Barack Obama delivered last night what has been hailed by most of the press as an extraordinary speech, which is not surprising considering The Hills blog is reporting that dozens of members of the media were seen standing and cheering during the speech. And I say most praised the speech because a writer for the AP had a more negative reaction to the speech, which drew the ire of none other than Keith Olbermann.

All in all, the speech, with the exception of the rhetoric of the last five to ten minutes, was nothing that we haven't already heard. Obama said he was going to lay out his proposals, but specifics were few and far between. The main theme of the speech, it seemed, was the entire theme of the night - John McCain would be a "third term" for George W. Bush. Like was noted in the live blog, Obama went after McCain's judgement, just as Sen. Joe Biden did the night before. I think this is going to be their theme over the next couple of months, and it will be up to the Republicans to refute these claims if they want to win the election.

Now, of course, Obama couldn't have spelled out exactly how each of these proposals would work in a 40 minute speech. It comes down to the simple fact that it is the same stuff that we have been hearing in the primaries - broad proposals that sound appealing on the surface but ignore the specifics. For example, Obama said that he would work to raise the salaries of teachers and increase funding for our schools. But he never mentioned where this money would come from or how he would get it.

Perhaps that's what will be spelled out in the next couple of months. Even so, the speech would have been more powerful, in my opinion, with hard numbers and not just the same rhetoric we have been hearing throughout the past four days.

I think most people were looking for a speech up to par, if not better, than the one he gave at the 2004 DNC. As Nash said last night, this one falls short. It certainly didn't strike me as extraordinary, but it did put the ball in the Republicans' court. And it will be their task to rebuke the claims in Minnesota next week.

Now, back to what I was saying earlier about most journalists thoroughly enjoying the speech. Charles Babington of the AP was not one of them. The article, in my eyes, is a fair assessment of the speech. Olbermann, of course, did not think so. After most likely pulling this piece of information off Daily Kos, Olbermann read a few paragraphs of Babington's article, ridiculing him for not watching the same speech and getting the length wrong by a few mere minutes. Olbermann, horrified that this could be reprinted in thousands of newspapers across the country, was sincerely worried for his man Obama. He concluded his rant - which would have made you think you were watching "Countdown" and he was listing off the World's Worse - by telling Babington to "find new work." Keep in mind that this is a former sports reporter turned self-proclaimed politcal expert telling a veteran journalist that his work is factually wrong.

In the end, last night capped of a week of the same for the Democrats. Their message is clear - McCain is Bush #3. As we have mentioned, it is up to the Republicans to develop a well-supported response to this.

If I were to respond at length to Obama's speech, I would probably reply to a whole list of things- from Obama's claims about supply-side economics to his old, failed education policies- but so much that I would say would merely be conservative calisthenics. Obama accused McCain of using the same old tactics because he lacks new ideas and can't point to a record of success (hm?!?), but I would say that his positions reveal that indictment to be true of Obama himself. Thus, most of the arguments used to rebut, say, Jimmy Carter or George McGovern, could be repeated to rebut Obama. Even so, we will likely post an in-depth commentary tomorrow.

For now, all I have to say is that after watching most (though, admittedly, not all) of the speeches this week, Obama's was at least above average. But, it wasn't terribly groundbreaking, and I don't think any of the lines will go down in history- or at least they don't deserve to. I would rank it far below the memorable 2004 address. It wasn't quite as policy-driven as I had expected (though I was surprised to hear about his proposal to cut the capital gains tax for small businesses, which I hadn't heard about until now, is a good idea, and, naturally, somewhat contrary to the rest of his ideology). Yes, he mentioned a good number of his positions, but there were very few facts and figures (which is understandable, because the facts and figures- such as the report that revised our second quarter GDP growth to a fairly strong 3.3%- do not fully support his narrative). Essentially, the Obama campaign is asking us to be short-term pessimists, but long-term optimists. I think he would have to have heftier proposals to justify such a leap, but I do think the speech will give him something of a convention bounce. The attack the Republicans must deal with most effectively is that McCain= Bush's third term. If they do not repudiate that argument, McCain will lose.

We'll both post summary posts later tonight (and maybe more commentary Friday). Hope you enjoyed our converage. We'll be back next week.

11:04 - The networks will not fawn over the final night of the RNC like they have tonight. The only reason they may be gleeful is because it will be over.

11:03 - An encore for the Obama and Biden families.

11:02 PM - Olbermann and Matthews are going crazy over the speech. "To hell with my critics," Matthews said.

10:58 - Fireworks and more country tunes. Still awaiting network reaction.

10:56 - The last five minutes were the best. But still, 2004 was better.

10:52 - "Change doesn't comes from Washington; it comes to Washington." His best line so far has been a pronoun switch.

10:52 - The election has never been about Obama? Really?

10:49 - The gay remark seemed to get one of the biggest cheers.

10:48 - A "U-S-A" chant turns into a weird "U-Yes-S-We-A-Can" hybrid chant.

10:47 - He's repeated himself a few times this speech. Now he's repeating his blue state-red state monolgue from 2004.

10:45 - "Last best hope?" Isn't that a Reagan line?

10:38 - He's explaining how he's paying for all of it! This has got to be a first in the campaign season.

10:36 - Where is Obama getting all this money from to increase teacher salaries and fund schools?

10:34 - A crack about McCain's 26 years in Congress? Did he read Biden's resume?

10:33 - Obama says that in 10 years he will end our foreign dependence on oil. Drilling stance is still iffy.

10:32 - Finally getting to the meat.

10:31 - "Government cannot solve all our problems, but it can make it so all our problems are solved."

10:29 - Still no substance ...

10:27 - His 2004 speech was about how red and blue states need to unify. This speech has featured an Us vs. Them rant.

10:23 - Instead of focusing on the experience argument (because McCain would win that hands down), the Obama campaign is going after judgement. Biden questioned McCain's judgement last night, and Obama is doing the same tonight.

10:21 - So far the speech hasn't been that transcendent, nothing too noteworthy. The same people must be editing these speeches.

10:19 PM - First jab at the Bush presidency.

10:14 - And the final count on the ovation ... two and a half minutes.

10:13 - It continues.

10:12 - It continues.

10:11 PM - The ovation begins.

10:10 - Supporters of the Obama campaign keep hitting the points of "moving" and "inspiring" people. There is little talk about actual policy ... which is supposedly what this forthcoming speech is supposed to clear up.

10:07 - The video has already started emphasizing the "workmanlike" themes. Hopefully the speech won't be as trite, though.

10:02 - The DNC video for Obama ... images of the heartland, Obama with baby photos - the standard politcal images. The video sems to argue implicitly that self-actualization will lead to a superior presidency.

10:02 - Obama is pro-people, according to an interviewee on MSNBC. As opposed to John McCain being ... anti-people?

10:01 - Another "no more Bush" and "turn the page" reference. You really didn't have to watch a full hour to get the message. Just listen to one speaker.

10:00 - Durbin voted in favor of this war he is condemning. But what's new?

10:00 PM - Sounds like Dick Durbin needs a glass of water.

9:56 - Anxiously awaiting Dick Durbin's speech ...

9:51 - There is some serious downtime before the 10:00 hour here. The dances sure are interesting though.

9:49 - Actually, his blurb was "Riverating" ... just trying our hand at puns since the DNC seems to be all over those.

9:48 - Ray Rivera's blurb was riveting. This must be the calm before the storm.

9:45 - C-SPAN is turning out to be the channel to watch. All the 24-hour news networks are busy over-analyzing during some of the speakers. And for the purpose of our blog, we want to hear the speakers since we are doing our own analysis. Olbermann's insights have proven to be insufficient which is disappointing.

9:42 - Barney Smith leaves the stage to chants of "Barney! Barney!" No such treatment for Gore.

9:38 - A hyphenated last name, a thick country accent, and three words a minute? Yes - the speaker from Pittsboro did us proud ...

9:36 - It seems like these blue-collar speakers are firing the crowd up more than any of the other speakers have thus far. The message has been the same, though - change, no "third" Bush term and the like.

9:34 - Three spanish speakers so far since around 8:00.

9:31 PM EST - Regarding the blue-collar speakers, Joe Biden said he would listen to these people everday. He says he is going to listen to them everday, but I hope he has professional advisors.

9:29 - Not much analysis to provide right now. There are constant gaps between speakers, and the speeches themselves are more of the same rhetoric. We want to see Keith Olbermann say something stupid, but we haven't found anything ... yet. Though it is interesting to add that we've seen "9/11 was an inside job" and "Maddow/Olbermann in 2012" signs in the crowd behind the MSNBC desk.

9:26 - Biden doesn't use the "Bill Clinton thumb jab" when he speaks, making him perhaps the only Democrat who doesn't employ this overused technique.

9:24 - Biden takes the stage ... unnanounced according to the offical DNC website.

9:19 - It has been discussed before, but the stage that is in place at Invesco Field invokes images of ancient Greece. When the "Obamessiah" takes the stage, he should be wearing some sort of God-like robe.

9:14 - Michael McDonald provided a rendition of "America the Beautiful." Anyone who saw 40 Year Old Virgin would find this mildly humorous.

9:00 PM EST - Some thoughts on the Al Gore speech right before the hour.
- "Let the Sunshine In" was his intro and outro song. How fitting.
- Gore's speech was mostly forgettable, presenting the same Obama cathecism. The most interesting part of his speech was his equation of Obama to Abraham Lincoln. Really? Lincoln's greatness came from his willingness and ability to make unimaginably difficult moral decisions. Obama thinks that any decision which has moral implications is above his pay grade (or, at least, he said so at the Saddleback Forum).
- Gore mentioned he didn't want to "recycle" Bush's policies of the last eight years. Oh, the puns.

