Four establishment conservative voices, after a day to think things over, are declaring their lack of enthusiasm (to say the least) for the President's State of the Union address: the Wall Street Journal's editorial page; Bob Novak; George Will; and Peggy Noonan.
Does this matter?
Only time will tell.
First, the Journal's twin editorial take on the speech:
One editorial takes the White House to task for focusing too much on polls in its calls for energy policy changes. "If there is an unhealthy addiction right now, it may be the White House fixation on polls showing Americans are anxious about gas prices. This, and only this, could explain the decision to co-opt Democratic energy ideas in order to deflect their political attacks in the run-up to mid-term elections."
A second editorial draws similarities between Bush and Clinton. "On the home front, President Bush was definitely playing 'miniball,' as he likes to describe small political ideas. At times his agenda had the feel of Clintonian 'triangulation,' an attempt to play it safe and inoculate Republicans against some of the likely Democratic themes this election year."
Then there's Novak's column, in which he suggests that most conservatives felt the President's Tuesday night speech was his "worst," and "what bothered conservatives most about Tuesday night's performance was not what the president failed to do but what he actually did." LINK
Will and Noonan feel much the same: LINK and LINK