"(I love it when he gets Democrats to chant “U-S-A!”)"

Ditto. I remember being stunned when they did that after his Iowa victory. The thousands of American flags waving was a great effect, too. Plus, I noticed a flag pin on his lapel . . . nuance gives way to political necessity, more often than not.

I think you guys need to lighten up about one reference to Martin Luther King, Jr. This speech barely mentioned race at all.

As the 45-year-to-the-day anniversary of "I have a dream" was being brought up by every pundit and anchor I saw in the lead-up to the speech, Obama's lovely invocation of it -- by which he reiterated his commitment to positivity over negativity --  seemed not at all out of place, and didn't even register for me as a statement on race. Enlightened lib that I am.

I dunno about the MLK reference-surely it was not excessive and how could he not mention the eyes of the man who made the prize possible on the 45th anniversary of the great speech. Then again(this may seem bizzare)but I am in a lot of nursing homes and am struck by the number of times I hear the dementia-sticken white residents using intense racial slurs cursing at the black nurses aides who are trying to clean/help them. Of course they are senile but I think this betrays the vestiges of embedded racism that may not yet be scrubbed away from the national white psyche. I hope he doesn't fail by this.

I agree with the MLK comment.  Made for a weak ending, too -- especially that scriptural quote, which sort of evaporated as it went out.

OK speech, but not great.  Almost nothing on immigration, which has been a great disappointment of this campaign all along.  If the Democrats don't speak out for the immigrants, no one will.  Looks as though no one will.  Cowardly, at best.

www.nytimes.com/.../28speech.html

I was hoping for a lot more in the way of specific details.  If he doesn't stray from the platitudes, the electorate will soon get tired them.

"As the 45-year-to-the-day anniversary of "I have a dream" was being brought up by every pundit and anchor I saw in the lead-up to the speech, Obama's lovely invocation of it -- by which he reiterated his commitment to positivity over negativity --  seemed not at all out of place, and didn't even register for me as a statement on race. Enlightened lib that I am."

It wasn't a problem because it was a statement on race, which, of course, it wasn't, exactly; it may have been a problem because it meant that the last image viewers had of his speech connected him to a black preacher who's probably much more important to African Americans -- and enlightened libs -- than he is to many other voters.  The reference may have been inevitable, but it might have been much better earlier in the speech.  As it was, it just sort of stuck out there at the end, not connected, as I remember, to much of anything else.

I like the speech OK because of its populist themes.  But I think that it might sound too much like traditional liberal for many people.  And having laid out all these problems, and all these (expensive) solutions, does this guy really looked like a FIXER, and DOER?   I kind of doubt swing voters will think so.    

lesserliz -- perhaps those black nurses really were meaner, more impatient, or less caring to those "demented" seniors than non-black nurses?  When my mother was dying of cancer, I was amazed at the difference between the many surly black nurses at Johns Hopkins in Baltimore, and the almost much nicer and more helpful white nurses in western Pennsylvania.  Experiences like this is how "racism" is reinforced.  

There was a moment after Barack Obama spoke but before Michelle and the children had made it on stage

I've got to give a dissenting opinion on the MLK point in the post.  Obama had to note the anniversary in some way during his speech or else he would have been roundly criticized.  If you agree with that point, from there you have to think about how best to do it, and ending a speech with something as inspiring as the story of MLK is a pretty good way to ensure you end on a high note.  Not only that, but can you think of a time in our country's past where we went through a period of more positive change than in the civil rights movement?  It is a nice story to tie together Obama's argument that we need change, and the kind of change we need isn't going to come from token measures.  

I also thought his framing of the MLK story was very similar to how Bush (in one of his few speach-giving strengths) can tell stories that will have different meanings for different audiences.  By framing his telling of the MLK story in terms of "a young preacher" as opposed to using names like "the King" or "MLK" or even "Martin," Obama made the racial politics aspect of the story all the more implicit. To those who know MLK's story well, they knew exactly what he was talking about.  To those perhaps not as emershed in MLK's story, what they heard was the story of a "young preacher" who worked his tail off to change his country for the better.

John Judis claims Obama’s speech was just what the doctor ordered, hitting on change, American promise

John Judis claims Obama’s speech was just what the doctor ordered, hitting on change, American promise