one realizes this more than Sandra Fluke herself. Her entire career will depend to a large extent on how well she comes across in speaking to other people. As a result, she’s undoubtedly very devoted to honing her speaking skills. She’ll retain what proves to work with her designated audience, and will reject what doesn’t. It has nothing to do with the substance of her arguments, and it sure as hell has nothing to do with her character.
Obviously, her style works well in the Balloon Juice community — most of the people here who saw her think she was effective, and outliers are minimal. But this doesn’t mean that there would likewise be minimal outliers for her in a courtroom, or on any given stump speech. Just because her style worked for the BJ community doesn’t mean it’ll work for other audiences — audiences far more important to her personally, to boot.
Omnes Omnibus
@Ash Can: FWIW her style seemed to go over very well at the venue. Two standing Os in a six minute speech has to signify something.
Greyjoy
For heaven’s sake, she can be coached on public speaking to make her more effective. Even the best speakers flop sometimes, and Fluke isn’t someone with a history of public speaking.
Geeno
@@VividBlueDotty: Also Robin G., et. al.
I agree – i think she needs a bit of polish on her speaking style, but she’s off to a great start. In a few years, I can see her doing pretty much whatever she wants to politically.
brantl
@Robin G.: Because you seem to be looking for extreme professionalism from a person who was asked to speak because she is, at the very most, semi-pro, and the semi- part of that -pro being only because they wouldn’t leave her alone. Get it?
Robin G.
@brantl: Not really, considering I never said that. I never claimed that she owed me, nor anyone else, the skills suited to a career politician. I did not say her performance reflects poorly on her as a person, nor on the substance of her message, nor on the tastes of anyone who enjoyed the speech. I said exactly one thing: Sandra Fluke gave a speech in a delivery style that I personally found unappealing. That this caused so much freaking out is boggling to me.
Janus Daniels
Rush Limbaugh: Sandra Fluke publicist.
Phoenician in a time of Romans
@Shawn in ShowMe:
It’s AMAZING how much they hate her because she has an aura that makes them feel like the troglodytes they are, from Rush Limbaugh on down the line.
I only knew about Fluke speaking from monitoring the comments from a completely warped wingnut site.
This is what they had to say:
“And I saw, but couldn’t stomach after 3 minutes was Sandra, I want to Fluke on the taxpayer’s dime for free. Nausiating.”
And
“And then there was Sandra Fluck, who probably wanted to fluck every male in the room, including the rapist Bill Clinton. If you really wanted to make Miss Fluck happy, drop free rubbers from the ceiling on her instead of balloons”
So, yeah, we’re talking about twisted individuals who have a sort of sexual loathing for Fluke.
But I’m having fun bookmarking comments quietly as they get more and more rabid closer to Election Day. And when Obama wins, those comments will be hauled out and rubbed in these idiots’ faces.