I'd give him a B. Delivery is never going to be spectacular. Content was solid.

We're spreading freedom, fighting the terrorists, things are getting better, stay the course, support our troops.

Very little smirking, much furrowing of the brow.

The tie was blue.

In response, Biden took his "whiny angry complainer guy" presidential campaign theme for a spin. Needs work.

A- at worst. Very good.

It had to be pretty good. Some moron at the Huffington Post just compared Bush to the BTK Killer. Any speech that drove liberals to a new level of lunacy has to be considered a success.

Link via Instapundit.

You know, one of these days I'm just going to actually learn HTML...

Let's try this one again.

If that doesn't work, here's the URL:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/theblog/archive/paul-krassner/capsule-review_3350.html

Two thumbs UP.

When the (serious) opposition has no choice but to find fault with things the President DIDN'T talk about versus finding fault with the things he actually DID talk about; well, you've got yourself a "winner". I may be a "Liberal", but I support this war and always have. The President did a fantastic job of "(re)selling" the war to the People tonight.

Maybe he didn't win over Sen's Durbin, Pelosi, or Dean, but who in their right mind would expect him to anyway? It's not his job to please politicians. It's his job to please the People.

You've seen the replay, now - give it an A-, Ace. You know it's true. What his scripted speeches lack in the "I can hear you, the rest of the world can hear you..." spontaneous elegance, they can make up with clarity and heartfelt sincerity. This one had it.

I'm gonna guess on a couple of reactions to the speech before visiting the fever swamps...

Kos: Bush = Hitler

Excitable Andy: Where was the apology for Gitmo? Torture! Torture! Tooooooorture!!!

I'll check back in to see how I scored in a little while.

Well, I've got to admit that I'm batting .000 tonite.

I couldn't really find any Hitler comments from the Kossaks, just a bunch of stuff about 1.) How they couldn't even bear to watch the speech or, 2.) How it just reinforced their view of how horribly wrong things are going (I know, shocking!) and, 3.) The MSM is waaaaaaay too conservative for their tastes. F'rinstance, I saw a couple of them complain that (get this) Chris Matthews is (and I'm not kidding here, some of them actually seem to believe this) in BushCo's pocket. Chris. Fuckin'. Matthews.

But, thankfully, no Hitler comments that I saw before having to dive into the shower.

And as for Sully, he hasn't commented on the speech as of yet. I can only assume that he caught the vapors and retired to his hammock. That, or he was out walking the beagle while the speech was on.

It was clearly a success; the press is already trying to hide it with a non-story: "Bush Criticized Over Speech About Iraq War" (AP headline).

I missed it, alas. I work nights and the time I woke up to get ready for work was already after the speech was over. If it had been an hour later, I'd've been too busy getting ready for work.

Solid speech.

General MSM reaction= "But...but...but...he mentioned 9/11!! How dare he!!"

Mucho gracias for the link, my friend.

Now, get back to blogging, you slacker.

Thanks,
Dave at Garfield Ridge

He should have held up a picture of the painting of Saddam smiling while the towers were burning. That really would have offended Gergen.

I didn't see Bushs speech either but from Dave's descripition it sounds like he managed to trip over his own dick again. The connections between Saddam and OBL are vague and Saddam may not have had anything to do with 911. That's all old news anyway, so why hand Liberals a fresh club to beat W with anyway? Cheesh!

Nobody can make W look as bad as W can.

I think it was last week, after Durbin's speech, when I was joking on the comments here about what hyperbolic, ridiculous things lefties would compare Bush to next. One of my thoughts was "serial killers." Thank you to the Huffington Post for proving me right.

The connections between Saddam and OBL are vague and Saddam may not have had anything to do with 911.

Direct connections? Yes. But truly nuanced thinkers, aka "war supporters", understood already that OBL, Saddam, 9/11 and the war in Iraq are indirectly connected in ways that are important and real nonetheless. The few folks that remain tentatively supportive benefit from hearing him say it again, and again, and again.

W didn't hurt himself by bringing it up. And he couldn't have helped himself with reactionary turds by avoiding it under any circumstance. As for liberals beating him with that club, it's not fresh and they'd use it whether he mentioned it or not. Furthermore, I say throw me in that br'ar patch, idiot Democrats.

I think he said what needed to be said. I especially liked that he made a plea for the citizens to be more supportive of the troops who are doing the actual fighting of this war. That needed to be said, and was glad to hear it. I hope the public will be responsive to that message.

I think it would've been more powerful to hammer home the point that we are locked in a struggle that will determine the fate of the world forever. I would've said the we are in a great contest of wills, and the whole world is watching. Instead of reminding everyone of this stupid controversy, he should've stuck to what no one can deny, that we are there now and must see it through. And he should've paraphrased another great Republican:

Now we are engaged in a great war, testing whether this nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. And the whole world is a great battlefield of that war.

The brave men, living and dead, who struggled there, have consecrated it, far beyond our meager power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced.

A. Lincoln

OOPS, forgot to include the best part:

It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us--that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion--that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain--that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom--and that government of the people, by the people, and for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

I don't think it changed the playing field much. Under the circumstances, that gets it a B- at best.

One big lack was any anecdotal support--stories about the bravery of the troops, or about the bravery of the Iraqis we're there to help. Some vivid, concrete facts about what's been accomplished so far would have been nice, too. Somebody in the White House needs to start reading Arthur Chrenkoff more regularly. Bush had a chance to make his case directly, without the usual MSM distortion, and I feel like he blew it.

Ahh, Ace's always-correct pessimism pops up again. Heh.

72, watch the damn speech before you spout off. You have totally the wrong impression.

someone
OK, I will. But utron and others on this blog apparently did and are of the same opinion, this seems to be the general consensus among the conservtatives I know. My post is meant as constructive critcism. Bush too often misses the ball and I'm always left wondering why, when it would've been so easy to hit it out of the park. And always being a cheerleader doesn't help anyone, least of all Bush.