Matt, I was thinking he should have mentioned Iraq when he was talking about our service members. You are right, Fallujah would have been the appropriate name.

Welcome to TPM from a long time reader. And rare commenter.

That said, I thought the dis of Bush-era interrogation measures and civil liberties shortcuts was also stronger and more explicit than I would have thought. It was a pretty bald shot at his predecessor.

I agree, but it was not an unwelcome shot, AFAIC.

Talk about sour grapes. This is too funny, from the NYT Blog:

“A Downer” for Limbaugh | 1:13 p.m. Rush Limbaugh wasted no time in describing how unimpressed he was with President Obama’s speech, which he called an “acceptance speech” instead of an inaugural address.

Mr. Limbaugh said it “fell flat” and played more like a campaign speech, which he said not surprise him because he expects the Obama administration to continue the campaign, the way he said the Clinton administration did. He excluded the Bush administration from that comparison, though it was frequently criticized in other places for staying permanently in campaign mode.

The event was “over-hyped,” he said, and added that he saw “more energy at a McCain campaign rally and 10 times the energy at a Sarah Palin rally.” He also said the speech only drew reactions from comments about race and that it contained “elements of socialism.”

Mr. Limbaugh said he did not like the “classical music,” which he said contributed to the mood becoming “a downer.”

No memorable phrases? What about

For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus - and non-believers. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this Earth; and because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and segregation, and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve; that as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself; and that America must play its role in ushering in a new era of peace.

Roberts "practiced extensively" and still flubbed the oath -- a whole 36 words? Wow. Glad this guy has his lifetime appointment.

Oh, brother. Matt, you wax positively rhapsodic over the "tough-guy" elements in the speech, the only thing you notice about the far more extensive sections upholding the rule of law and our place in the community of nations is to suggest it was somehow inappropriately "bald." I can see already that TPMDc is going to be an extreme disappointment with you at the helm. Oh well, Josh's writing is still worth coming to the mothership for.

Chris Wallace of Fox News actually said Obama is not the President b/c he flubbed the oath.

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2009/01/20/obama.takes.oath.cnn

Obama taking the Oath. Roberts screwed it up. Obama stopped and signaled to Roberts (he overtly nodded at him) to repeat the phrase. Obama got it right off the bat that Roberts had screwed it up.

How sad. Chief Justice? ...God.

Though I expect great things from the Obama administration, particularly due to the change to competency from cronyism, I was underwhelmed by Obama's speech.

I greatly appreciated the Bush/Cheney smackdown but I thought much of the speech consisted of platitudes.

I don't remember an inauguration when the crowd chanted the incoming president's name, nor one with two million participants.

I expected the talking heads to poopoo the speech because that is what they do. We live in a different time when folks want to tear down people and moments rather than build them up. If JFK's inauguration was given in today's peanut gallery climate he would be derided as well. Sure they can say they've watched JFK' and FDR's speeches many times and judge it solely on what was said and all that blather, but I think it's more the case they don't want to deride history and out themselves as the buffoons they are.

Limbaugh would've praised a Republican President if they burped into the microphone. I don't even know why folks listen to his hyper-partisan mumbo jumbo. Limbaugh is only going to get worse because he needs to keep up the political rancor in order to pad his bank account. He's a divided America profiteer.

We live in a society of instant gratification and very short attention spans. If you believe it fell flat and was forgettable, that's more a condemnation of youself than the speech. Talking heads dissect and criticize everything moments after it was said - killing it before it even had a chance to live.

I would suggest that folks who are deriding the speech, either go and read a transcript or rewatch the speech with an open mind, now that you've all had the chance to show your self importance by running to your soapbox and rattle off criticisms.

Obama's inauguration didn't reach the levels of JFk or FDR's or Lincolns but those were masterpieces from different times. Obama didn't have a chance - in the modern day none ever will.

I think it's much ado about nothing with Roberts and Obama. I think both were partially to blame. I think Obama jumping the gun to repeat the opening phrase threw off Roberts, who then botched the second phrase. While I would have obviously preferred a perfect oath, I think the way it happened added certain humility and realness to the whole situation.

Obama's hawkishness, so beloved by Matt Cooper, was to me the first major off-putting part of the speech.

Mentioning the so-called GWOT less than 2 minutes in (didn't you read what British FM David Miliband said last week?) was gratuitously hawkish.

My skeptical antennae went up from there.

David Sanger, writing in the NY Times, gives a much more honest and accurate assessment of the speech than Matt Cooper, above, who is clearly projecting his own psychic need for domination onto the president's words.

Yet every time Mr. Obama urged Americans to “choose our better history,” to make decisions according to science instead of ideology, to reject a “false choice” between safety and American ideals, to recognize that American military power does not “entitle us to do as we please,” he signaled a commitment to pragmatism not just as a governing strategy but as a basic value.

This was not in the league of Kennedy, FDR or Lincoln. More like vintage Jimmy Carter. It was a lecture. American's don't want to be lectured. There was nothing motivational about it, no call to action.

And the markets tanked. Now there's hope for ya. Happy days are here again!....not.

I didn't vote for the man because he makes nice speeches. I voted for him because of what he said he would do. There will be mistakes and missteps - you can't tackle a job this large and complex without some. He'll be better than Bush, but that's a pretty low bar. Greatness? Maybe we should wait on putting his face on Mt. Rushmore until after we see how things work out. For now, I'll settle for simple competence, integrity and sanity. Then let's see if we can work up from there.

The biggie for me was his use of Corinthians in regards to "putting away childish things." I am still getting chills from that.

We have been childish for a long time. American Idol. Hardball. OJ. Shock and Awe. The old battles of the sixties played out like a syndicated Punch and Judy show. We have been behaving like kids with matches.

We now have adult problems. No more wartime escapades and white man burdens. No more hating one side or the other reflexively. We are drowning in childishness.

Obama's call for maturity, a maturity borne from an awakening of compassion... That will stick with me for life.

Obama's speech rorsharch test V:3.028

Former Hillary partisan and grudging Obama admirer Col Pat Lang:

"I had not expected this speech. This was a workman's speech, the speech of a man impatient to get on with the serious business of the Republic. It was bony, filled with policy statements and demands for sacrifice and seriousness of purpose. He is a serious man. It would have been oh so easy for someone of his literary skill to have crafted a speech that would have sung to the ages. I expected that, something like the seductive words of the poet president he so admires. Instead, we received a manifesto that rejected the attitudes and policies of the Bush era, and insisted that the United States must redeem and save itself through hard work and a rededication to "our founding documents."

Hail to the Chief!

pl

....................

The portion of the speech to initially impact the denizens of Syria Comment?:

"To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.”

I'll bet this resonates among peoples the world over who know these circumstances all too well.

Since I can't post this elsewhere, in regards to Josh's comments amout Howard Kurt's piece in the Wapo: I would be much more comfortable with Joe Klein joining TPM than I am with Matt (Valerie Plame) Cooper coming on board!

Again, why is Cooper here ?

I felt some of the same reactions, Mr. Cooper, and it was helpful to see someone else voice similar thoughts and flesh them out.

Thanks to Cooper we can now find the same old, flaccid, tiresome MSM commentary on TPM.

zzzzzzzz