Actually, Obama is NOT "very eloquent" when he tries to speak
Posted By: extemporaneously. on 2009-03-27
In Reply to: No, Obama is very eloquent. - Thank you.
Lots of people have noticed this and commented on it. He becomes quite ordinary, hesitant, and as some have said, "professorial".
I'm sure you must have too...or you're simply too bedazzled by pixie dust to notice that Obama is really quite ordinary.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Joint Chiefs Chairman "Very Positive" After Meeting with Obama
Joint Chiefs Chairman 'Very Positive' After Meeting With Obama
-
By Karen DeYoung
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, November 30, 2008; A01
Adm. Michael Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, went unarmed into his first meeting with the new commander in chief -- no aides, no PowerPoint presentation, no briefing books. Summoned nine days ago to President-elect Barack Obama's Chicago transition office, Mullen showed up with just a pad, a pen and a desire to take the measure of his incoming boss.
There was little talk of exiting Iraq or beefing up the U.S. force in Afghanistan; the one-on-one, 45-minute conversation ranged from the personal to the philosophical. Mullen came away with what he wanted: a view of the next president as a non-ideological pragmatist who was willing to both listen and lead. After the meeting, the chairman "felt very good, very positive," according to Mullen spokesman Capt. John Kirby.
As Obama prepares to announce his national security team tomorrow, he faces a military that has long mistrusted Democrats and is particularly wary of a young, intellectual leader with no experience in uniform, who once called Iraq a "dumb" war. Military leaders have all heard his pledge to withdraw most combat forces from Iraq within 16 months -- sooner than commanders on the ground have recommended -- and his implied criticism of the Afghanistan war effort during the Bush administration.
But so far, Obama appears to be going out of his way to reassure them that he will do nothing rash and will seek their advice, even while making clear that he may not always take it. He has demonstrated an ability to speak the lingo, talk about "mission plans" and "tasking," and to differentiate between strategy and tactics, a distinction Republican nominee John McCain accused him of misunderstanding during the campaign.
Obama has been careful to separate his criticism of Bush policy from his praise of the military's valor and performance, while Michelle Obama's public expressions of concern for military families have gone over well. But most important, according to several senior officers and civilian Pentagon officials who would speak about their incoming leader only on the condition of anonymity, is the expectation of renewed respect for the chain of command and greater realism about U.S. military goals and capabilities, which many found lacking during the Bush years.
"Open and serious debate versus ideological certitude will be a great relief to the military leaders," said retired Maj. Gen. William L. Nash of the Council on Foreign Relations. Senior officers are aware that few in their ranks voiced misgivings over the Iraq war, but they counter that they were not encouraged to do so by the Bush White House or the Pentagon under Donald H. Rumsfeld.
"The joke was that when you leave a meeting, everybody is supposed to drink the Kool-Aid," Nash said. "In the Bush administration, you had to drink the Kool-Aid before you got to go to the meeting."
Obama's expected retention of Robert M. Gates as defense secretary and expected appointment of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton as secretary of state and retired Marine Gen. James L. Jones as national security adviser have been greeted with relief at the Pentagon.
Clinton is respected at the Pentagon and is considered a defense moderate, at times bordering on hawkish. Through her membership on the Senate Armed Services Committee -- sought early in her congressional career to add gravitas to her presidential aspirations -- she has developed close ties with senior military figures.
Some in the military are suspicious of "flagpole" officers such as Jones, whose assignments included Supreme Allied Commander at NATO, Marine commandant and other headquarters service, and who grew up in France and is a graduate of Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service. But Jones also saw combat in Vietnam and served in Bosnia.
"His reputation is pretty good," one Pentagon official said. "He's savvy about Washington, worked the Hill," and at a lean 6-foot-4, the former Georgetown basketball player "looks great in a suit."
Although Jones occasionally and privately briefed candidate Obama on foreign policy matters -- on Afghanistan, in particular, as did current deputy NATO commander Lt. Gen. Karl Eikenberry -- he is not considered an intimate of the president-elect.
But as Obama's closest national security adviser, or at least the one who will spend the most time with him, Jones is expected to follow the pattern of two military predecessors in the job, Brent Scowcroft and Colin L. Powell, who injected order and discipline to a National Security Council full of strong personalities with independent power bases.
