I thought so, concise, like talking to an adult.
He laid out the path to reform of our twisted
overgrown government. Protest alone will not do it,
we must make a positive effort to create the kind
of government WE want.
It seemed to me that he was very reasoned, gave a
good historiocity to the story of our nation and
how we can KEEP it.
He certainly spoke to all those families out there
who have been wondering when they were going to hear
a speech like this.
For me, not so awesome.
There was much to like about the speech. It was good overall, but here are the points that concern me (from memory):
1. He talks a lot about income inequality as if it were a bad thing. This plays into the class envy that the dems love so much. There will always be income equality and I see nothing wrong with it unless it is the product of cronyism or government stealing from the middle class to further enrich the already rich. Otherwise income inequality comes from inequality in hard work and willingness to take risks. Some of it comes from inequality in intelligence, skills, talent, good looks, and luck. If we were all exactly equal with no hope of getting ahead, no one would make an effort to get ahead and we would have no innovation or advancement.
2. He recites a litany of bills being introduced to address various problems. When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Typical politician. Introduce another bill to fix things. I didn’t hear any mention of repealing crappy legislation that we’ve already been saddled with. I didn’t hear any mention of getting the government off our backs and out of our lives. Just more bills to fix what the earlier bills screwed up.
3. De rigueur mention of “diversity.” He still has to be politically correct and pander. IMO, “diversity” is just as often a weakness as it is a strength. Maybe more often. Diverse ideas are great when groupthink prevents innovation or sometimes even recognition of reality and facts. Diverse ideas are great when you are brainstorming. (But when you are finished brainstorming, you pick the winners and discard the losers. Please note that I am not advocating discarding the “losers” when they are people. This is not code for eugenics or anything like that. I am talking about ideas. But I also believe that employers should be free to hire based on ideas (education, skills, competence) and not on quotas for “diversity.”) Diverse ideas are a disaster when you have to entertain every hare-brained idea because you don’t want to risk hurting someone’s feelings. Balance is key. Having diversity foisted on us for the sake of political correctness is a bad idea.
Those were the main 3 negatives that struck me. They are not unique to Lee or the Tea Party. They are promoted much more strongly by the left. I’m hoping the Tea Party will move away from those positions.