Home Store In Memoriam Deborah Newsletter Forum Topics Blogfeed Blogroll Facebook MySpace Contact Us About

FOX News "Liberals" Fall Over Themselves Criticizing Obama's Convention Speech

Reported by Ellen - August 29, 2008 -

On last night’s (8/28/08) special America’s Election HQ following Barack Obama’s convention speech, I expected brickbats from the likes of Karl Rove, Megyn Kelly and Charles Krauthammer. But it was shocking that none of the so-called liberals, Juan Williams, Nina Easton and then Greta Van Susteren on the following program, couldn’t seem to find a good thing to say about the speech. You know something’s wrong when Bill Kristol turns out to be Obama’s biggest fan of the night on FOX. With video.

Juan Williams said, “What we heard from Barack Obama I think was more prose than poetry. If you think back to the speech that he modeled this on, that came from JFK back in 1960 when he accepted the nomination afterwards in L.A. You remember the whole notion of 'new frontiers for America.' I don’t think there was any catchphrase in this speech that will match that.

Williams also said, "This was not a motivational, inspirational speech. At times, it looked more like a laundry list and in that sense felt a little bit, not quite satisfying... I don’t think that he really played to the emotion in the crowd. The emotion came from the history of what has been accomplished. It came from the spectacle."

Williams also criticized Obama's plan to free the country of dependence on foreign oil in 10 years. Ignoring the fact that the program might survive his presidency, Williams criticized Obama's plan based on the fact that Obama won't be president in 10 years. “I don’t know what to believe there or not,” Williams complained. “The specifics didn’t match up.”

Kristol, on the other hand, said, “Barack Obama faced very high expectations tonight and, honestly, I think he met them and I honestly think he exceeded them. It was a very well-crafted speech... I thought it was an awfully impressive performance.”

Easton, another supposed liberal, started by saying, “I think the film (that preceded the speech) was very effective.” She found the speech, on the other hand, “a lost opportunity.” With obvious annoyance, Easton asked, “How many times have I heard this same speech from liberal Democrats over 20 years, not just at this convention?” She said Obama's own “worn ideas” represented the politics of the past even as he claimed to be an agent of change.

Even Fred Barnes found something to be enthusiastic about in the speech. He said, “I kind of loved (the theatrics).” Brit Hume agreed.

The pattern continued into the next show. Supposed liberal Greta Van Susteren wondered whether Obama’s words would “stick.”

The guest, Republican Frank Luntz, said he thought they would. He praised Obama’s “crisp,” “crystal clear words” delivered “with power and passion” that “brought the audience to its feet.” He said that after attending eight conventions, he had never seen so many people standing “because they felt this was so historic, so special.”

Van Susteren was immediately critical. She acknowledged that the speech was “dazzling” but, she added, “Here’s the big issue. Can he DELIVER? (her emphasis). And is there anything in the speech, any words that he used, that is any way promising to the voters out there, that all his great ideas, all his inspiration and his hope can actually be translated into product? Because that’s his big problem.”

Anybody want to bet she that any of these so-called liberals will do anything but fawn over John McCain’s speech next week? How many times do you think we’ll hear the words, “straight talk,” “maverick,” “regular guy,” “down to earth,” “youthful,” “vigorous,” “he’s his own man,” and, of course, “POW?”