Although exit polls did not break out active-duty voters, it is virtually certain that McCain won the military vote.
In an October survey by the Military Times, nearly 70 percent of more than 4,000 officers and enlisted respondents said they favored McCain, while about 23 percent preferred Obama. Only African American service members gave Obama a majority.
In exit polls, those who said they had "ever served in the U.S. military" made up 15 percent of voters and broke 54 percent for McCain to 44 percent for Obama. "As a culture, we are more conservative and Republican," a senior officer said.
Obama has said he will meet with the chairman of the Joint Chiefs as well as the service chiefs during his first week in office. At the top of his agenda for that meeting will be what he has called the military's "new mission" of planning the 16-month withdrawal timeline for Iraq. Senior officers have publicly grumbled about the risk involved.
"Moving forward in a measured way, tied to conditions as they continue to evolve, over time, is important," Mullen said at a media briefing four days before his Nov. 21 meeting with Obama. "I'm certainly aware of what has been said" prior to the election, he said.
The last Democratic president, Bill Clinton, clashed with the chiefs during his first sit-down with them when they opposed his campaign pledge to end the ban on gays in the military. The chiefs, some of whom held the commander in chief in thinly veiled contempt as a supposed Vietnam draft dodger, won the battle, and Clinton spent much of his two terms seen as an adversary.
But Mullen came away from the Chicago talk reassured that Obama will engage in a discussion with them, balancing risks and "asking tough questions . . . but not in a combative, finger-pointing way," one official said.
The president-elect's invitation to Mullen, whom Obama previously had met only in passing on Capitol Hill and whose first two-year term as chairman does not expire until the end of September, was seen as an attempt to establish a relationship and avoid early conflict. While some Pentagon officials believe an Iraq withdrawal order could become Obama's equivalent of the Clinton controversy over gays, several senior Defense Department sources said that Gates, Mullen and Gen. David H. Petraeus, head of the military's Central Command, are untroubled by the 16-month plan and feel it can be accomplished with a month or two of wiggle room.
These sources noted that Obama himself has said he would not be "careless" about withdrawal and would retain a "residual" force of unspecified size to fight terrorists and protect U.S. diplomats and civilians. The officer most concerned about untimely withdrawal, sources said, is the Iraq commander, Gen. Ray Odierno.
Even as the Iraq war continues, defense officials are far more worried about Afghanistan, where they see policy drift and an unfocused mission. With strategy reviews now being completed at the White House and by the chairman's office, an internal Pentagon debate is well underway over whether goals should be lowered.
Although Gen. David McKiernan, the U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, has requested four more U.S. combat brigades, some Pentagon strategists believe a smaller presence of Special Forces and trainers for Afghan forces -- and more attention to Pakistan -- is advisable.
Bush's ideological objective of a modern Afghan democracy, several officials said, is unattainable with current U.S. resources, and there is optimism that Obama will have a more realistic view.
A number of senior officers also look with favor on Obama's call for talks with Iran over Iraq and Afghanistan, separating those issues from U.S. demands over Tehran's nuclear program.
One of the biggest long-term military issues on Obama's plate will be the defense budget, currently topping 4.3 percent of gross domestic product once war expenditures are included.
Obama has said he will increase the size of the Army and the Marine Corps, finding savings in the Iraq drawdown and in new scrutiny of spending, including on contractors, weapons programs and missile defense.
"They know the money is coming down," a Pentagon official said of the uniformed services, and many welcome increased discipline.
But it's neither the military's nature nor its role to volunteer the cuts, the official said. "It's for Congress and the administration to say 'Stop it.' "
Polling analyst Jennifer Agiesta and research Editor Alice Crites contributed to this report.
No, Obama is very eloquent.
.
So, if you buy this "very small relationship with Acorn in 1982" ....sm
ergo, from Obama's own mouth: "My executive experience is from being a community organizer (with Acorn)" --
Now, that sounds to me, from your post, that he was involved with a group called "Project Vote" --
Let's connect the dots here.....kinda sorta like the scandal hitting the fans lately with all the voter registration fraud that Acorn's involved with now, doncha think?
Sounds like what Obama was doing, way back in 1982?
Nice executive experience.
Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy.....like I'm going to be sick again.....
