When I watched Obama’s speech, my initial reaction was that it was one of his worst. Still, he had greater fluency that does George W. Bush in most of his addresses.
The Democratic nominee came across as distance and, at times, angry. He didn’t seem to connect to the crowd, though I have read reaction online that many at Invesco Field were move by their candidates’ remarks.
In listening to television commentary and reading blog and pundit reviews of the speech, what struck me was the great diversity of views. On FoxNews, Dick Morris called it one of the greatest speeches ever. Charles Krauthammer, with whom I normally agree on most things political, thought it wasn’t a great speech but a smart one. He thought it worked.
Bill Kristol offered a similar assessment.
Michael Barone was not so impressed. While less critical than yours truly, he thought the speech was “workmanlike rather than . . . inspirational.” He also pointed out that it’s “pretty easy to refute” Obama’s “notion that John McCain is the (90 percent) same as George W. Bush.” Thus, he concludes “that the major themes of Obama’s speech . . . may not be sustainable.”
In a similar vein, Athena (AKA Peggy Noonan) doesn’t think that “six months from now,” people are “going to remember what he said.” Well, she did say they’d “remember the Parthenon” which, after all, is her temple.
Simply put, “there were things about it that didn’t work.”
Noonan said those who described the speech as symphony were engaged in “fatuous suck-upping.” And Peggy has crafted some pretty symphonic addresses of her own.
Well, with Peggy calling the speech a “flop-a-lini,” I think I’m on pretty solid ground with my criticisms.
(Via a reader who found the link here.)
More commentary here as well as the video which I couldn’t manage to upload.