Ok, as an old time C++ programmer I'm biased. And opinionated. Take with a grain of salt.
First of all, the whole point about the bloat of C++ is a fallacy. True, C++11 did result in adding a lot of features to the already gargantuan specs, and it couldn't be otherwise given the unprecedented codebase that must not break. Noblesse oblige. Yet, once you start writing "pure" C++11 code, you end up using a relatively small subset of the specs, which results in a lean and clean language, without renouncing any of the power and efficiency of the language.
Second, there's the preposterous idea that a GC is needed for parallelization or that it makes a language intrinsically better. There's nothing wrong in using a GC, of course, I just don't see it as an advantage, not against modern C++. Conversely, lack of deterministic destruction, RAII and the like is a serious limitation for a "systems programming language", where fine-grained resource management can be paramount.
Dissecting each and every feature of the language is beyond the point, let's just say that the language doesn't innovate enough, with respect to C++, to generate more than a mild interest; on the other hand, it has a number of "features" that I just find irksome, when not altogether misguided. Postfix typing, overloading well-known symbols from other languages with totally unrelated meanings, implicit interface inference (interesting, but that's an accident waiting to happen), the egregious short-sightedness of using case to determine visibility (not to mention cultural chauvinism... ironic for someone who has developed UTF-8). Just to name a few.
And all of this syntax sugar just to save keystrokes. Might have made sense in the '70s; nowadays it's the task of a decent IDE to take care of that, not the language design.
Which takes me to the most important reason why I haven't taken up Go for a ride beyond the online demo: features (or lack thereof) are but a facet of what makes a language the right tool for the job. You must factor in IDE support, ease of debugging, unit testing, documentation, libraries, tools. For a language that is apparently all about "getting the job done", Go doesn't offer any of that, not up to modern standards anyway (gdb? seriously?).
I'll leave it at that, for brevity <g>