Obama should never speak without a script.Anyone
nm
Have NEVER heard Obama speak to this
++
and Obama DOESN'T mis-speak?-dont go there
Don't go there unless you are ready to hear it back. Obama thinks there are at least "57" states and talks of when the "bomb was dropped on Pearl Harbor". He is also the king of "uhhh" and "ummmm". He reads a teleprompter well. Otherwise, he makes many mistakes when speaking.
i could have been a bit more eloquent...
LOL i was just exasperated at all the arguing. Everyone has their own opinion and it is definitely okay to disagree and have the discussions, but I think when people start acting like their side has NEVER done anything is just ridiculous. Give Obama a break! what? like you EVER gave Bush a break! And i dont really care about either of them you know. I just can't stand the hypocrisy sometimes. IT goes for the sex scandals too. A republican does it they are the WORST because of their "family values". WHAT? Well what happened to the "tolerance" of the democrats?
it's CRAZY!!! that's why i dont spend much time over here it works me up too much and i want to be happy so i go chat on the gab board :)
That was a very eloquent post. It very clearly
described your angst about voting, and it's what lots of other people feel. It's true, no candidate is perfect, no platform will save the world, or even the country.
Whatever happens, happens, I guess. I only have one vote, and I intend to use it, but in the end the REAL truth is that for all of us regular everyday Joes and Janes, it really won't matter that much who wins...
In the end, we're still totally ON OUR OWN.
There is nothing whatsoever eloquent
You 2 sound like a couple of old bitties. Obama supporters are not a cult. This is what enthusiastic joyful support of a president looks like. Most of us are thanking our lucky stars that the shrub did not manage to snuff that out all together.
I agree with one of the posters below. If you keep on trying to turn hope and change into curse words, you deserve all the misery you apparently are wallowing in and will only succeed in marginalizing yourselves even further. There is nothing you can say or do to stop this train. Time to suck it up and get on with your lives, if you can even remember what that means beyond your uglier than ugly 24/7/365 witch hunt.
Very beautiful and eloquent
What a beautiful picture.
That was eloquent and I am also PROUD !!! Gobama!
everyone else is sour grapes!
Talk about eloquent...and RIGHT, which are not always the same thing.
That guy has a political future in England, methinks.
One of the most eloquent posts to date! I hope you
everywhere you can, and not the lies that the 'pubs have been throwing around for far too long. The last 8 years have erased any and all hope that I will:
1 - Be able to retire.
2 - Be able to own a home.
3 - Be able to continue to fund my savings or IRA instead of siphoning from them.
4 - Be able to feel any sense of security whatsoever.
5 - Be able to travel any further than the local K-Mart two towns away, and be able to afford much once I get there.
McCain gave an eloquent speech
I felt sad watching his speech. You could tell it is a big dissappointment for him and all conservatives.
His speech was eloquent and sincere.
McCain lost, gave an eloquent
speech and still got to get that last "jab" in.
It is a sad day for a lot of us. Obama won - congratulations. I know his fans are happy. So McCain does not speak as eloquently as Obama. I wouldn't think he would as Obama is a lawyer. But then again I was not voting for someone because of their speaking ability. I was voting for their issues they support.
Obama had none of them (or "it"). Obama's plans are bad for the country, but so many people fell under his spell with his speaking ability.
Tis a sad day for our country when someone is voted first because of their color and second the way they speak and how he convincingly tells you he's going to give all the poor and low income people stuff for free.
Did anyone notice his message in his speech tonight. He's already planting the idea that he's not going to fulfill all the promises he made during his campaign. So time will tell as to when he starts breaking all the promises.
She is a nice eloquent lady....until she starts...
with the "rabid Republicans" type comments. Not necessary to take potshots to impart information. Fact is, I like GP. We are from the same part of the country and have a lot in common, believe it or not.
As to Obama...look. I had concerns about him during the campaign. Those did not just disappear *poof* when he won the election. I still have concerns. I don't trust him. His first choice for his administration did not make any strides toward trust, in fact, made me even more concerned. I asked if the real Barack Obama would step up, and he has. Maybe the next choices will be better. Time will tell.
