Contributors

• Q: How Did This Speech Compare To Past Obama Speeches?

• Q: What Will Be The Most Memorable Lasting Passage Of The Speech?


Terry Edmonds


Wayne Fields


Clarence Jones


Allan Lichtman


Elvin Lim


Martin Medhurst


Ted Sorensen


Jeffrey Tulis


John Woolley

Ted Sorensen, former special counsel and adviser to President John F. Kennedy:

The Obama inaugural address was the best in 10 or 20 years....

I believe any objective measurement would show that the excitement and enthusiasm in Washington today, both before and after the inauguration, was even greater than it was 48 years ago for the Kennedy inauguration of Jan. 20, 1961.

Clarence B. Jones, former lawyer and draft speechwriter for Martin Luther King, Jr. and co-author of "What Would Martin Say?":

My memory of past inaugural speeches had to be refreshed by reference to JFK, Johnson, Clinton, for example. President Obama's words were custom-tailored to address the urgent issues and problems now facing our country. I thought his speech was good, relevant and appropriate for our time. I do not think, of itself, it was such a distinctive speech as an inaugural speech.

Terry Edmonds, former assistant to the president and director of speechwriting for President Bill Clinton:

I was as much moved by the moment as I was by the eloquence and message of the speech. In my view, the president accomplished what he needed to with this speech; namely, balance the hard reality of the unprecedented challenges we currently face with the can-do spirit that is the hallmark of the American experience and the cornerstone of the Obama doctrine. The speech echoed many of President Obama's campaign themes, especially his promise of fundamental change in the way our government works, in its domestic and foreign policies and in his belief that the force of our ideals is more powerful than the strength of our military might. There was none of the customary bellicose language in addressing our enemies. To the contrary, the new president, while warning terrorists that "we will defeat you," also added, "we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist."

I was also struck by his overt invitation to the Muslim world: "We seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect." By allowing his middle name, Hussein, to be used in the oath of office, and by his extension of this verbal olive branch, the new president seemed to be signaling to the Muslim world that their concerns will not be ignored by the new administration.

I think this speech will go down in history as one of the greatest inaugural speeches ever given. Not only because of its poetic language, brevity and Obama's customary confident and impassioned delivery, but also because today, America took a giant step in the perfection of our nation.

John Woolley professor of political science at University of California, Santa Barbara and co-creator of the American Presidency Project:

It strikes me as a mirror to Ronald Reagan's assault on government ("government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem"). Obama says "The question we ask today is not whether or government is too big or too small, but whether it works."...

He also echoes JFK's call to duty and his broad promise to "support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty." Obama says, "We will not apologize for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defense.... Our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken; you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you."

Obama's emphasis on the core values of the American people is an inaugural staple. Most presidents, especially in hard times, have made similar claims, that we need to return to the fundamental principles on which the nation is founded.

Jeffrey Tulis, associate professor of government at the University of Texas and author of "The Rhetorical Presidency":

Obama's speech strikes me as a more self-conscious and coherent argument than most 20th-century inaugurals. In this speech, Obama defines and models his understanding of post-partisan politics. By this he means a post-ideological politics, as he discards the conventional arguments regarding the size of government, the status of markets and the trade-offs between national security and rights.

In each of those arenas he suggest that we need to frame our arguments differently, more pragmatically. This series of arguments is nested in a larger call for civic renewal and for civility. The whole speech models the kind of politics that Obama envisions. It is striking that Obama so skillfully combines civility and respect with a very sharp critique of the outgoing administration. Thus, politics can never really be post-partisan, even if it can be post-ideological.

Wayne Fields, professor of English at Washington University in St. Louis and author of "Union of Words: A History of Presidential Eloquence":

The speech certainly echoed much of the content, the reasoning, of FDR's first inaugural address, stressing the word "common" and the idea of a community that, while in crisis, remains whole and is, itself, that which gives the deepest pleasure and the profoundest source of security; it will provide the foundation for our recovery. It is a speech about the opportunity the present crisis provides to affirm our deepest values and our strongest commitments. In this it resembles Kennedy's inaugural but without the trumpet call and the sense that we need to be awakened.

Allan Lichtman, professor of history at American University:

Unlike memorable inaugural addresses such as Lincoln's first inaugural, Roosevelt's first inaugural, Kennedy's inaugural and Reagan's first inaugural, this speech did not have any truly memorable lines that we will be quoted decades from today. It was also a very somber speech, an historical sermon addressed to our deep problems rather than a rallying speech. Perhaps more than any recent address Obama sought explicitly to put his presidency in historical context, drawing heavily upon the founders and the founding principles of the republic. He even warned, just as Washington once did, of the dangers of "faction," a word rarely used in contemporary politics....

But the speech was adequate to the occasion even if it will not pass into the cosmos of great American addresses.

Martin Medhurst, professor of rhetoric and communication at Baylor University and co-creator of PresidentialRhetoric.com:

This was a good, but not great inaugural address. The ceremony itself and the vista of 2 million onlookers will be what people most remember about this day. Obama drew inspiration from three past inaugural addresses -- FDR's first, in 1933; JFK's in 1961; and Ronald Reagan's in 1981. There were numerous rhetorical echoes to all three of these speeches:

"A nagging fear that America's decline is inevitable" -- Reagan's first

"They will not be met easily or in a short span of time. But know this, America -- they will be met." -- Reagan's first

"The state of the economy calls for action, bold and swift, and we will act." -- FDR's first

"All this we can do. And all this we will do." -- JFK's inaugural address

"To extend opportunity to every willing heart" -- echoes many George W. Bush speeches, perhaps unintentionally

"Those ideals still light the world." -- JFK's inaugural

"What is demanded then is a return to these truths." -- FDR's first

I was surprised that there were so few echoes of Lincoln and King in the speech.

Elvin Lim, assistant professor of government at Wesleyan University and author of "The Anti-Intellectual Presidency: The Decline of Presidential Rhetoric from George Washington to George W. Bush":

Like all inaugurals, President Obama's inaugural speech was a rehearsal of the nation's civil religion and a rededication of our national covenant; it was the necessary and culminating act of his investiture as head of state.

But aside from fealty to inaugural protocol, President Obama's inaugural speech made a sharper break from the past administration than has been the case in inaugural tradition. He spoke of the triumph of "hope over fear" -- a reference to the tactics he perceived the Republicans used in previous elections. He rejected "worn-out dogmas" and "stale political arguments," likely a jab at neoconservatism and immoderate faith in the free market. He rejected the artificial choice between "our safety and our ideals," an indictment of waterboarding and Guantanamo Bay.... He was trying to signal as sharp a break with the past as inaugural protocol would allow.... President Obama is aiming for transformation, not transition.

Paul Stob, co-creator of PresidentialRhetoric.com:

Many expected to hear Lincoln's voice show up in Obama's speech. But there seems to be more Kennedy and Roosevelt than Lincoln. When Obama addresses different international audiences -- speaking "to the Muslim world," "to those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict," "to those who cling to power through corruption" -- one hears Kennedy speak "to those old allies," "to those new states," and "to those people in the huts and villages of half the globe."

One also hears echoes of Roosevelt when Obama speaks of an American work ethic, a common effort and a national character. When Obama says that "the state of the economy calls for action, bold and swift," one hears Roosevelt's insistence that "this nation asks for action, and action now." Like Roosevelt, Obama hopes to tap into the spiritual resources of the American people to meet the current situation.

Blogs