By Daily Kos diarist Troutnut 12/27/07. Reprinted with permission.

The Page has the full text of Obama’s new stump speech, which Halperin calls “the best-written speech of the campaign.”  Obama wrote it himself, and it’s beautifully written even by his high standards.

Update: They’ve got the video online!

Here are a few of my favorite parts of the speech:

Really hitting on his theme of a uniting politics:

I chose to run because I believed that the size of these challenges had outgrown the capacity of our broken and divided politics to solve them; because I believed that Americans of every political stripe were hungry for a new kind of politics, a politics that focused not just on how to win but why we should, a politics that focused on those values and ideals that we held in common as Americans; a politics that favored common sense over ideology, straight talk over spin.

Also this:

You know that we can’t afford four more years of the same divisive food fight in Washington that’s about scoring political points instead of solving problems; that’s about tearing your opponents down instead of lifting this country up.

(By the way, any anti-Obama people out there who think this amounts to singing kumbayah need to read Mark Schmitt’s excellent article about the strategic value of Obama’s approach.)

He counterpunches Bill Clinton’s assertion that electing Obama would be taking a risk:

The real gamble in this election is playing the same Washington game with the same Washington players and expecting a different result.  And that’s a risk we can’t take.  Not this year.  Not when the stakes are this high.

A substantive highlight of the hypocrisy of Hillary’s core message:

But you can’t at once argue that you’re the master of a broken system in Washington and offer yourself as the person to change it. You can’t fall in line behind the conventional thinking on issues as profound as war and offer yourself as the leader who is best prepared to chart a new and better course for America.

Here’s a masterfully succinct summary of how his own experience qualifies him for the job:

My experience is rooted in the lives of the men and women on the South Side of Chicago who I fought for as an organizer when the local steel plant closed.  It’s rooted in the lives of the people I stood up for as a civil rights lawyer when they were denied opportunity on the job or justice at the voting booth because of what they looked like or where they came from.  It’s rooted in an understanding of how the world sees America that I gained from living, traveling, and having family beyond our shores – an understanding that led me to oppose this war in Iraq from the start.  It’s experience rooted in the real lives of real people, and it’s the kind of experience Washington needs right now.

Here’s another excellent strike back at his critics, pointing out that his approach works:

There are others in this race who say that this kind of change sounds good, but that I’m not angry or confrontational enough to get it done.

Well, let me tell you something, Iowa.  I don’t need any lectures on how to bring about change, because I haven’t just talked about it on the campaign trail.  I’ve fought for change all my life.

I walked away from a job on Wall Street to bring job training to the jobless and after school programs to kids on the streets of Chicago.

I turned down the big money law firms to win justice for the powerless as a civil rights lawyer.

I took on the lobbyists in Illinois and brought Democrats and Republicans together to expand health care to 150,000 people and pass the first major campaign finance reform in twenty-five years; and I did the same thing in Washington when we passed the toughest lobbying reform since Watergate.  I’m the only candidate in this race who hasn’t just talked about taking power away from lobbyists, I’ve actually done it.  So if you want to know what kind of choices we’ll make as President, you should take a look at the choices we made when we had the chance to bring about change that wasn’t easy or convenient.

That’s the kind of change that’s more than just rhetoric – that’s change you can believe in.

I love this bit (emphasis added by me):

It’s change that won’t just come from more anger at Washington or turning up the heat on Republicans.  There’s no shortage of anger and bluster and bitter partisanship out there.  We don’t need more heat.  We need more light.  I’ve learned in my life that you can stand firm in your principles while still reaching out to those who might not always agree with you.

Granted I don’t always follow Obama’s advice in my comments on dKos, but Obama does have the discipline to live by his words, and that’s what I want in a President.

Another outstanding piece:

We can change the electoral math that’s been all about division and make it about addition – about building a coalition for change and progress that stretches through Blue States and Red States.  That’s how I won some of the reddest, most Republican counties in Illinois.  That’s why the polls show that I do best against the Republicans running for President – because we’re attracting more support from Independents and Republicans than any other candidate.

That hits on something really important about Obama which puts him at stark contrast with Hillary.  He’s not just aiming for 51% — he’s trying to create a dominant progressive majority for years to come.  You do that not by demonizing the other side, not by pulling your 51% toward you and pushing the other 49% away, but by convincing some of them to join you.  Polarizing politics played well might get us one squeaker of a general election win, but Obama’s politics will pay off for decades.

Obama goes on to defend his politics of hope as something far greater, far more effective, and more substantive than his critics would have you think (emphasis mine):

In the end, the argument we are having between the candidates in the last seven days is not just about the meaning of change.  It’s about the meaning of hope.  Some of my opponents appear scornful of the word; they think it speaks of naivete, passivity, and wishful thinking.

But that’s not what hope is.  Hope is not blind optimism.  It’s not ignoring the enormity of the task before us or the roadblocks that stand in our path.  Yes, the lobbyists will fight us.  Yes, the Republican attack dogs will go after us in the general election.  Yes, the problems of poverty and climate change and failing schools will resist easy repair.  I know – I’ve been on the streets, I’ve been in the courts.  I’ve watched legislation die because the powerful held sway and good intentions weren’t fortified by political will, and I’ve watched a nation get mislead into war because no one had the judgment or the courage to ask the hard questions before we sent our troops to fight.

But I also know this.  I know that hope has been the guiding force behind the most improbable changes this country has ever made.  In the face of tyranny, it’s what led a band of colonists to rise up against an Empire.  In the face of slavery, it’s what fueled the resistance of the slave and the abolitionist, and what allowed a President to chart a treacherous course to ensure that the nation would not continue half slave and half free.  In the face of war and Depression, it’s what led the greatest of generations to free a continent and heal a nation.  In the face of oppression, it’s what led young men and women to sit at lunch counters and brave fire hoses and march through the streets of Selma and Montgomery for freedom’s cause.  That’s the power of hope – to imagine, and then work for, what had seemed impossible before.

That’s the change we seek.  And that’s the change you can stand for in seven days.

This line seems to be one of the most popular pull-quotes:

In seven days, what was improbable has the chance to beat what Washington said was inevitable.

My take:  This is a brilliant speech by Obama.  He hits the highest positive tone to date, while simultaneously dissecting his opponents’ criticisms.  I think this is going to make the sale for a lot of doubting voters; I can’t imagine being in the audience, listening to this, and not being moved to give this man a chance.  He doesn’t sound at all like someone who’s time has not come.  He is in his element, in his moment, and he’s going to win.

—————
Update: CNN has the Clinton campaign’s reaction:

Clinton spokesman Phil Singer quickly reacted to the speech, saying, “Now is not the time for political attacks, it’s time to pick a president who can give us a new beginning in a time of war and a troubled economy.”

Is it just me, or does that sound like he’s endorsing Obama?