Eloquent post. Many valid reasons why I hope
Some of the sweetest and most devoted couples I know are same-sex. They pay taxes, are all highly educated and make my community a better place. They adore their children, their pets, their friends. To think they're denied the simple right of marriage, is heartbreaking.
Interestingly, I only have only one couple of friends who are married, who are same RACE. All the rest are black & white, white & Asian, Asian & Latino, Filippino and black, etc. I remember back when I was a teen, my parents actually didn't want me hanging out with a certain friend because her parents were a mixed-race couple. They thought it was 'scandalous'.
Well, that has all changed, and you better believe that every vote I cast will hopefully work towards bringing about equality in marriage for ALL couples.
Well I can only speak on what I saw.
I didn't see a post about Nan being old and to die in hell, so pardon me on that.
And I didn't say that you had left before. Reread the post. I was walking about Nan having left before basically, and said she wasn't coming back.
Odd, that you should speak for gt SM
One might think she doesn't have a voice of her own. Or one might think other things.
Sure, but I can't speak for the others. nm
.
So now you speak for God. Wow, gt. sm
You are more of an elitist pig than I thought possible. But I mean that in a good way. Am I fried now?
So now you speak for God.
That was only one of the sites. And God forbid people are brought to Christ.
SO WHAT??!! WHERE DOES IT SAY SHE CAN'T SPEAK?!
Nobody told her she doesn't have the right to speak.
That's quite a stretch even for YOU, MT. 
as we speak
POTUS is lamenting the state of government -- of course it is all the fault of Congress. He tries and tries but "they" prevent any movement. Poor chimpie.
I have a right to speak
out about the incompetency of the supposed "leader" of the free world. Each episode of ignorance, distortion of facts, and deception needs to be brought into the light and examined repeatedly. It is cumulative. I brush aside the label of "bush bashing" as another neocon attempt to frame the issue. I will continue to post as I wish and to refuse to engage in discussion with anyone whose purpose is simply to gain attention, even if negative. I do feel compassion for those so abused and ignored throughout life that they will take any acknowledgement as life-affirming, but I do not take it upon myself to feed their insatiable desire to be noticed. I am encouraged by the split in the repub party into small groups of supporters, but the dems have got this pres election in the bag anyway not only due to their fresh, positive approach but the self-destruction of the repubs by their own arrogance and corruption.
I can only speak to myself....
but I pray concerning basically every decision I make. Not because I think the decision is God's will, but that whatever His will will be done. I saw the same clip (I think) and I think that is what Palin meant, not that the pipeline itself was specifically God's will, but to pray for the success of the venture, ask that it go well, but in the end, God's will be done. God is very real to us and praying is just communicating with him. Talking to him. It is a relationship, like with a dear friend. That is the best short description I can give. This is from my experience only. Others may not have the same experience.
speak for yourself
x
Speak for yourself
I have briefly (mercifully) lived in an fabulous neighborhood consisting of a bunch of old guys who only cared about golf and their wives who had faces stretched back to their spine and stapled. It was really very boring. Give me the rich vibrancy of a middle-class neighborhood any day. Just my opinion!
did he ever speak out against it at all? nm
x
sorry to say, he is on Fox as we speak
with all their promises, which sound just great, but who is going to pay for all these great promises?
Perhaps you would like to speak to.....sm
letters that are being sent to pastors of churches in our area (and maybe nationwide, I haven't researched it yet) that tells them if they mention anything political in the pulpit, then their church will lose its tax-exempt status. While I don't go for politics in the pulpit, I also don't go for the government telling pastors what they can and cannot preach about.
It would seem to me that one side is just as guilty of "crossing party lines" as the other.
Once again, you know not what you speak.....
Indonesian lawyer DOES give the parent the right to renounce the child's citizenship to another country. The U.S. does happen to recognize this with Indonesia, so it was done and the papers were there to prove it. Only when Obama turns of age could he RENOUNCE his citizenship with Indonesia, which he has not done.
The attorney I speak of is in New York and has been doing this for over 30 years. He deals with foreign adoptions every day and each country has its own red tape and laws. Indonesia is one he has spoken of many times with regards to Obama and those attorneys who have dealt one-on-one with Indonesian law know this.
You seem to belive all countries recognize the United States.....they don't. BTW, during the time Obama was in Indonesia and adopted by his stepfather, the laws were clear that no one could go to school in Indonesia unless they were an Indonesian citizen, i.e., Obama.
And, yes, it does matter what Indonesian law says because Obama is Indonesian by adoption. He has NO papers proving his U.S. citizenship in the first place but he does have papers proving INdonesian citizenship, of which he has not renounced as of today.
Matter of fact, the only papers he has proving ANY citizenship is that of Indonesia and Kenya, when his father was alive.
Sorry to disappoint ya......
Maybe you should just speak for yourself...(sm)
instead of assuming that everyone is like you.
The whole 9/11 is being rewritten even as we speak. SM
A lot of new information coming out and guess what!!!! It does not point out, as you and others have said ont his board before, that Bush had anything to do with it. I am not sure what you hissy fit throwers are gonna do about that. By the way, I think this post serves as a classic example of what is wrong with the Democratic party of today. Anti-Americanism in its pure form. Michael Moore would be so PROUD of you!
You do not speak the truth, either
The truth is different for different folks. What about all the service men and women who 100 percent support the anti-war protests? Do they DARE to speak?
You may not realize it but there are MANY ex-military and current military who DO NOT SUPPORT THIS WAR!!! You need to look beyond what you only want to see.
And if being anti-American means to oppose what is morally wrong, well....I will say no more.
Please do not claim that you support our troops. That is not the truth either. You support the current administration's war/invasion plan, but not the troops.
You speak to an Army mom this way. Says a lot about you. nm
Don't tell her she doesn't have a right to speak
If Cindy Sheehan had the right to spew her feelings Army Mom has that right too. Works both ways as bad as you HATE it...
They told her she did not have a right to speak and a lot of other
pretty awful things as well, Democrat. I am sorry you are so blinded by the hatred that was shown to this poster. Besides, she never said she spoke for everyone.
Army mom, you don't speak for all.
You have a right to voice your opinion and support whom you will. You do not have any more right than the next person to speak for all the troops. At the very moment you having your how DARE you moment, you yourself are attempting to speak for all of them. I know for a fact you are wrong in doing this because I read military message boards frequently and there is no one view represented on them. In fact the majority at this time are anti-Bush and anti-Iraq war. If you don't believe me go and read them yourself.
Isn't it time you stopped lecturing others for wanting to bring the military home from a mission they can't possibly win by any measure of the word and put your outrage to work where it will actually save lives? They can't win. I'm sorry. They could fight until 2020 and all they will do is die. They are not accomplishing anything. It is not their fault! It was the mission itself that was a losing proposition from the start and for that they can't be blamed, they are just doing their jobs as they were trained to do and for that we admire them. But they can't win. There is nothing TO win. There isn't any shame in that. We have bad leaders who did no planning, a bunch of war-avoiding chickenhawks. They are the ones you should be outraged against.
And don't hiss at me - I'm a veteran myself and I know a military snow-job when I see one. As our military deaths double, so does Halliburton stock. Our leaders and their rich friends have no reason to stop the killing and they have every reason to continue it. Our sons and daughters are the pawns in their money-making schemes and don't you think they know it? Most of them do. That doesn't stop them from performing their missions and it doesn't make them cowards simply because they see the game plan for what it is. They CAN'T protest the war. They are not in a position to do so. They rely on us to do it for them. Only we can bring them out of the hell hole. Our leaders are not going to do it unless we demand they do it in a unified voice they can't ignore. Demanding that the troops stay IN Iraq for an undefined mission without end in a war against a vague principle while war profiteers grow rich on their blood doesn't make any sense. THAT is what Cindy Sheehan is saying- not that America isn't worth fighting for like Sean Hannity loves to vomit every other sentence to the gullible and Viet Nam-shellshocked.
THE MISSION IS UNWINNABLE. It's the mission that is not worthwhile, not the troops themselves. Why waste more lives for no purpose? Sunnis want to kill Shiites and you care - why? They have been at it for 700 years or so. We won't change that whether we leave today or five years from now. Wake up. Look at it realistically. Every day we remain Cheney's friends get richer and more mothers lose their loved ones. Come on. Why do you support that? Why would you support the agenda of chickenhawk cowards with all its stinking profiteering undertones more than you support your family member's chance to live life? And why are you angry at those who want to save your son or daughter's life, at those who feel his chance at life is far more important than any contractor's bottom line or egotistical leader's plan to strut on a stage of war glory? Because that really makes no sense. I'm a mother too. I know you want your soldier home safe in one piece regardless of his political views. So why do you fight so hard against those who want exactly the same thing?
