Bob Kolasky is the managing editor of IntellectualCapital.com. His e-mail address is bob@voxcap.com

PHILADELPHIA -- Texas Gov. George W. Bush gave a successful speech last night. It was restrained yet celebratory, specific yet thematic, substantive yet evocative, negative yet positive. In short, it was presidential. And that, in and of itself, was impressive.

Since Bush first became the odds-on favorite to be the Republican Party's nominee for president back in 1999, there have been some questions rightly asked about whether he had what it takes.

Did he have enough experience in politics? His six-year tenure as the head of Texas government is the limit of his public service -- doesn't a president need more? Could he deal with important foreign-policy questions? This, after all, is a man who thinks Greeks are Grecians and could not tell you the name of the leader of Pakistan.

Did he have any core beliefs? Many thought that his compassionate conservatism was merely a well-packaged way of having it both ways. It did not stand for anything. Was he sufficiently battle-tested to be a real leader? It seemed like things had come easy to Bush, and there was a real sense that his lack of tough experience would make him a weak president.

In the morning after his biggest moment yet as a candidate, those doubts have been largely assuaged, and whether you think Bush should -- or will -- be president, he has proven that he has mettle, and that he is capable of responding to his critics.

Questions answered

Does he have enough experience? Jan Bullock, the widow of Bush's "mentor" and unlikely ally, Lt. Gov. Bob Bullock, a Democrat, answered that question last night. By touting Bush's ability to cross the aisles and get things done in Texas, Bullock made the case for the governor's governing capability. Vice President Al Gore has tried to challenge Bush's record in Texas, but thus far the voters are not listening. Six years of effective leadership -- at least, according to the voters in Texas -- seems to be sufficient.

Can he deal with important foreign-policy questions? It sure looks like it. If not, he can ask Colin Powell and Dick Cheney and Condoleeza Rice and John McCain -- all well-respected, and experienced, experts -- for help. The Gore campaign will have no luck at attacking him on his lack of international knowledge.

Does he have any core beliefs? Bush has done a good job of defining himself while still keeping both wings of the Republican Party happy. His speech last night put some much-needed meat on the bones of compassionate conservatism; it was both. He memorably told the story of visiting a 15-year old inmate in a Texas jail who asked Bush whether he stood a chance. Bush's response is worth noting:

He seemed to be asking, like many Americans who struggle: Is their hope for me? Do I have a chance? And, frankly, do you, a white man in a suit, really care about what happens to me? A small voice, but it speaks for so many: single moms struggling to feed the kids and pay the rent; immigrants starting a hard life in a new world; children without fathers in neighborhoods where gangs seem like friendship or drugs promise peace, and where sex sadly seems the closest thing to belonging. We are their country too. And each of us must share in its promise, or the promise is diminished for all.

Bush's forceful message was combined with acknowledgement of core conservative ideas: missile defense, removal of the estate tax, a ban on "partial-birth abortion," school vouchers and enforcing existing gun-control laws, rather than passing new ones.

Is he sufficiently battle-tested to be a real leader? What is impressive about Bush is how much more improved he is as a candidate. He is a better public speaker; he is more relaxed; he is more confident yet less cocky in public appearances than he was six months ago. And he, perhaps for the first time this week, had the air of a man who could lead.

The Clinton factor

If Bush gave a successful speech on Thursday, the GOP convention -- symbolic pap and all -- also felt like a successful convention. With the exception of vice-presidential nominee Dick Cheney's speech on Wednesday, it was relentlessly on message and gave the GOP a positive face rather than a negative one.

For that reason, Cheney's speech was a mistake. He gave the men and women in the hall exactly what they wanted, but the Bush campaign would have been better off if he had not yielded to temptation. One of the Republicans' Achilles heels is Clinton hatred, and by acquiescing to that sentiment, Cheney, in his "wheel has turned" speech, took the focus from the ticket's message and put it squarely on his opponents. Doing so as subtext is fine; doing so explicitly is a mistake.

How many times is the Republican Party going to try to appeal to the nation's outrage over Clinton-Gore behavior? How many times is that appeal going to be ignored? "Does anyone, Republican or Democrat, seriously believe that under Mr. Gore the next four years would be any different from the last eight?" Cheney asked. The Gore campaign would be happy fighting this election over that question. And it will make the case, although not explicitly, that Gore is Clinton without the character flaws.

In fact, that question -- and the celebration of the last eight years -- will be part of the message the Gore campaign tries to give to the country less than two weeks from now in Los Angeles. Gore and his emissaries will fight the campaign on the issues -- health care, guns, Social Security and abortion -- and that will make for a heated campaign.

As of now, it appears Gore's best chance is to tie Bush to congressional Republicans, the religious right and the party's stand on some social issues. In doing so, Democrats will be forced to go on the offensive in Los Angeles in ways Republicans avoided in Philadelphia.

Proving it

In proving himself this week, through his speech, his message and his united party, Bush changed the tenor of the campaign. Democrats once thought they could defeat Bush much the way his father defeated Michael Dukakis in 1988, by tarring him as an unlikeable, unpresidential and ineffective candidate.

Bush has proven himself unworthy of those labels. It does not necessarily mean he is going to be the next president, but it does mean he is closer to that than he was a week ago.