Posted on 01/20/2005 9:33:31 PM PST by RWR8189
;-)
I've been out doing errands and had Rush on in the car and heard part of that and smiled thinking of this very thread.
:)
I am pleased to see quite a few people agree with my point of view. I will check back on the discussion later in the evening, and answer anyone who has addressed me then.
Here is the part I objected to:
"That edifice of character is built in families, supported by communities with standards, and sustained in our national life by the truths of Sinai, the Sermon on the Mount, the words of the Koran, and the varied faiths of our people. Americans move forward in every generation by reaffirming all that is good and true that came before - ideals of justice and conduct that are the same yesterday, today, and forever."
I interpreted this as equating Judaism and Christianity with Islam. It made me wonder if the President has ever read the "words of the Koran". I have. I took a college course on the Koran. What it says and what it advocates is shocking. The Koran and its adherents are the reasons why we are in Afghanistan and Iraq right now. How can you see it any other way?
Nothing at all wrong with it. I was just looking to see if the "we love Peggy!" people were a little two-faced. Or being the thought police.
That said, this article was the latest in what has unfortunately become disappointing writings from her.
That's because they thought Peggy "I support George Bush" Noonan was being two faced.
Reading back over the thread, some aren't being nearly that logical.
Obviously to ask for your evidence that she was being "paid off" or had not written it. Your response then would be to offer any phrasings she or others in the know had made that buttressed payment or you would post side by sides of her other columns and point to how she uses certain phrases normally but this latest uses words she is not known for.
Honestly, I agree some have been over the top in coming down on her, but most of those same people did not just bash her, but backed up why they thought the way they did.
It is then up to those who think she has a point to explain what that point is and offer citations to back up why you agree. That's what I've done in posting why I disagree with her.
I stated I don't think it was jealousy, but I do think some who have opined it is have explained logically why they deduce that is the case.
And btw, the answer to your "will we use force" question is that in some cases, yes, in other cases, no.
Of houses I think.
Note: I didn't say he was an "artist." He did, however, apply paint to canvas.
Can you not possibly just read that and see that he is ONLY acknowledging other people's religion?
I repeat: he is the president of ALL the people of this country, and no matter how much it pains you, Muslims, too.
I remember reading that "malignant leprechaun" column by Noonan and having respect for her I believed her characterizations. I had not read this piece you have posted. Now I have some thoughts to "chew on" (as Noonan stated after hearing the speech yesterday).
Incidentally, I saw Peter Robinson (noted in this column) on tv this morning praising President Bush's speech.
Because Noonan is actually commenting on the substance of the speech. If Noonan said that Bush's speech was all wrong because he was just jealous of Clinton then I'd have a problem with her too.
Its fair to point out where she is wrong with her analysis, but its not fair to make baseless allegations about her motivations or her character. How are these accusations any different than when liberals say that Bush's motivation for invading Iraq was finish the job his daddy couldn't? That is how they "feel" so I guess we should applaud them when they do it.
As conservatives, we should be above personal attacks and be able to discuss substance rather than the person - especially when that person is one of our own.
LOL, The Saturday Night Live writers liked it.
She probably does get it, at least in an intellectual sense. It's just not as important to her as her as is the opportunity to boost her own ego and career.
Stop already. Most posters have more than adequately offered more reasons for their opinion of Noonan's column than she offered for her opinion of Bush's speech.
I won't bother rehashing all of it but perhaps it would behoove you to re-read this thread before you dare to lecture me again.
"I loved the music!"
"Same here!"
I've only read about half this massive thread, but regarding the music, I thought Red Sea's comment about Jewish prophecy of music like none that had ever yet been heard was very interesting. If it's true, then I guess we're not in the end times yet.
I was struck during the medley of classic patriotic songs that was played just after the speech: it opened with the melodic whistling of a single, thin fife on top of the brasses' more typical loud braying.
The meandering fife tune was eerily Middle Eastern in sound and feeling, reminiscent of bazaars and snake charmers. Music communicates directly to the heart and spirit, bypassing words. This Inauguration was being broadcast all over the Middle East by Al Jazeera and others. I thought that the fife arrangement, however inadvertent, was a subliminal message of harmony between our culture and theirs.
(BTW, the fife has an honored place in American history from the days of the Revolution. The appearance of the fife-playing Minuteman regiment in full costume gave me enormous joy.)
Then you should tell this to William Buckley as well because he didn't like the speech either. Reagan credits Buckley as the father of the modern conservative movement so I guess your observation doesn't hold water.
I've read it and you keep posting the same old falsehoods. Liberals attack Bush in this exact same way all the time and we hate it. The liberals also offer up reasons for their opinion on Bush's policies - does that make it ok with you?
No one has "more than adequately offered up reasons" to attack her motivation or character. I too believe her "too much God" section was faulty, but so what? That was only a very tiny part of her column.
The fact of the matter is that no one knows what her motivations were and if they claim they do then they're lying. She offered up her analysis - that's all.
I beg your pardon?
Name one falsehood I have posted.
How DARE you.
You are way out of bounds, you arrogant jerk.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.