There were parts of his speech that raised the old expectations. I liked the emphasis he put not on himself but on the word “you” — the idea that change comes organically from the bottom up. I liked his extraordinary self-awareness, his willingness to admit that often life on the campaign trail requires candidates to do silly things. I liked the sense of citizenship that pervaded his address, the sense of mutual obligation.
But what I was mostly looking for were big proposals, big as health care was four years ago. I had spent the three previous days watching more than 80 convention speeches without hearing a single major policy proposal in any of them. I asked governors, mayors and legislators to name a significant law that they’d like to see President Obama pass in a second term. Not one could. At its base, this is a party with a protective agenda, not a change agenda — dedicated to defending government in all its forms. David Brooks – New York Times – Click To Read More
It seems the liberal press is disappointed in the President’s speech last night. (Always the danger after following Clinton. Just ask Rick Santorum after following the firebrand Hernam Cain in the Florida Straw polls.)
David Brooks is the first of many to speak out. For the first time the terrible fear is leaking into the room that perhaps Obama’s vision is not what this country needs. Already seemly accepting the fact that this country is in debt, Brooks, Charlie Rose and other Democratic commentators are questioning Obama’s ability to come up with a workable plan and the leadership to carry it out.
Whether they are ready to vote for Mitt Romney is another question. – DSMW