Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Mikmur

I don't think anyone ought to get their knickers iin a know because Peg didn't like the speech. I understood her point and while disagreeing with it, this was not a malicious review nor was it extreme. She has a point and any of the "realists" might agree with her. This was an idealistic speech and I am surprised so many are taking it concretely. I don't think GWB promised to extend freedom in the next four years and make a utopia. I think he was thinking long range and as a posture rather than an action. But that is just me, I interpreted it in a nuanced way. But Peggy didn't. Otherwise she loves GWB just like us.


12 posted on 01/21/2005 4:28:35 AM PST by cajungirl (my peeps are freeps)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: cajungirl
I don't think anyone ought to get their knickers iin a know because Peg didn't like the speech. I understood her point and while disagreeing with it, this was not a malicious review nor was it extreme.

Deserves repeating!

69 posted on 01/21/2005 5:32:36 AM PST by technochick99 (Self defense is a BASIC human right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: cajungirl; pubmom
I don't think GWB promised to extend freedom in the next four years and make a utopia.

Pubmom: thanks for the ping.

As I've read and listened to the reaction to this speech, I've noticed the pundits fall into two categories. Those who like it heard it like I did, an address to the PEOPLE living in oppression. Those who don't like it are interpreting it as a threat to the oppressors. Peggy falls into the latter category, which surprised me. Maybe she wants a gig at CNN or something. But she didn't hear the same speech I did.

I heard a president speaking directly to people living in darkness...Rise up. The entire speech was designed around the analogy of fire. One spontaneous spark can spread quickly and widely...as one man dreams of freedom, his dream spreads to those he shares it with, and to those they tell, and so on. We've seen that fire's power, both in the fall of the Berlin wall and just recently in Ukraine. Once that fire starts spreading, no oppressor, no army can suppress it.

The people in Kiev Square weren't organized by the "realists". No, some few brave individuals struck a spark. They went to the square in the dark of night and said "no more". In homes, shops and offices others felt that spark and soon a million people were camped there. They stayed through threats, snowstorms, Christmas. They only had one weapon: their very presence.

I believe THAT is what Bush addressed yesterday. The funny thing is, I think Bush is the realist here. Sparks can indeed set a fire that burns bright and fast and far and wide. Where it goes is unpredictable and sometimes dangerous. But one can't deny that it is most threatening to those who hide in their palaces and dare not come out for fear of their own citizens. They face a choice: relinquish power or burn in your palace.

Confusius said: "May you live in interesting times". Indeed.

75 posted on 01/21/2005 5:39:49 AM PST by Timeout (What's the chromosome, Kenneth?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: cajungirl
This was an idealistic speech and I am surprised so many are taking it concretely.

Indeed. A bit of the more "concrete" reality was brought home in The Daily Show -- a bit of Bush's rhetoric about spreading freedom was followed up by Jon Stewart deadpanning, "Offer not valid in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, [etc]".

97 posted on 01/21/2005 6:01:39 AM PST by steve-b (A desire not to butt into other people's business is eighty percent of all human wisdom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: cajungirl
I don't think anyone ought to get their knickers iin a know because Peg didn't like the speech. I understood her point and while disagreeing with it, this was not a malicious review nor was it extreme. She has a point and any of the "realists" might agree with her. This was an idealistic speech and I am surprised so many are taking it concretely. I don't think GWB promised to extend freedom in the next four years and make a utopia. I think he was thinking long range and as a posture rather than an action. But that is just me, I interpreted it in a nuanced way. But Peggy didn't. Otherwise she loves GWB just like us.

When JFK or Martin Luther King Jr. invoked utopian idealism, God and vision they were idolized. When GWB does it he suffers from "mission inebriation"? Every great visionary suffers from mission inebriation by Noonan's standards, only when they're a Conservative is it labelled a "neurosis".

This is nothing but self loathing, hypocrasy in its worst form.
154 posted on 01/21/2005 6:47:35 AM PST by N. Beaujon (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson