Lipstick and Public Speaking

I reached a point in my career when it became necessary to cross over from my function as a Managing Engineer, to a sales type responsible for introducing a new product line to the sales folks who were manufacturers representatives. The task was a bit daunting. The company spent millions on these meeting held every two years, and the sales reps had many more years of experience with the company than I had.

The meetings were held over several weeks, and the reps were flown to the meeting site for a four day session. In all, there were seven identical meetings, four on the East Coast and three on the West, and the company spared no expense to provide a high quality backdrop to introduce new products and a new division. I was with the new division and had only been with the company about one year.

Covering the same topic three times in a four day period over seven meetings in a short period of time requires ever increasing concentration. That's 21 deliveries of the same "pitch". Everyone has had an experience driving from one place to another where you are suddenly at your destination and swear that you missed a few noticable landmarks along the way. The same thing happens in public speaking. At some point you will realize where you are in the outline, but unsure if a certain point was already covered.

Paul Stuckey of Peter, Paul and Mary tells a story of concentration, or the lack thereof, that is worth repeating here to further illustrate the point. Paul was attending a large gathering and had just paused for a moment at the punchbowl. Somone engaged him in conversation, but as this individual continued on, Pauls concentration went wandering as he looked over the attendees in the room, when he realized that his new companion had just stopped talking and had finished the dialog with a queation mark behind which was a question that Paul had not heard. Not wanting to be embarrassed, Paul responded by asking the gentleman to rephrase his question in a somewhat wider format so that his response might more fully address the issue. His companion agreed, and said slowly, a bit louder and most succinctly... "What are the ages of your children"? There's an old expression that "It's better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt"!

It is really tough to repeat a speech and make it fresh to the new audience. It is so easy to drop by the "punchbowl" and continue talking. Sometimes fresh ideas are included in the 3rd or 4th delivery...sometimes they enhance delivery, sometimes they cause foot-in-mouth problems. This is particulary true when you try and be "cute" or glib....

There's a difference between including an off-the-cuff comment and a double intendre. I have serious concerns regarding Obama which you can see for yourself as you scan down this blog. However, I have to cut him some slack here. I believe his "lipstick on a pig" comment was just as I described above. This is a very smart man...and...had he thought about the connection of this comment to the "hockey Mom" comment by Sarah Palin, he never would have made it. Was he trying to be glib? Cute? Condescending towards McCain? Answer: three "you betcha"! Had he taken even a moment to think before speaking, he would have anticipated the backlash and never gone forward. I believe he recognized immediately following that he had just stepped into a moose pile of problems which did not end with his "spare me the indignation" semi-explanation. He should have accepted the consequences from his statement, apologized and then move on. That's not his way. He does not take ownership of his mistakes. In his interview with O'reilly, he could not bring himself to say that he had been wrong regarding the outcome of the surge. He'd dance and shuffle...smile and change the subject, but that was it. He does not accept consequences from his actions.... That's just Obama!