Since Reagan's time we have seen the use of individuals' personal stories as a prop for each President's points or policy positions, sometimes with devastating effect.  Last night Bush pointed to a young sergeant and told his story and clearly meant to imply that not to support his policies was the same as letting down people like this courageous young man who had been awarded the Silver Star and Purple Heart.  Webb countered this device by introducing his father's picture and referring to how difficult it was for his family to bear his father's deployments, then he flips Bush's device on its head:

I still keep it, to remind me of the sacrifices that my mother and others had to make, over and over again, as my father gladly served our country. I was proud to follow in his footsteps, serving as a Marine in Vietnam. My brother did as well, serving as a Marine helicopter pilot. My son has joined the tradition, now serving as an infantry Marine in Iraq.

Like so many other Americans, today and throughout our history, we serve and have served, not for political reasons, but because we love our country. On the political issues--those matters of war and peace, and in some cases of life and death--we trusted the judgment of our national leaders. We hoped that they would be right, that they would measure with accuracy the value of our lives against the enormity of the national interest that might call upon us to go into harm's way.

We owed them our loyalty, as Americans, and we gave it. But they owed us sound judgment, clear thinking, concern for our welfare, a guarantee that the threat to our country was equal to the price we might be called upon to pay in defending it.

Wow.  Not only did he point out that this young sergeant's sacrifices and those of our other military are not based on politics, but he drove home the point that the sacrifices should not be taken for granted nor gratuitously incurred, and all while sitting in a quiet little study with no live audience and no live bodies to point to.  That car alarm you're hearing is the sound made by the one he hit out of the park and into Bush's windshield. 

CNN's Blitzer: "As expected, a tough, no-nonsense speech" (1/23).

  CBS' Couric: "The Democrats picked Jim Webb for one obvious reason -- his military credentials are above reproach" (1/23).

  CBS' Schieffer: "He really ripped [Bush] tonight" (1/23).

  MSNBC's Matthews, on the choice of Webb: "I thought it was one of rare moments the Democratic Party showed tremendous discretion in picking someone who may not be the most liberal member of the Democratic caucus, ... but who certainly carries the political rank of someone who has faced the enemy and whose children are willing to face the enemy up against a president and a vice president who have avoided the same kind of experience" (1/23).

  Pat Buchanan, on Webb: "That was riveting. He is an authentic individual. It was very moving in those passages about his father and his son. And I think tens of millions of Americans saw him really for the first time. Virginia's seen him. And I think the Democratic Party really has a star there" (MSNBC, 1/23).

Also, courtesy of Hotline.

If you watched freshman Virginia Sen. Jim Webb deliver the Democratic response to Bush's State of the Union speech, you witnessed something historic -- a Democrat on national TV unabashedly ripping into six years of Bush rule for an uninterrupted 10 minutes.

With no O'Reilly or Hannity to disrupt or out-shout him.

http://www.commondre...

Nick:)

Webb gets the netroots jacked up about the nominee, puts Virginia firmly in play, and adds military credentials that none can top. I'd hate to lose him as our Senator, but would be willing to share him with the other 49.

Kill this idea now.  Jim Webb for Senate!!!!

Many people doubt he would run - and that may be the case.  All we can do is ask.  This is bigger than the State of Virginia.  I know you guys like your new Senator and don't want to lose him, but there is a void of leadership.  We need him.

Economic populism, whether bashing globalization or demanding a higher minimum wage and ending tax cuts for the wealthy, is becoming the distinctive new message of the Democrats, but it has seldom been put as persuasively and with such patriotic credentials as in Senator Jim Webb's rebuttal speech.

But Charles W. Dunn, a political scientist at Regent University, said Webb "offered no solutions and failed to inspire." Webb lacked spark and repeated the same answers he had given during his campaign, Dunn said.

"He had a golden opportunity here. But he didn't fully rise to the occasion. . . . A new leader was not born there tonight," Dunn said.

Failed to inspire? America fell in love with Jim Webb last night.

"Offered no solutions" AND "repeated the same answers" seems like the good professor is rebutting his own argument.

I agree with the good professor on this. "He had a golden opportunity here." You are so right professor Dunn. Opportunity provided, opportunity seized and opportunity a smashing success!

Plus, agressive regional deplomacy sure seems like hard work.

Newsbuster was, as usual, full of juvenile comments sneering at Webb's military service and his use of his family's military history as a "prop" in his speech. It was down hill from there, claiming that all Webb could do was criticize without offering any solutions other than promoting defeat for US and victory for terrorists, and he should be in jail for not supporting the troops and the Commander-in-Chief. They also tried re-running Allen's trite claims that Webb wrote pornography, which strikes me as a sign of desperation.

Michael Gerson, former speech writer for Bush, expressed his contempt for Webb's speech in a by-lined letter in Newsweek(http://www.msnbc.msn...
Among other things he called  the speech flabby and mediocre compared to what he termed Bush's outstanding speech, which he pointed out began graciously with comments to Madame Speaker.  It looks like the word is out: downplay Webb's effort, call it worthless and insulting to the President, a speech which contributed nothing to solving the problems we face in Iraq... in short, trivialize and smear Senator Webb and deny the substance of his speech. 

Oh, yes, I noted the frequent use of liberal as a swear word by all right-wing nuts in commenting on the speech, thus dismissing Webb and anything he had to say.

Typical republican hatch job. But what do you expect.

On the Gerson review, I checked it out earlier and comments are running about 90% against Gerson.  I propose that everyone on this site go to that one and make their comments.

They keep chanting the mantra that Democrats don't have a plan; all they can do is criticize.  Or their second favorite mantra is Democrats want to cut and run.  They want us to lose.

But none of that is true.  Of course, various Democrats may have some differences and variation on how to achieve the ultimate goal of getting our soldiers out of harm's way in Iraq.  But the majority agree that we need to redeploy to outside of Iraq but not entirely leave the region immediately.  We need to gradually draw our troops down and let the Iraqis take over defending themselves and allow them to find a political solution to their differences.  We can't fight their civil war for them.

But Webb's job was to deliver a Democratic rebuttal to the SOTU.  It wasn't to give an in depth, 90 minute policy speech.  If he had spoken too long, that would have been criticized too.

Those who were not impressed with his speech and its delivery are embittered partisan hacks or far right idealogues.

Fair minded conservatives were impressed even when they disagreed with Webb's content.  People like Pat Buchanan, David Brooks, Andrew Sullivan all admitted Webb did a brilliant job.  It's perfectly fair to point out where their opinions differ.  But criticizing the quality speaks more about the critic and his judgment than about Webb.

Jim Webb is the man McCain would pretend to be, but when I look for straight talk on any issue from economic fairness to the War in Iraq, Jim stays true to the first principles he learned--duty, honor and country.

I doubt national Democrats are less aware of his potential than I am.  I believe this is Jim Webb's moment in history and his moment is the nation's opportunity.  Of course, many in Virginia would hold him close and keep him in the Senate.  I understand.  He gives you great bragging rights and I believe he can do a lot of good in the Senate, but I also believe Jim is bigger than any one state.  When Jim went to Vietnam, he fought there for his country.  Don't be surprised to see him move higher up the political ladder to better serve this country he loves so well.