Having watched President Bush’s acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention, I found it difficult to not compare that speech and the one made by Senator Kerry in accepting his nomination during the Democratic National Convention.  I re-read the Kerry speech and then re-read a commentary by David Brooks (N.Y. Times, July 31, 2004).  In part, Brooks stated:

“What an incoherent disaster. When you actually read for content, you see that the speech skirts almost every tough issue and comes out on both sides of every major concern. The Iraq section is shamefully evasive. He can't even bring himself to use the word “democratic” or to contemplate any future for Iraq, democratic or otherwise. He can't bring himself to say whether the war was a mistake or to lay out even the most meager plan for moving forward. For every gesture in the direction of greater defense spending, there are opposing hints about reducing our commitments and bringing the troops home.

“He proves in the speech that he can pronounce the word “alliances”, and alliances are important, but alliances for what? You can't base an entire foreign policy on process.

“Then I remembered that, of course, the Great Co-opter has to try gauzily to please everyone. He has to play to the 86 percent of the delegates who say the U.S. should have stayed out of Iraq, as well as the Clintonite foreign policy elites who supported the war. He has to play to the Sharptons as well as the Liebermans."

I noted in an August 3^rd entry on another blog that Brooks made several important points.  One of them was the fact that speeches when heard are much different than when read for content.  In his speech, Mr. Kerry presented nothing new.  His opportunistic "please everyone" approach was the same as it always has been.  His ability to be on both sides of any issue is remarkable. He has not changed his spots nor will he.  If Europe doesn't like something we do he will sway in their direction.  If Move-On.org doesn't like something he is thinking, he will sway the other way. 

With Mr. Kerry, it will continue to be "blame America first".  In his mind and in the minds of many on the left, it is always the fault of America if we are attacked.  For example, the Fox News Website carried this headline on August 2, 2004:  Democratic candidate John Kerry accused President Bush of encouraging terrorist recruitment with policies that have made the world angry at the United States..."

Blaming America first!  Somehow those on the left think that if we were just nicer to the Europeans and the islamic fascists we would be safer.  And yet the truth is that it is because of the democrats that the enemy learned to see us as pushovers and started to murder us.  President Bush did not attack the towers and he did not attack the U.S.S. Cole.  He did not blow up thousands of people.  He is trying to defend us and he is facing the obstacle of Democrat propaganda with every move. 

In contrast, I just re-read President Bush’s speech from last night.  His words were humble yet powerful.  He stood as a leader, not an appeasing waffler. His speech was one of hope.  He said that “Since 2001, Americans have been given hills to climb and found the strength to climb them.”).  He said that he believes “Every child can learn and every school must teach…”.  He said that “I believer in the energy and innovative spirit of America’s workers, entrepreneurs, farmers and ranchers…”.  And most importantly, he said that “now we have reached a time of hope…Now we go forward, grateful for our freedom, faithful to our cause, and confident in the future of the greatest nation on earth.”

The contrast cannot be missed.  The hesitant, worried, never committing Democrat and the firm, strong, clear Republican.  Both are seeking the same office and only one…President Bush…holds the credentials for the job.