Slate called it painful. The oozing coverage of the crowds and parties in Washington, D.C. had hit the max.

Yes, this is a momentous occasion. But skeptical journalists long for substance. They're saying "Show me."

Sure, we have the first African-American in the presidency. And he actually has ties to Africa. He's half-Caucasian. He's a gifted orator and, from what we saw in the election race, a very smart guy. Not just lawyer smart, but people smart. And clean — so far. For someone to come out of Illinois politics (with real ties to slimy Chicago precinct activity) and show no signs of taint, Rod Blagojevich notwithstanding, is no small feat.

But things are too dark for journalists to abide the parties for long. I'm glad those hoses in Birmingham are history. Mississippi's not burning anymore, not in the same way anyhow. But to move forward by looking in the rearview mirror is dangerous.

Our pastor prayed for Barack Obama Sunday. I hope pastors and priests were doing so all over this country and around the world. I hope they continue. This inauguration has the world's attention, because "firsts" that involve both race and political shifting get noticed. Political groundswells like this are common in other countries — not so much here. But people forget how uncomfortable change is. Oh, how we like our routines.

Journalists who are smart know that you cover the unusual. They should be making the obligatory parallels. The Lincoln Memorial speeches. The Reflecting Pool and the crowds. Lincoln and his Bible. Kennedy, his youth, and his faith. Martin and his dream. FDR and the recovery.

It would be surprising for the coverage not to look like this. But what I dread is the likely headlines coming in the next 100 days. Clinton — also an orator and a very shrewd politician — pulled off some amazing economic and international relations coups. Fast. And they stuck, for the most part. But his were different times: recent, yet so far away. Steve Jobs was healthy back then. So were Microsoft and Yahoo! and the Big Three. The housing markets were booming. Bernard Madoff was doing great.

The key to Kennedy's success was his ability to bring in good help. There were other factors that nobody really knows now — perhaps related to his last name, probably tied to what was happening elsewhere in the world that the U.S. tapped into. Kruschev pounded his shoe on the table, but deep down one wonders if he liked Kennedy. Will we ever know? We have such a rose-colored perspective of that time.

A lot of people are out of work as these inaguration parties kick into gear. The fear in our nation is something that is affecting not just the economy. It makes people party harder. The same happened in 1930, I suspect. Obama has used the word "hope" a lot, and it is, indeed, audacious in its claims.

But the fix is bigger than what one U.S. president can pull off alone. He's said as much. He's no dummy. But nobody's listening to his cautionary rhetoric. They're too busy throwing confetti — and lining up with their hands out.

In large part, the success of this president will not be related to his skin color or heritage. It will spring from his ability to say "No" to some people and to some things we've all gotten very used to. That's hard to pull off. We like "Yes." The other word makes people mad and is a surefire party-stopper.

This president's success and ultimate legacy will also come from his ability to persuade those around him and in other parts of this world to make some fairly drastic changes in how they do business, trade, even what used to be considered domestic issues like education, health care and the environment. And war. Gaza? Tehran? Kabul? The threat of attack on the U.S. is not gone. But that, too, is not something the U.S. presidency alone can avert. It never has been. How quickly we forget the lessons of history.

And good help is hard to find — moreso when times are tough. Reformers don't make as much money as conformers.

What the celebrants are forgetting is that for all our shock at change in this country, people around the world aren't impressed by all this as we are. They want to know what's in it for them. And we're a tired, much poorer, much weaker nation than we were in the 1940s when FDR was turning things around and gathering alliances around the planet. We're more multicultural than we were in FDR's time — or Martin's time — and we won't even admit it to ourselves.

So we celebrate a new administration. We applaud a man who will likely bring (or oversee) change like we've never experienced before. But I hope the celebrants in Washington will do what they can, when they get home, to help make good change happen. Bread and circuses can't fix what ails a nation or an empire.

Hope brings audacious results only when it can elicit methodical work at the mundane day-to-day tasks of cooperative reform.

There's an unseen level to all of this. And Lincoln, so goes the legend, knew it. Apocryphal or not, the image is compelling of that tall, bearded man kneeling in prayer as the torrents of civil war and economic unrest in this nation raged. There's too much in Lincoln's writings to refute the notion that he had a sense of God's power in the governance of a republic.

Aquinas, quoting Augustine, notes that no ruler will succeed who does not rule his own soul. And the real power of that ruler to bring the people happiness comes not from the trappings of power but from the measure of restraint that ruler shows when tempted toward excess. Happiness and the satisfactions of life, at their core, come from peace with God. A president who knows it will pass this truth on to his people in ways small and large.

May our nation find this truth to be self-evident as this inaugural year unfolds.

Will that bring splashy news coverage? Not like we're seeing this week. But there's something to be said for change that goes deep — deeper than the day-to-day headlines and TV quotes and radio bits. Smart journalists will get that, even if they have to report it from the margins.

I'm ready. And waiting, like everybody else.