Browse > Home / Barack Obama, Editorials / Where was substance in Obama’s acceptance?

Where was substance in Obama’s acceptance?

August 29, 2008

By Michael Goodwin 

NY DAILY NEWS - After three days of Democrats trying to portray their nominee as a normal Everyman, Barack Obama accepted their nomination on a stage fit for Superman.

A Hollywood version of the White House facade plopped down in the middle of a tricked-out football stadium was a grand idea if the goal was to create a media spectacle. But to communicate a message of realistic hope for a beleaguered middle class, fake grandeur was an odd choice.

Using a facade to appear presidential invites wisecracks about a nominee already derided as a messiah wanna-be. And the numerous references by warmup speakers to Abraham Lincoln, John Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr. are gratingly outsized for the 47-year-old rookie senator.

The content of the speech was more sober and a better fit for the historic moment of the first African-American winning the nomination of a major party. Obama looked and sounded supremely confident in his belief that his time has come and that he can lead an American renewal.

"We are a better country than this," he said, promising "a new politics for a new time."

The greatest political orator in half a century was virtually flawless in his delivery, bringing the huge crowd to its feet with sweeping promises of change and a pacing that ranged from relaxed to rapid-fire, with tones soft to fairly shouting. His is a rare talent that has inspired a generation and touched the emotions of millions of Americans. Thursday was no exception, especially for those already supporting him.

The grace notes were reserved for the defeated and abandoned; the hardest and most effective ones aimed at George Bush, John McCain and big corporations. The populism was contagious, the contempt for banks, insurance and oil companies relentless.

Haunted by suggestions he is not patriotic, Obama tried to confront them by directly declaring his love for America and pledging to defend it, with force if necessary. That he finds it necessary at this late stage to make such basic claims for a potential commander in chief shows he knows the issue is hurting him among voters.

Did he succeed in containing the damage? Probably not, because he had nothing new to say on the subject.

He also fell short of the expectation he would be workmanlike and very specific about helping the middle class. Though he ticked off a list of promises, none was new or striking. And there were so many that the list seemed like the proverbial Christmas tree - something for everyone, but no clear priority.

The failure to break new ground was a missed opportunity. Instead of the terms of a new deal, Obama left voters with a persistent plea for their trust in him. Trust that the time is ripe for change and trust that he can deliver it.

The address capped a convention that achieved its main goal of uniting the party, at least at the top. Hillary and Bill Clinton dramatically waved the white flag of surrender and their pledges of loyalty averted disaster if the fall campaign began with them still holding out.

Yet it is less clear that Obama overcame the doubts about him the Clintons defined and Republicans are exploiting. Questions about his youth and inexperience linger, as do concerns about Democrats holding the White House and both houses of Congress.

Oddly, Obama friend and Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick best expressed those concerns on Tuesday, when he said, "Democrats don't deserve to win just because Republicans deserve to lose."

Patrick has it exactly right and his insight explains why the race is tied. As Democrats pack up their convention and Republicans start theirs, neither party has proven itself ready to govern.

Source:  New York Daily News

Posted by Against Obama · Filed Under Barack Obama, Editorials 

Comments

Got something to say?