After speech, the president had his doubters

Haya El Nasser

01/21/1997

USA Today

FINAL

Page 07A

Maybe it's because it's the same president, because the nation is feeling good,

because the speech was so conciliatory.

Whatever the reasons, President Clinton's 22-minute inaugural address Monday

seemed to stir little interest and even less emotion among those who bothered to

tune in.

But whatever grade it received, the speech evoked plenty of reaction from

Americans across the country.

Chicago

Coverage of the inauguration blared from the TV set above as Doug Bair ate his

lunch at a neighborhood bar in the suburb of Arlington Heights.

``It's a lot of pomp and circumstance,'' said Bair, 43, a pizza distributor. ``It's like

mashed potatoes. It's a feel-good food.''

But there wasn't much in Clinton's speech that made Tom Dietrich, 67, a retired

engineer, feel good. ``He's a phony,'' said Dietrich, who voted Republican and

thinks Clinton will be too busy fending off scandals such as Whitewater and

Paula Jones' sexual harassment charges to do much good for the country.

New York

In a Manhattan pub, two law school students, both Clinton voters, watched the

speech at lunch, then got into a friendly debate.

Mike Neil, 26, noted the absence of ``any great one-liners, nothing like (John)

Kennedy's `Ask not what you can do for your country.' In three days, who's

going to remember it?''

But Hansen Alexander, 43, who worked in Clinton's 1992 campaign, thought the

speech shouldn't be judged by what kind of emotions it aroused.

``It was purposely low-key,'' a sign that Clinton is more confident than four years

ago, he said. ``He's a conciliator, a negotiator, a bottom-line kind of guy.''

Free-lance graphic designer Betsy Goldman, 31, watched while folding her wash

at a Manhattan laundromat. ``It sounded good, even if it was kind of vague. . . .

He never said how we're going to accomplish all of those great things.''

A Clinton voter who pays more than $300 a month for health insurance, she said

she was disappointed that ``I heard the words `health care' once. And he didn't

really say anything about it. Does he think we forgot about that?''

Seattle

Katherine Simpson, 52, a market researcher in Seattle who watched at home,

said Clinton offered hope of a brighter future but few ways to achieve it.

``I wanted more vision, more of what he really wants to do. He told us `we are

going' but not how we're going to get there,'' Simpson said.

Atlanta

The president's plea to overcome the great divide of race, ``America's constant

curse,'' resonated with some.

``I was glad to hear him emphasize the problem of discrimination,'' said Jarvis

Ellis, 53, an exercise physiologist who listened on his car radio in Atlanta. ``I

think the United States scores about C or C-minus on racial tolerance.''

Los Angeles

Writer Paul Boorstin, 52, son of noted historian Daniel Boorstin, watched at

home with his wife and 12-year-old son.

``I liked it a lot. I thought he was reaching toward realizing his vision of what

he'd like to do,'' he said. But ``the `bridge to the 21st century' has been

overplayed. He could come up with something new rather than a campaign

slogan.''

Actor Mark Batemen, 27, was half asleep but he heard bits and pieces of the

speech on the radio. ``I just thought, `Didn't I hear this four years ago?' ''

Boston

Outside of a Starbucks cafe in the suburb of Framingham, Mass., teacher

Michael Connolly took a less cynical view.

``There's so much negativism in politics these days, we should welcome a chance

to hear a positive message, the kind of message you get in an inauguration

speech,'' said Connolly.

``He touched on some important themes. Certainly, trying to overcome racial

barriers is important.''

Dallas

Clinton got a thumbs-up from Jacob McClendon, 17, a Cedar Hill High School

junior who was skateboarding on a downtown street.

``He was talking about how they needed to get the youth of America more

involved. That's true. He sounded all right,'' said McClendon, who heard the

speech earlier in the day.

Washington, D.C.

In the nation's capital, some political experts' analysis of Clinton's speech

sounded eerily similar to the average citizen's spin. ``A speech that's easy to

forget,'' said Stephen Hess, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. ``It didn't

have a special ring or elegance that one hopes for.''

But Hess points out that ``you can count the really good (inaugural speeches) on

the fingers of one hand.''

Allan Lichtman, professor of history at American University, saw Clinton's

address in person. ``Not his best performance. He touched all the bases . . . but it

lacked the magic, the inspiration, the passion,'' he said. For those who didn't hear

the speech: ``I don't think they missed a great deal.''

Contributing: Carol Marie Cropper in Dallas; Kevin Davis in Chicago; Deeann

Glamser in Seattle; John Larrabee in Boston; Jonathan Lovitt in Los Angeles;

Bob Minzesheimer in New York; and Tom Watson in Atlanta

PHOTO,b/w,Porter Binks, USA TODAY ; PHOTO,b/w,Steve Mawyer, USA

TODAY