President Barack Obama’s strong propensity to stutter and mumble his way through unscripted debates, speeches, and announcements is both bothersome and striking. Now, for those who think highly of the president’s abilities and acumen, such pauses and mumbles are often seen as the signs of a cautious genius. For myself, it sounds like a man who hasn’t much to say without a teleprompter. Wednesday night’s debate was yet another moment of such stuttering and stumbling. So much so, that it didn’t take long for parody videos to arrive on the scene featuring nothing but the condensed stammering of the President himself. Of course, no one is perfect - we all stumble and struggle at times when speaking our mind; however, the Obama administration continues to produce much more than the occasional communicative mishap. Let the reader know that I do not wish to express cruelty in this article, instead, I would suggest that for a man to be the leader of the free world, he ought to have a measure of unscripted clarity and articulation that renders genuine cogency. A man who has real and honest answers will speak directly, succinctly, and forthrightly; but a man who twists and contorts reality will often stammer through his oratory (unless it is pre-fabricated and scrolling on a screen before him). I would suggest that such muttering is indicative of manipulation more than anything else. Should the reader desire further proof of this matter, then all one has to do is review every interview and statement given out from the Obama administration concerning the recent Benghazi debacle, after which time it can be declared: Quod Erat Demonstrandum.
The Obama administration is filled with such stumbling and stammering. In the earliest years of Obama’s White House, I wrote about this same problem when the disgraced nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan was released without a viable explanation to the public (The Audacity of Communication). When the White House was pressed for an explanation, Robert Gibbs was there to set matters “straight”:
Q (Reporter): Is the President concerned that Pakistani nuclear scientist A.Q. Khan will be a proliferation risk, now that he’s been released from house arrest? And will he renew the US request for him to be interviewed by US intelligence?
A (Robert Gibbs): Uh, obviously we’ve seen the reports of the release, but have not received, uh, have yet to receive official word, uh, from the government. Uh. Obviously this President has made clear, uh, many times, the great concern he has for nuclear proliferation, uh, and, uh, as we hear from the government about, uh, these reports, uh, obviously, uh, the President, uh, and this government want assurances that, uh, that Dr. Khan is not involved or engaged in, uh, any of the activity, uh, uh, that resulted in, uh, in, in his house arrest earlier.
After hearing Gibbs’ response, I had to replay it in order to try to make sense of his “answer.” Perhaps it was out of morbid curiosity, but I wanted to see if such a jumbled collection of words could even be organized into a diagrammatical construct – thus:
I could barely find enough grammatical material to build such a maze, but there it is in all its glory: another monument to the confused and contorted message of our nation’s leadership. When men have real answers, their words will be clear and forthright, thus rendering genuine cogency in their communication. On the other hand…
…“a fool speaks nonsense.” (Isaiah 32:6).
When politicians stammer, or merely repeat non-answers, it is often indicative of a deeper problem. Our nation is in great need of real truth, honesty, clarity, and justice. May the Lord have mercy upon our land in our great time of need.