Someone tell me if this is factually incorrect

[Guest iramets]

I didn't say it wasn't a nice story. It is. But he has no business giving a speech that is intended to educate, to inspire, to make graduates ponder. He simply isn't equipped, as I felt he wouldn't be before Saturday's little talk and much more so after hearing what he had to say. When some CPFers informed me that such speeches uniformly suck anyway and can I supply examples of good commencement speeches, I gave some good examples and can give them hundreds more.

By all means, feel good about Willie's accomplishments. Just don't ask me to sit through his fumbling, bumbling, mumbling accounts of them, nor any kid of mine or any other human being for whom I have a shred of sympathy or respect.

[Benjamin Grimm]

It was a nine minute speech.

If he had droned on for an hour and a half, then yes, it would probably have been a human rights violation or something like that.

But at nine minutes, it couldn't have been that unendurable. Anyone who makes it through four years of college has learned to sit through much longer periods of boredom.

[Centerfield]

iramets wrote: “It makes no difference what job you may have years from now: never give up,” Randolph said. “If I had given up, I would not be at Shea Stadium. If I had listened to the critics along the way, who knows where I might have wound up? I went on 11 managerial job interviews and was rejected on each one of them and it was their loss. The excuses were different, but the message was the same: ‘No job for Willie Randolph.’ ” Did Randolph not turn down the Cincinnati job that was offered to him because he wanted more money? How is that being 'rejected"? He may have been within to ask for more money, but isnt that him rejecting Cincy, not they him?

If Willie had listed his compensation requirements up front, than an offer coming in below that could constitute a rejection. Alternatively, if Willie had countered Cincy's offer and Cincy declined, that could also be seen as a rejection. So technically, Willie might be speaking the truth here.

Of course, I realize that the impression meant to be conveyed by that statement is that Willie went on 11 interviews and that none resulted in a job offer, which, if the Cincy report is true, is not accurate. But I think this would fall under "spinning" the truth (conveying technically true statements in a misleading manner) rather than re-writing history (making up things altogether). One can see that he is editorializing in his next sentence regarding "excuses". Any discerning listener would realize that sometimes, there are no excuses, there are just reasons. And some clubs might have passed on Willie because they felt he was not qualified for valid and legitimate reasons.

But are graduations speeches meant to be held to such a level of scrutiny? Aren't generalizations and embellishments of truth allowed in speeches to convey a positive message? If we get technical, we can shoot down Willie's entire message of hard work and persistence. Sometimes it leads to great things. Other times, it results in fruitless chases of unattainable goals and wasting of valuable time that could have been spent on more modest, more attainable ventures.

Even Brody says in his address that "focus, determination, and hard work is what makes all the difference." That's not technically true either. Sometimes the difference is having a rich dad who knows everybody and can make things happen for you even though you're a moron. Sometimes all the focus and determination won't make a lick of difference if your competitor is willing to blow the boss after-hours.

I fully expect Willie's speech to suck. Most graduation speeches suck and Willie never struck me as very articulate anyway. But I don't think it sucked any more than regular sucky graduation speeches.

[Guest iramets]

Centerfield wrote: If Willie had listed his compensation requirements up front, than an offer coming in below that could constitute a rejection. Alternatively, if Willie had countered Cincy's offer and Cincy declined, that could also be seen as a rejection. So technically, Willie might be speaking the truth here. Of course, I realize that the impression meant to be conveyed by that statement is that Willie went on 11 interviews and that none resulted in a job offer, which, if the Cincy report is true, is not accurate. But I think this would fall under "spinning" the truth (conveying technically true statements in a misleading manner) rather than re-writing history (making up things altogether). One can see that he is editorializing in his next sentence regarding "excuses". Any discerning listener would realize that sometimes, there are no excuses, there are just reasons. And some clubs might have passed on Willie because they felt he was not qualified for valid and legitimate reasons. But are graduations speeches meant to be held to such a level of scrutiny? Aren't generalizations and embellishments of truth allowed in speeches to convey a positive message? If we get technical, we can shoot down Willie's entire message of hard work and persistence. Sometimes it leads to great things. Other times, it results in fruitless chases of unattainable goals and wasting of valuable time that could have been spent on more modest, more attainable ventures. Even Brody says in his address that "focus, determination, and hard work is what makes all the difference." That's not technically true either. Sometimes the difference is having a rich dad who knows everybody and can make things happen for you even though you're a moron. Sometimes all the focus and determination won't make a lick of difference if your competitor is willing to blow the boss after-hours. I fully expect Willie's speech to suck. Most graduation speeches suck and Willie never struck me as very articulate anyway. But I don't think it sucked any more than regular sucky graduation speeches.

It did. Because some commencement addresses are brilliant, inspiring, tear-producing, and some are just okay. Willie's was less than okay. He didn't say anything criminal, immoral, or dangerous, but basically that's because he didn't say much of anything. When you're not facing hostile questioning, which is Willie's main excuse for why he spins shit to Mike and Chris or Wally Matthews or whomever, and you have two weeks to work on it, with Jay Horwitz to help you out, I kinda think you shouldn't just come close to approximating the truth in nine minutes of blather. But people willing to make excuses for Willie, people willing to bend over double-backwards to spin reasons why his speech doesn't technically qualify as godawful piffle that the cat spews out every day, well, I have no risposte other than De gustibus non disputandum, which translates into YMMV.

[Guest martin]

iramets wrote: Just don't ask me to sit through his fumbling, bumbling, mumbling accounts of them

if somebody forces you to sit through a speech of his, let me know and i will punch that person in the stomach.

[Guest iramets]

Well, if I were at Fordham's commencement, I wouldn't really have that much choice, would I? Those poor kids deserved a real Commencement speaker is my point.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I think if I were in the audience I'd be more pleased by the fact that it only ran nine minutes than I would be annoyed by whatever it lacked of quality content.

I don't remember a thing that Mario Cuomo said when I graduated, and I tried to listen and pay attention, because at that point (1985) he still was a possible future president.

[Guest Johnny Dickshot]

Recently dead journalist Ed Bradley spoke at my graduation. I remember his central message -- "history is impoirtant" but not another word.

If the kids graduating were anything like me they were thrilled just to be there.

[Willets Point]

George Bush spoke at my graduation. He basically said "kinder, gentler" nation, "1000 points of light," and told a joke about long speeches. I was appreciative that his speech was short.

[nymr83]

which Bush?
Everyone hates long speeches, I was glad mine was short, the rain probably helped with that (it was outside in a light rain.)

[Guest Edgy DC]

I assume Bush I, who used ""kinder, gentler nation" and "1000 points of light" as cornerstone themes of his campaign. If he said "compassionate conservative" and "whiff of freedom," then I'd guess Bushie II.