President Kennedy is remembered for his eloquence.

Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country! was one of his pronouncements, capably written, we believe, by Ted Sorenson.

Kennedy, as you may know, was in pain during his time in office, suffering from a degenerating back condition.

But his speeches rarely contained a single frown, unless he was trying to kick the missiles out of a nearby island.

Moreover, he had a great sense of humor, especially when improvising answers at press conferences.

Contrast his style with that of George W. Bush.

Bush smiles, but it seems forced. In fact, much of his delivery is strained and the meta-message hes sending is that he hates public speaking.

These differences have nothing to do with political philosophy or party.

Reagan was Kennedy-esque, inasmuch as he seemed to be having a blast as the Commander-In-Chief. Harry Truman stiffly soldiered his way through orations, somewhat like Bush.

So, does it make sense to advise an aspiring speaker to be more like Kennedy?

Yes, for one important reason.

When we think someone is a genuinely nice person, and that he can laugh at himself, hes more endearing, and actually, because he willingly reveals his humanity, he is allowed to make mistakes.

If hes likable, hell be forgiven faster and more often than a stiff.

Reagan had the Iran-Contra scandal, which could have shortened his presidency.

But, when he denied knowing the details, he wasnt excoriated for being asleep at the wheel.

He was excused from responsibility. Episode over, the public willingly said lets move on.

In speaking, and perhaps in politics, the race doesnt go to the swiftest, or even to the best and the brightest.

It goes to the most liked.