Posted on 01/21/2005 12:29:43 PM PST by baseball_fan
The inaugural address was in several respects confusing. The arresting feature of it was of course the exuberant idealism. But one wonders whether signals were crossed in its production, and a lead here is some of the language used.
The commentators divulged that the speech was unusual especially in one respect, namely that President Bush turned his attention to it the very next day after his reelection. Peggy Noonan and Karen Hughes, speaking in different television studios, agreed that this was unusual. Presidents attach great importance to inaugural addresses, but they don’t, as a rule, begin to think about them on the first Wednesday after the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. But in this case, that is evidently what happened. And this leads the observer to wonder about some of the formulations that were used, and clumsiness that was tolerated.
Mr. Bush said that “whole regions of the world simmer in resentment and tyranny.” You can simmer in resentment, but not in tyranny. He said that every man and woman on this earth has “matchless value.” What does that mean? His most solemn duty as President, he said, was to protect America from “emerging threats.” Did he mean, guard against emerging threats? He told the world that “there can be no human rights without human liberty.” But that isn’t true. The acknowledgment of human rights leads to the realization of human liberty. “The leaders of governments with long habits of control need to know: To serve your people you must learn to trust them.” What is a “habit of control”?
An inaugural address is a deliberate statement, not an improvisation. Having been informed about how long the president spent in preparing it, the listener is invited to pay special attention to its message...
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
"There is — let’s demonstrate — a law against murder. But how do you deal with the man who fired the bullet at the cuckolder in mid-stroke, egged on to do so by his daughter, who is suffering from a fatal illness?"
TMI. And very weird. Buckeley has completely slidden off his chair.
All the New York City "Republicans" I have known felt threatened by the implications of ideological conviction. Mr. Buckley and Ms. Noonan are no exceptions to this arrogance of claiming to be above the moral duty the President so clearly described. Regardless of the prominent role they may have once have held, their day has thankfully passed.
LOL!!!
Then he should have said that. Otherwise, it appears that he is subscribing to a theory in which human rights are created by the consent of the governed and not God.
Now that I've read the entire Buckley article on post 41, I am even MORE convinced the aging man is fast becoming old school, similar, I'm afraid, to the old school media.
Buckley is effect is saying that simply because it would be difficult to promote freedom in many parts of the world, we should just throw up our hands and forget the whole thing.
After all, we must be pragmatic, eh Mr. Buckley??
" while setting up, in the long-term, a functioning democracy that will end the recruitment of terrorists.This is the Bush strategy, and it's a good one."
I agree, and he needs to use it consistently, like on MEXICO.
Clearly, we both thought you misunderstood the point.
You said And btw, it is really petty and juvenile for you to characterize those who were inspired by the speech as "knee jerk".
This seems to imply you read the comments as saying anyone who liked the speech was extending a knee jerk reaction. The comments was about many Freepers reflexive offensiveness for any criticism of Bush, even by conservative Bush supporters.
Some people are simply wound way too tight.
Assuming you are referring to Okla. City bombing, IMO that is an example of ME terrorist enabled from within by the BWC terror enabler....history should tell us eventually.
He should try New Mexico first and if it works here try some other counties.
Now I respect the P.E. certification, but how does it contribute to a deeper critical understanding of oratorical meaning? Elucidating his argument would be more useful.
Why? Do we not want to SHOW the world that we can be intellectually honest and that we are transparent and allow dissension and discourse? Or do we want them to think we crush anyone who dares stray from the party line? That is the LEFT, not us.
I understnad Dubya's point. It is his word choice that could have been improved.
Of course, if you can read Ezra Pound without foot notes, Buckley's prose is ein kinderspiel. His breakthrough videotape on Celestial Navigation is an excellent example. Slightly dodgy information ... but somehow you still get there.
Lighten up.
People were taking whacks at you because you applied a couple of negative adjectives to it, and stopped there.
If you have a beef with the speech, lay out your arguments.
So far, I think the message is pretty clear: Democracy is the antidote to foreign threats. It has the fringe benefit of providing open markets too. What people do in their countries are now our business, because we can no longer wait to be struck before striking back.
I do think Peggy Noonan and Bill Buckley are a bit jealous here.
If you look at our track record of supporting dictators, and the return on that investment to this point, it's been pretty low. We have enough modern history to support the observation that the only effective way of dealing with a tyrant is to motivate the people to freedom, and to assist any way we can.
It's a good clear policy with all kinds of fringe benefits. Not the least of which is that it occupies the very highest moral ground.
People are getting beat up because they are missing these points for the small semantic ones like "Can people simmer in resentment and tyranny at the same time?"
Gorbachev, after all, can't really tear down the wall all by himself, can he? Doesn't he farm that out?
Keep it simple, dude!
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.