Nash gave a quick preview of what to expect from the Democrats tonight. Here's a quick rundown of what you can expect from us tonight.

We'll be keeping live, running posts in 30 minute intervals beginning at 9:00 PM EST. Barack Obama's acceptance speech will be given its own live post.

9:00 - 10:00 PM EST
- Live musical performance from Michael McDonald
- Susan Eisenhower
- Retired Generals Tribute
- American Voices Program (aka, Obama's attempt at snagging the blue-collar votes)

10:00 PM EST
- Richard Durbin
- Barack Obama

Look for analysis, our own personal thoughts, and of course pithy comments throughout the night. And be sure to leave your thoughts in the comments section.

A quick preview of tonight:
Everything will be over-the-top tonight: from the fans, to the media coverage, to the stadium (which, interestingly, was constructed by the same set team that put together Britney Spear's last tour... apparently that ad had predictive, not merely entertainment, value). Everything, that is, except for the speech. The smart money says that Obama's speech tonight will focus on policies. In his words: "I'm not aiming for a lot of high rhetoric... I'm more concerned with communicating how I intend to help middle-class families."

After a long hiatus, the Carolina Review blog is back. We hope to make this an engaging forum where we can interact with our readers this year. Over the next two weeks, we'll be covering the Democratic National Convention and the Republican National Convention. Thursday night, Michael Smith and I will be blogging live during Obama's acceptance speech (as we expect to do during McCain's next week). At this point, I would just like to record a few short observations (which are very far from exhaustive) from Monday-Wednesday.

• So far, there has been no discernible "convention bump" in the polls. Monday, the Gallup national poll had a 45-45% tie. Tuesday, John McCain actually slid ahead 46-44%. Wednesday, Obama was ahead 45-44%. These results have been mirrored by other daily polls. Now, though we still have Obama's acceptance speech, which could very well give him a statistically significant lead (however briefly), it cannot be a good sign that the opening of the convention, combined with the Biden VP announcement gave the ticket absolutely no momentum. [Update: Polling from Thursday show is mixed. Gallup polling indicates that Obama is up 48-42%, but Rasmussen, which has had them even all week, has Obama with only a one point lead. At least we can still say that there was no initial bounce from the Biden announcement. Indeed, Rasmussen reports that Obama "lost ground immediately following the selection of Joe Biden as his running mate."]
  
• The pundits generally applauded Michelle Obama's speech on Monday night. At the least, they said that she accomplished her main goal: changing her image from the enraged radical of the primaries to an American everymom. This is something of a trend in the family (precipitated by necessity, no doubt, but made possible by a willingness verging on duplicity). Immediately after securing the Democratic nomination, Obama started trying to present himself as a son of Kansas, guided by Midwest values. He also started moving to the center on a list of issues (Iran, guns, free trade, etc.). More recently, Obama has been attempting a transformation from the long-awaited Messiah to "a clear-eyed pragmatist" (in the words of Biden). Perhaps more incidentally, He has already undergone a CHANGE from the Obama who wrote The Audacity of Hope, the Obama who seemed to ache that he couldn't agree with everyone simultaneously (though he completely understood the viewpoints of those with whom he disagreed) to the sharp-elbowed Obama of today, who superciliously derides his opponents (take, for example, his infamous "bitter" monologue or when he remarked, "it’s like these guys take pride in being ignorant"). On the other hand, I don't think McCain could re-invent himself.
  
• If I could set one rule for the conventions, it would be that no idea may be repeated, which would make them barely long enough for 3 commercial breaks. If I could set a second rule, it would be that no convention speaker may use anything that might potentially be interpretated as a pun. Amoung the many cringe-inducing samples are:
  
• "It makes perfect sense that George Bush and John McCain will be together next week in the Twin Cities, because these day they're awfully hard to tell apart." -Hillary Clinton
  
• "If you watched the Olympics you know China's going for the gold." -Mark Warner
• "Even though John McCain spent 26 years in Washington voting over and over against investing in renewable energy, John McCain does support some 'renewables.' He wants to renew the failed Bush agenda..." -Kathleen Sebelius
  
• While this convention may in the end be successful in uniting the Democratic Party, establishing the narrative for the general election, and giving Obama a much-needed bump in the polls, it has already done one thing very conclusively: provided us with plenty of reminders of just how odious politicians are (one of the least heralded benefits of a limited government is that we wouldn't feel so irresponsible if we just ignored these narcissists and their fatuous pronouncements). The worst example so far has to be Hillary Clinton. About a third of the way through her speech Tuesday night she took a moment to remember two prominent Democrats who have recently passed away: Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs-Jones and Arkansas Democratic Chair Bill Gwatney. Then, she went from almost touching to blatantly obscene, saying "You know, Bill Gwatney and Stepahnie Tudds-Jones knew that, after eight years of George Bush, people are hurting at home and our standing has eroded around the world." We don't typically take friends' passings as opportunities to score rhetorical points... and I thought Bill was the indecent one.