Reaction To Kerry's Acceptance Speech

The Bush Campaign's Reaction

Marc Racicot, Chairman of President Bush's reelection campaign, said:

John Kerry missed an opportunity to help the American people understand his vote for the war in Iraq based on the same intelligence that the president viewed, his description of himself as an antiwar candidate and his subsequent vote against troops on the front lines. He's right, America can do better

The Republicans also had Rudy Giuliani available for reaction:

"John Kerry voted against the Persian Gulf war when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait," Mr. Giuliani said at a news conference at the Omni Parker House hotel. "How you could do that, only he can explain - usually five or six different ways - but only he can explain. But he voted against the Persian Gulf war. Then he voted for the Iraq war, and then shortly after, when the question of an $87 billion supplemental appropriation came up - to support our troops, support our people who are on the firing lines, as many of you have been - Senator Kerry voted against it, as did Senator Edwards, among only four senators who voted for the war and against the appropriation."

Television Commentators

The Associated Press reports that all the TV commentators were wowed:

Television commentators gushed in their first response to John F. Kerry's nomination acceptance speech, while warning the address will be parsed in the weeks ahead for what wasn't said.

Newspapers

Tom Oliphant, who has covered Kerry for 30 years, writes in the In the Boston Globe:

Kerry muffed an opportunity to hone great material into a powerful address. He and his campaign can do better than this, and his supporters have a right to demand that they do.

John Podhoretz at the New York Post said:

Kerry has every right to go after Bush with everything he's got. But in essence, while calling on the president to engage with Kerry in a battle of "great ideas," Kerry articulated only one big idea last night.

Kerry's big idea is this: He was a war hero and Bush is a lying scoundrel.

So, in the end, it appears Kerry has decided to run as Howard Dean with some medals.

The New York Times said:

As an introduction to the candidates, the Democratic convention, on the whole, did its job.

The Times was also disappointed:

He did not, however, provide a clear vision on Iraq. Voters needed to hear him say that he understands, in retrospect, that his vote to give President Bush Congressional support to invade was a mistake. It's clear now that Mr. Kerry isn't going to go there, and it's a shame.

The Washington Post called the speech a "Missed Opportunity:"

Mr. Kerry last night elided the charged question of whether, as president, he would have gone to war in Iraq. He offered not a word to celebrate the freeing of Afghans from the Taliban, or Iraqis from Saddam Hussein, and not a word about helping either nation toward democracy.

[. . .]

Mr. Kerry could have spoken the difficult truth that U.S. troops will be needed in Iraq for a long time. He could have reaffirmed his commitment to completing the task of helping build democracy. Instead, he chose words that seemed designed to give the impression that he could engineer a quick and painless exit.

[. . .]

Yet in economics as in national security, Mr. Kerry missed an opportunity for straight talk. His promises to stop the outsourcing of jobs and end dependence on Middle East oil are not grounded in reality.

Blogosphere

Blogs for Bush rounds up the reactions of the Bush-bloggers.

Smash at The Indepundit posts that Kerry's performance was solid.

James Joyner at Outside The Beltway, wasn't favorably impressed by the speech but has a terrific round up of reactions so I will stop.

UPDATE: Steven Taylor at PoliBlog posted "Bite-Size Toast for Thursday Night" rounding up reactions to Kerry's speech.