No problem, it was said during the Jim Lehrer wrapup of the Republican convention last night. The liberal I mentioned was national columnist Mark Shields. The moderate (?) was NYT columnist David Brooks. Don't recall who did the "normal audience" studies, but todays polls showing the Bush candidacy has a healthy rise in approval ratings should provide some credance to my words saying Sen Miller's talk was very powerful and very credible.
No, I heard it all. Sen Miller's speech was not an angry tirade. He made pointed, specific statements. He started with motherhood and apple pie statements that appeared to begin a fairly mundane political speech, including his statement that his family is most valued in his life. He said soldiers, not newsmen, give us freedom of the press; soldiers, not protestors, give us freedom of speech; soldiers who fight and lie in caskets under the flag who provide the misplaced right to abuse that flag. He was very emphatic in saying that, as a former Marine, he took great exception to U.S. military forces described as occupiers, versus liberators. He noted Sen Kerry's continual work to undermine intelligence; vote against weapon systems and programs; withhold supply of food, gasoline, personal protective armor, and other supplies; and weaken initiatives to attack terrorists. He later noted his previous support for former President Clinton, but said he had been disappointed there. Toward the end, he reviewed his personal relationship with President Bush, noted the President says what he means, had a spine of tempered steel, and Sen Miller said he would place the security of what he most valued--his family--in the President's hands.
If in doubt, you might obtain and read a copy of the talk. I think it would be worth your time.
By the way, I notice you have a problem typing "DiB", but I can't take that personally. After all, I notice you can't spell your own name either.