The president’s tone was almost conversational Wednesday night–and the plainness of his speech added to its force. The public does not quite trust Republicans on Social Security. The fancier Bush’s words, the more people would have suspected he was pulling a fast one. Speaking directly made him seem sincere, and convincing. It also gave him momentum, which is hard to attain in a State of the Union address: There was no excess rhetoric to slow him down.

This may have been the most conservative State of the Union address President Bush has delivered. There were, of course, some lines to make conservatives wince. Doubling Pell Grants will probably increase tuitions, enriching colleges more than helping students. The new money for defense lawyers in capital cases will have to be monitored so that it does not become a subsidy for left-wing legal activism. The president continues to support a “temporary worker” proposal on immigration that most conservatives rightly consider reckless. But there were very few unpleasant surprises in this year’s speech.

And there was quite a lot to cheer. The president committed himself not only to restrain spending, but also to eliminate some programs. He reiterated his support for a ban on human cloning, for getting conservative judges through the Senate, and for a constitutional amendment to protect marriage. He called Congress to enact lawsuit reform, an ambitious set of free-market health-care policies, and a pro-growth tax reform.

Above all, conservatives could applaud Bush’s acknowledgment, and willingness to tackle, the runaway costs of Social Security. He made his case carefully. He was wise to summon the ghosts of former Democratic officeholders who supported various reforms in the program, and to advertise his flexibility on the details of legislation. But we continue to worry that he is placing too much emphasis on the danger posed by the program’s insolvency, and not enough on the opportunity that reform creates for young people to have a better future. Also, Bush’s demand that any bill “make Social Security permanently sound” risks making the perfect the enemy of the very good. But these are only tactical concerns. The president is to be commended for taking on this issue–and for not backing down after two months of bad press and confusion in his own party.

“ The president is to be commended

for taking on Social Security–

and for not backing down after

two months of bad press and

confusion in his own party.”

Bush isn’t backing away on democratization as a goal of American policy, either. Critics of his inaugural address said that he would never challenge the Saudis or Egyptians to liberalize. Some of these critics made this prediction in order to question the wisdom of Bush’s professed ideals, others to question his commitment to them. All will now have to revise their forecasts. We thought some of the formulations in Bush’s inaugural address were too loose. But some modest and gentle encouragement of reform among our Arab semi-allies–coupled with the implicit threat that Americans may at some point turn less gentle, and do something more than encourage–seems warranted.

The Democratic response to the president was remarkably weak, even as rebuttals to State of the Union addresses go. Nancy Pelosi demonstrated that in the three and a half years since September 11, the antiterror idea for which Democrats have developed the most passion is better inspections for shipping freight. Harry Reid said that Democrats would “be the first in line to work with” Bush “when we believe the president is on the right track.” But Reid was unable to come up with a single example of an issue where Bush is on the right track. All he promised was fervid resistance, accompanied by lame jokes and cornball sentiment.

Nothing the Democrats said–for that matter, nothing Bush said–could match the power of Janet Norwood’s embrace of Safia Taleb al-Suhail. One woman lost her son in a war that freed the other to vote. For once, the people sitting with the First Lady were more than props to elicit emotions. They were faces of courage: the courage of an America that liberated Iraq, and of an Iraq that has begun to liberate itself. President Bush has shown a type of courage himself. He has taken substantial risks on Iraq and on Social Security, the two great topics of his speech. If he succeeds, the rewards will be substantial too.