Conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer was not convinced by first lady Michelle Obama’s widely-praised speech at the Democratic National Convention Tuesday night, saying he “didn’t buy a line of it.”
The speech began with an account of the couple’s early life, progressing to the modern day. Michelle fondly recalled the rusted car her husband first picked her up in, and how they owed more in student loans than they did for their mortgage. She discussed their parents and grandparents, and the hardships they faced so their children could have better lives.
“I know from experience that if I truly want to leave a better world for my daughters, and all of our sons and daughters, and if we want to give all our children a foundation for their dreams and opportunities worthy of their promise…if we want to give them that sense of limitless possibility – that belief that here in America, there is always something better out there if you’re willing to work for it…then we must work like never before,” she told a roaring crowd.
Here is Krauthammer’s analysis, via the Daily Caller:
Krauthammer commented: “She told the story of a Gandhi, and you know…looking at how he’s conducted himself in the present scene, particularly in the campaign, with ruthlessness, and determination and drive, it’s not quite a plausible story. I’m sure in the arena it was a plausible story, I saw the tears, but I’m afraid I didn’t … I’m sure it was a great speech but I didn’t buy a line of it.”
That is not to say it wasn’t an effective speech. Krauthammer added:
“Nonetheless I would say within that, and despite the repetition that have, Michelle Obama’s speech I thought was a brilliant speech, and brilliantly delivered… All of the other speakers would talk about what Obama does — the achievement and legislation and whatever, and the political implications. Her whole task was to say why, her answer was, ‘Why? Because essentially he’s a saint. Because of his upbringing and because of his emotions and because of his humanity he does this because he cares and the brilliance of it is this.’ It drained Obama of any ideological motivation or any having to do with self-interest or ambition, which I think is sort of more plausible explanation.”
But what of the rest of the speeches? Did Democrats, for instance, do a good job of refuting the commonly-held idea that they believe the government is the center of society?
“They spoke endlessly of spending on this, spending on that….government doing x, government doing y, as a way to achieve what they think needs to be achieved…I think if anything it reinforced the notion that they are completely government-centered in their understanding of society.”
- Michelle Obama Talks Up Husband at DNC: ‘Being President Doesn’t Change Who You Are – It Reveals Who You Are’
- ‘He Is Mocking People’: Krauthammer Takes on the ‘You Didn’t Build That’ Philosophy’
- Krauthammer Reacts to Paul Ryan’s RNC Speech: ‘Like Stiletto Attacks, Each One a Short Jab That Left a Mark’