Thanks From a Grateful Country (Peggy Noonan's WSJ Tribute To Ronald Reagan. Absolute MUST READ!)

Wall Street Journal ^ | 6/7/04 | Peggy Noonan

[tutstar]

bttt

[ride the whirlwind]

Once a woman wrote to him and noted that while he had movingly denounced Nazism, there was another terrible "ism," communism, and he ought to mention that, too. In his next speech, to industry people and others, he said that if communism ever proved itself the threat to decency that Nazism was, he'd denounce it, too. Normally he got applause in this part of the speech. Now he was met by silence.

In that silence he built his future, becoming a man who'd change the world.

I wonder who this insightful woman was - she helped to get the ball rolling that helped to end the cold war eventually.

[cgk]

Peggy ping...

[wjcsux]

Great read. God Bless you, Mr. President.

[DoctorMichael]

Brilliant! What a Wordsmith!

Thanks.

[Bigg Red]

Beautiful. Long but well worth the read. There are many quotables, which with Noonan is a given, but this one jumped out at me.

He believed truth was the only platform on which a better future could be built.

**
And it also sounds like a good description of our current president.

[fly_so_free]

BUMP

[Museum Twenty]

bump

[Victoria Delsoul]

he "advanced the boundaries of freedom in a world more at peace with itself." And so he did. And what could be bigger than that?

Bump to a great article.

[nutmeg]

ping

[Vision Thing]

Peggy served Reagan well during his presidency. And she serves him well here with this article.

Reagan didn't make many glaring errors in his career. However, he really botched it when he chose Edmund Morris to write his official biography.

Peggy would have done a better job.

[mondoman]

Wasn't Peggy Noonan President Regan's speech writer?

[DoctorMichael]

Yes.

[mondoman]

I think the Bush Administration needs to hire her.

Watching the Reagan speeches this past weekend, I am impressed with the visuals of the text. Reagan was fantastic with his delivery, he truly made each speech his own, but he started with some fantastic material.

W's speech writers need some help.

[Salvation]

Thanks for posting this Peggy Noonan article.

[Salvation]

To be young and working in his White House at that time in human history, was — well, we felt privileged to be there, with him. He made us feel not that we were born in a time of trouble but that we'd been born, luckily, at a time when we could end some trouble. We believed him. I'd think: This is a wonderful time to be alive. And when he died I thought: If I'd walked into the Oval Office 20 years ago to tell him that, he'd look up from whatever he was writing, smile, look away for a second and think, It's pretty much always a wonderful time.
And then he'd go back to his work.

And now he has left us. We will talk the next 10 days about who he was and what he did. It's not hard to imagine him now in a place where his powers have been returned to him and he's himself again — sweet-hearted, tough, funny, optimistic and very brave. You imagine him snapping one of those little salutes as he turns to say goodbye. Today I imagine saluting right back. Do you? We should do it the day he's buried, or when he lies in state in the Capitol Rotunda. We should say, "Good on you, Dutch." Thanks from a grateful country.

[Salvation]

**W's speech writers need some help.**

My thoughts, exactly!

[radiohead]

I am in the process of reading 'When Character was King,' by Peggy Noonan. Much of this article is taken right from the book, in fact, I read a number of the lines just today!

If you liked the article and want more, I suggest you pick up the book. You can get a good conditioned paperback for next to nothing on Amazon.

The more I read about Reagan, the more I hear his speaches, the more I have to just hit myself in the head and wonder what the heck was I thinking back then to have been a liberal? I wish I could apologize to him.

[mondoman]

My wife and I discussed Ronald Regan v. George Bush over dinner last night. My kids have been asking me what I thought of RR.

I truth, I did not vote for RR, but instead supported John Anderson in 1980. I clearly remember the night of the Illinois primary, when the announcement was made that Reagan would win, I made a fateful decision NOT to join the Marine Corps upon graduation from college. In those days, we called him "Ronald the Raygun". I say my decision was fateful in that, I could have been one of the 200+ Marines who died in Beirut.

I graduated college in 1980, entered the workplace in the midst of the Reagan Recession. It WAS bad for me personally. As a 20-something, I was not very politically aware, so I don't have much to recall from 1980-88, except I do remember vividly the Challenger disaster, and President Reagan's excellent commemoration speech. I cannot even clearly remember if I voted for Reagan in 1984, but I doubt I would have supported Mondull. In 1988, I DID not vote for Dukakis, even though I was raised in Massachusetts.By then, I was married and seeking to support those who would maintain the tax reduction -- remember Bush 41's No New Tax pledge???

In 1992 I voted for Perot as a protest to Bush, and then realized that I was one of the 20% who gave Bill Clinton the presidency. Throughout the 90's, I have matured politically to where I now understand that by splitting my votes, I was diluting my support of issues that I now hold as priorities. In large part, I have to ascribe this to listening to talk radio (Rush since 1990 and Mike Rosen) as balance to NPR and the major networks, reading the OP-Ed pages, and becoming a critical reader of the news.

Now to comparing W to RR: I was, and still am, a luke-warm supporter of W: I want him to do well, but HE DOES NOT INSPIRE ME. When W was running in the 2000 primaries, I asked Texan friend of mine what kind of Governor he was. My friend told me that Bush was able to get the Democrats and the Republicans in the Texas Legislature to work together, something Bush would do in the White House. Over the years, I have not seen Bush do this with Congress AND GET THE CREDIT he deserves. George W. Bush is not a good communicator in the Bully Pulpit.

Watching the Reagan videos this week confirms this opinion. President Ronald Reagan was special, when he was in office, I was too naive to recognize this. He made his speeches his own, his delivery was impeccable and sincere (compare that to Clinton-smarmy and cynical). He was a gentleman and quick on his feet in press conferences. Many of the same criticisms that Reagan was but a front-man for those who pulled his strings are said about W. But in Reagan's case, I believe he could only be handled only so far. Can you imagine Reagan's response to the recent press conference where W was asked if he made any mistakes in Iraq and W just refused to answer? RR would have admitted responsibility with humility, won over the American public and laid out a course of action which would blunt the critics and deflect (Teflon) the jabs of the press.

Ronald Reagan was special. I just wish I had realized it at the time.