David Frum was one who did not enjoy President Bush's inaguration speech.
...the real information contained in an inaugural addresses is information about the president who delivers it. A clear, direct, and specific address – like Roosevelt’s first or Reagan’s first – indicates a focused and disciplined presidency to come. A diffuse, orotund, and self-consciously eloquent address – like Lyndon Johnson’s in 1965 or Bill Clinton’s in 1993 – often warns of weak decision-making and excessive image-consciousness in the new administration.
The high fat content in this second Bush inaugural suggests to me that something is going seriously wrong in this second Bush White House. The deep problem is not that there were seven extra minutes – ultimately, who cares about that? The deep problem is that nobody spoke up to excise those seven minutes – not even the normally deeply time-conscious president. To my mind, the failure to edit this speech is an indication of a broader gathering attenuation of purpose and discipline at the highest levels of the government. I hope I’m wrong about that, I really do.
