Kerry was nervous. He seemed hurried, this made him seem less boring. He wrongly shut down the enthusiasm of the crowd many times, indeed, almost always. When he finally found his rythm, it was too late. He might not have hurt himself, but I don’t think he helped himself much either. Almost every word in the speech had a deja vu quality to it (some of the words came from Bush, some from Dean, etc.) It seemed as if a committee had written the speech. Isn’t odd when others make a better case for Kerry than he can for himself? This is not a great candidate. It was not the best speech at the convention.
The Liberal (also anti-free trade) speech verged on a laundry-list mode, yet lacked specificity. The war that the Islamic terrorists are waging was just another point on the list, somewhere near global warming. The same with Iraq. He said nothing about Afghanistan (never mind Iran or North Korea). He did not tell us what he would do in Iraq (or even would have done). He said nothing about democracy abroad, no left-over-idealism of human rights. He said nothing about his career in the Senate. It is true that he intended to give the impression that he is strong and courageous and is able to replace the current commander-in-chief. Did he? Maybe.
His major point is that Bush can’t be trusted, Bush has lied. This is going the Michael Moore, Joe Wilson, et al, route. They are discredited, and the American people will not believe it. They shouldn’t. He will not get anywhere arguing that he will re-establish trust and credibility to the White House. Wrong election. The same with the emphasis on optimism and hope. Kerry missed a great opportunity in this speech: He had the chance to be clear and forthright, especially regarding Iraq and the war. He didn’t take it. He cannot become president by straddling huge issues, the same issues President Bush has full knowledge of, and some control over, the same issues that will continue to dominate the campaign.
Here are some takes on his speech: Chris Suellentrop (Slate); Jonah Goldberg (USA Today); John Podhoretz (NY Post); Lawrence F. Kaplan (TNR); William F. Buckley, Jr. (NRO); Thomas Oliphant (Boston Globe).
Kerry’s sweaty, panicked, deer in the headlights look told it all....Bush wins 58 to 40, it’s a knock out and the democratic party is finished. Mark my words you heard it here first!
I think Mr. Kerry did well. Speaking from the democrat’s perspective of course. From any other perspective their basic philosophical problems with the entire democratic convention not just Kerry’s speech.
What is this lie they kept saying that Mr. Bush has told? What is this restoration of trust and credibility in the White House Kerry was referring to? What is this misleading the country into war? What is this having an Attorney General who will follow the Constitution? As if the Constitution has any substantive value to Kerry to begin with. What is this jobs that pay $9,000 less than jobs last? It did not seem to matter to democrats that Mr. Clinton’s unemployment was low due to part-time jobs. How much can a person earn working part-time? What is this paid down the debt about? This must mean that the debt has only been in existence since January of 2001, Continuing on. What is this statement of saying he (Kerry) knows that there is criticism about his seeing the complexities of an issue about? Flip-flopping does not constitute nuance. What is this going to war because we want to? Apparently 9-11 did not happen. What is this going to war without a plan for peace? What is this fighting a more effective war on terror? What is this “strength is more than words?” Apparently, mobilization against, capture and eliminating ruthless despots are only words? What is this need for a strong military and leading strong alliances? This is getting tedious for both author and reader. The point has been made.
The bottom line is that basically everything Mr. Kerry said is either already in place and being active, or is based on a false premise. This does not include statements such denouncing alliances with other nations, while at same time saying we have no alliances. Yet, this sort double-talk was prevalent throughout the entire speech. Double-talk, false accusations and plan old lies are what Mr. Kerry’s speech was about.
Yea, it was a great speech if you are a democrat and believe most of the garbage thrown out before you. Sorry, I can only say that there were few bright spots to his speech. The salute, I know other do not like, but it was good. The reference to God and Lincoln were high points.The other high points are things that are already being conducted under the current adminstration.
In addition to what others have said about the speech, similar to Carter’s, etc. This is also a larger version of a Goreism from the 2000 Election. During a debate with Bush, Gore kept pushing a dead issue literally. Remember the James Bird killers got the death penalty, but this was not enough for Mr. Gore. Finally, Mr. Bush responded that they received the death penalty. What more could be done? Mr. Gore continued on his rant. This is what Mr. Kerry’s speech was similar to in many ways.
Truly, the republicans should be able to hit a plethora of home runs during there convention and before it. Or, will they revive a drowning campaign the same as Mr. Kerry revived a drowning rhodent.