Harvard-trained historian Richard F. Miller, author of In Words and Deeds: Battle Speeches in History, wrote a guest post for Jules Crittenden’s blog about President Barack Obama’s West Point speech. His assessment: it a “midst of war” speech, and not a good one.

The most important convention these sorts of speeches is first, simplicity of message (e.g., attack, retreat, hold) and next, consistency of message. The latter is key — time and attention spans are short. When a civilian commander, versus a NCO, gives such a speech, multiple audiences have to be accounted for — friends, allies, enemies, fence sitters, etc. This actually puts nuance at a severe discount — clarity is key. Battle speeches are not diplomacy. The same message must be received by all constituencies.| MORE ›

Here is your daily link mess. Don’t know what ‘link mess’ is? Well, scroll down:

Crooks & Liars calls upon its readers to “call Governor Pawlenty to sign the certificate so Al Franken can finally be a senator.” I, on the other hand, ask you not to do so: Franken will eventually be declared the winner and steal Sen. Norm Coleman’s seat, but the longer this can be delayed, the better.| MORE ›

Here is your daily link mess. Don’t know what ‘link mess’ is? Well, scroll down:

My good friend and one of the best conservative members of the blogosphere, Jules Crittenden, analyzes Glenn Greenwald’s interview with “the UN’s torture guy.” Go read Jules’ analysis – he completely destroys Greenwald.

The Caucus blog talks about John Murtha.| MORE ›