Oral Exam

I was riveted and moved by the tribute to Ted Kennedy. In the hall, thousands around me wept. Kennedy's speech was punchy, and his lungs were as strong as ever. Far more impressive was his sheer courage. It recalled the legendary moment at the 1924 Democratic convention, when Franklin Roosevelt appeared at a podium for the first time since he was stricken by polio.  Roosevelt "walked" to the lectern with stiff braces on the arm of his son.  Historians report that the crowd was dead silent as he struggled, then let loose a roar of pure emotion. (The scene is the heart of two movies, "Sunrise at Campobello" and HBO's "Warm Springs.") The crowd tonight was shouting not for Kennedy, but to him.

Michelle Obama's speech was tremendously effective.  It was beautifully written; I loved the line, reminiscent of Seamus Heaney's poem, about "the current of history meets this new tide of hope." She did a great job, better than I have heard before, connecting Barack Obama's story with core American values of hard work and upward mobility. Her performance skills were near dazzling. She did one of the hardest things to do: rouse a crowd in a hockey arena, while conveying intimate emotion to the TV audience. When she declaimed emphatically, "That is why I love this country," on TV you could see she had tears in her eyes. I believed her utterly.

But I still have some doubts.  At the risk of being churlish, I don't like this emerging tradition of family members speaking at these conventions.  It didn't start here—Tipper, Hillary and Liddy Dole all spoke at their conventions in 1996—but in lesser hands it can be mawkish and diminishing. (Like the practice of pointing out the "heroes" in the First Lady's gallery at the State of the Union.) Conventiongoers heard a panel discussion, a parade of  "ordinary folks," people who knew Barack Obama as an organizer, and so on. I put in a vote for professional politicians who hone arguments from the podium, thus creating a common language.

Minor quibbles about an impressive first evening.

Overview: What to Expect this Week:
Posted at 5 p.m. ET Aug 25 

MICHAEL GERSON

Having just finished watching the closing ceremonies of a vast, expensive, tightly controlled, made-for-TV spectacle sponsored by a party of the left, Americans now turn to … a vast, expensive, tightly controlled, made-for-TV spectacle sponsored by a party of the left.

The Democratic convention may lack the excitement and scandals of the Olympics (though Obama does look suspiciously young), but the venues this week offer some drama of their own.

First, how will Bill Clinton get out of this one? During a campaign in which he compared Obama to Jesse Jackson, hogged media attention from his candidate wife and was forced to explain, "I am not a racist," national affection for the former president has waned.

It won't be easy to recover. But, like Houdini bound in chains and submerged in a shark tank, Clinton will escape, and it will be fun to watch. Bill Clinton is at his very best in this type of circumstance. Seemingly doomed by his own excesses, he triumphs with a formidable set of strengths: amazing fluency, a roguish likability and a keen political sense (which failed temporarily during the bitterness of his wife's campaign). If given enough room to run by the organizers, Clinton should deliver one of the most effective speeches of the convention and recover some of his standing in the party.

Second, will there be a serious Democratic appeal to pro-lifers? It was this issue more than any other that drove many religious conservatives (previously Democrats in many parts of the country) toward the Republican Party in the 1970s and 1980s. This campaign of alienation reached its peak of intensity in 1992, when Democrats prevented Governor Robert Casey of Pennsylvania—a courageous, pro-life Catholic—from speaking at their convention. This time Obama has offered Casey's son, Senator Bob Casey, Jr., a chance to speak. What will he say about his father? How will the young Casey appeal to pro-life voters?