Do you always speak of yourself in the third person? sm
I see no difference in your writing style. Same old stuff.
I was presuming to speak for those ...
Only I know who was included in we and the we I refer to are well aware of who they are are are fine with being included in we. And, sigh...it really does not matter to me if my post does not make sense to you, or if in reading the explanation to you it remains obtuse. Sighhhhhhh.
I can't speak for Lydia. sm
but I don't think it bothers us as much as it disturbs us. I don't know how old you were during Vietnam. I was in college when my husband went to war. My father had just come home. I had rebeled in my late teenage years and decided I most decidedly was not a Republican. I don't know why, just a transition I suppose. Anyway, I saw first hand the entire face of America change in Vietnam. I was confronted with the war protesters and the slogans and the chants and the posters daily. I grew to dislike it. I saw what it was doing and I moved away from it. At some point, I realized, it was time to grow up and construct a profit-and-loss statement of my commitments and their consequences. Some very high profile names had their awakening and taking stock moment at that time and they moved away from the left, as well. I was never a leftist. I do believe I was a true Democrat though, at least for a time. The leftists drove me out. They have taken over the Democratic party and transformed it into something men like Zell Miller no longer recognize. It's too bad. There was a time it was a party to be proud of.
Speak for you own baby...
zzzzzzzzzzzz
You can't speak for all of us. As a woman,
nm
I can't speak for "pubs" ....I'm not one....
and I do have a sense of humor. But attacking someone personally and making them the butt of pretty tasteless jokes is not funny to me. Not funny about Obama, not funny about Biden, not funny about Michelle Obama, not funny about Cindy McCain...not funny about Sarah Palin. You guys go ballistic if someone says ANYthing about Obama. And just yuck it up tearing Sarah Palin to pieces. That goes way past "a sense of humor."
Maybe you'd better speak slower
It's okay for you to talk down to me and insult my intelligence, but it bothers you if I come back with a similar response. I didn't take kindly to your smart-aleck reply. If you want to disagree fine, but don't insult someone else and not expect the same treatment back in return.
Speak of Sam, what happened to her? nm
x
I can't speak for Chele
but I am not against the poor. I am against keeping me down until the poor catch up. I would probably be considered low income as my husband and I brought in $24,000 last year between the both of us. But you know what? I have taken a second job this year, and he finished his degree and graduated. We are WORKING towards bettering ourselves. Not waiting on someone to come by and say "hey, here's a check for being poor."
Most people that are poor are so because of what they have or haven't done. Yes, there are some people who legitimately have bad luck and can't ever get out of the hole. But more often than not, it's the bad choices they made, the drugs they did, the school they dropped out of, etc. Most "poor people" are able-bodied individuals who could go get a job and start to work their way up out of the hole. But they give up, pop out ten babies, and let the government take care of them. I mean it's a sweet deal isn't it?
What makes me sick is driving by the project 8 low income housing in my area and seeing these folks who only pay $60 a month in rent yet they have BMWs and Yukons and all these nice brand new vehicles parked out front.
But, by all means, please lets continue to "take care" of them.
Yes, those people who are rich by illegal means should be taken down. But those who have worked their butts off to get to the top are not evil. They shouldn't be punished for achieving what you couldn't. More than likely you could if you wanted to.
Yes, I am an MT. I enjoy this job, but I want to do something more with my life. Therefore I will work two jobs and take classes online until I can get my degree. Is it going to suck for awhile? Oh yeah. But you know what? In the end, when I have that degree, and I'm one of those comfortable "rich" people you hate so much, I'll be able to look back and know that I got there on my own. I didn't climb up anyone's back or grab onto their coattails to get there.
No one is against the poor. Those who are legitimately in the dumps and need a hand should get it. But only to get on their feet. Then they need to get out and work just like the rest of us!
STOP THE HANDOUTS!
I assume you speak for yourself
I care about it. Speak for yourself, not others
But I guess you think that's how this country should run.
Yes, I saw him speak today as well
nm
|
