I haven't had time to fully digest the speech, and because I was watching it along with other Democrats, I'm not certain that I am the best person to judge the speech. Nonetheless, here goes...

I completely agree with Howard Fineman, who said that the first line ("I'm reporting for duty") made the speech. It was an especially fitting opening given the speeches from Wes Clark, the Band of Brothers, and Max Cleland that preceded it. I'm no veteran (I'm barely old enough to serve if called upon); however, I think that Kerry genuinely has a shot at taking a good portion of the military and veteran vote come November, and a speech like this will go a long way to achieve this goal.

For the pundits and pollsters who say that Kerry has yet to define himself for the American people--that he has yet to flush out his plans--this speech laid out the broad range of initiatives that a Kerry Administration would pursue. I'm not sure if the speech was too policy-centric (and thus boring), but the talking heads can no longer say that Kerry has not laid out an agenda.

The speech was marked by a series of high points and low points. I was often impressed by the oratorical skills of John Kerry, but at times disappointed with his inability to maintain the same amount of energy throughout the entire speech. This had much to do with the fact that the nominee felt he was short on time, so he believed that he had to rush to keep the speech under an hour. Personally, I would have preferred a long speech to a hurried one. (Additionally, I think this anxiety as the speech continued was the cause of Kerry's perspiration)

This being said, I think the speech was nevertheless effective. Kerry was positive (and optimistic) for almost the entire speech, which will certainly contrast well with the increasingly negative and mean-spirited attacks by the Administration (especially from Cheney, but also from Bush himself). This is also true of the entire convention (I'm glad that the Dems learned from 1988 that although the "born with a silver foot in the mouth" comment was witty and memorable, it didn't help Dukakis at all, but rather hurt him). The "positivity" espoused by Obama, Edwards and Kerry will win over voters come November, even if Kerry was not the best orator of the three.

If I have to rate the speech, I would say that the positive and effective message trumps the occasional missteps in the speech. More clearly, although Kerry rushed at times, mispronounced some words and schvitzed*, I believe that his message of restoration--of our hope, of the middle class dream, of accountability in the White House, of our image in the world--will connect with the American people.

Much of the battle over the speech is yet to come. Spin masters on each side of the aisle will try to get the media to accept their set of talking points, lobbying the American people to hear their side of the story. In this regard, this is just the first true skirmish in the war that will rage over the next three months (with the Republican National Convention, the Presidential Debates and the last week of the election as the other key battles).

If the Democrats really want to win, they will have to get their hands a little dirty in the trenches. Nonetheless, they must endeavor not to stoop to the level of the Republicans. I do believe John Kerry when he called for both sides to run a clean and honest campaign, and if the Democrats are able to walk the fine line between keeping the media honest through fact checking and other spin tools, and not allowing this campaign to descend into a series of overtly negative and dirty attacks, Kerry will emerge victorious on November 2.

* - SHVITZ - v. Yiddish (SHVITS) To sweat heavily.