LeeAundra Keany, Executive Communications Coach | | Instant Analysis...
George W. Bush’s 2007 State of the Union - How did Bush do?
Overall, Bush did well. Speeches can be powerful but there is only so much you can do in the face of overwhelming opposition to real policy. What Bush was able to do however, was effectively navigate the stormy waters of an audience dominated by the opposition. He was civil, polite and there was no “baiting” and no throwing of “red meat to the base”, which is even more remarkable.
When looked at objectively, this was not a non-partisan nor a humble speech but when compared to Bush’s other speeches, it marked a definite shift in those directions.
His beginning remarks about Pelosi were brilliant! “And tonight, I have the high privilege and distinct honor of my own, as the first president to begin the State of the Union message with these words: ‘Madam Speaker.’ In his day, the late congressman, Thomas d'Alessandro Jr., from Baltimore, Maryland, saw Presidents Roosevelt and Truman at this rostrum. But nothing could compare with the sight of his only daughter, Nancy, presiding tonight as speaker of the House of Representatives. Congratulations, Madam Speaker.”
These words were gracious, personable, simple, and eloquent. Acknowledging Pelosi and augmenting it with the remark about her father was unexpected and remarkably thoughtful.
He began with domestic initiatives. This is customary in terms of most SOTU’s but unusual for Bush’s speeches. In past years, he began with foreign policy.
Most of the news will be made in this portion. His remarks on energy were striking in that he proposed reforming CAFÉ standards, replaced his call for hydrogen cars with plug-ins and hybrids, and in his call for action he actually said words he’s rarely uttered before, certainly not ever in such a prominent speech: “the serious challenge of global climate change.” He also said the word “conserve” which was huge. The ghost of Jimmy Carter wearing his cardigan while asking Americans to turn down their thermostats has spooked an entire generation of politicians from asking the country to conserve. This skittishness reached its peak when Dick Cheney derided “conservation” as a personal virtue but not a practical working policy. With Bush’s words in this SOTU, that era may finally be over.
He was unusually specific about his health care initiative which means he is serious about it.
When he moved on to the 800 lb. gorilla, Iraq, he did as well as he could. There was nothing in this portion that he did not say in his address two weeks ago but even here, there was an incremental step towards conciliation: “This was not the fight we entered but it is the fight we are in.” and more important, “Our country is pursuing a new strategy in Iraq - and I ask you to give it a chance to work.”
Some weak points: stylistically he flubbed more times than he really should. Diction remains an issue for him, for example, “nucular”, “penishula”.
The gallery moments have outlived their usefulness. In this speech they were almost like an afterthought. Nice stories, remarkable people but it’s time to retire this theatricality. It was effective when executed by Reagan who began the custom but it’s now become formulaic.
There was not much stirring rhetoric here. Some may call it fluff… but it is necessary fluff. It is really the only time that Americans can hear from our President what it means to be an American. His conclusion was almost non-existent. The speech was long and perhaps he felt that he didn’t have time for a summary of themes but I felt its absence.
Overall, there were no great steps forward in this address but compared to most of his recent speeches which were gigantic steps backwards, I say standing still is a victory for Bush. Nice job, Mr. President.
btw: Webb's Democratic Response was great! Short, focused, thoughtful. He was, however, a bit more combative than the President. This is either good or bad depending on where you stand politically...Private Reply to LeeAundra Keany, Executive Communications Coach |
