Posted on 01/27/2005 2:08:34 AM PST by bellevuesbest
I have been called old, jaded, a sourpuss. Far worse, I have been called French. A response is in order.
You know the dispute. Last week I slammed the president's inaugural address. I was not alone, but I came down hard, early and in one of the most highly read editorial pages in America. Bill Buckley and David Frum also had critical reactions. Bill Safire on the other hand called it one of the best second inaugurals ever, and commentators from right and left (Bill Kristol, E.J. Dionne) found much to praise and ponder. (To my mind the best response to the inaugural was the grave, passionate essay of Mark Helprin.) So herewith some questions and answers:
A week later, do I stand by my views?
Yes. If I wrote it today I wouldn't be softer, but harder.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
my problem with Noonan's column is that it was at odds with her own flowery praise in the moments after President Bush delivered the speech ... if anyone has the Fox coverage on tape, maybe they can explain the difference? Maybe she can?
I don't disagree, although "some people" have yet had the chance to self govern. I offer these points.
To do nothing is to let the present regimes continue using the unlimited billions of dollars from oil profits for funding terrorists who will absolutely commit greater and more widespread acts of terror against the United States and its allies.
Further, to do nothing risks the "free flow" of oil which can not only bring down our entire economy, but the economies of all nations. A world in crisis, nations in chaos.
My view of the President's message is pretty stark:
"Democratize the Middle East or perish!"
Good question. The real Peggy Noonan would have done a classier job of disagreeing with points in the President's speech.
The way she went about it is puzzling to people who love her.
LOL!I used a long handled concrete mixing hoe once and a long handled axe another.
One has to arm according to the snake, his position and venom.
You're right. But the size of our tent is irrelevant. She's still wrong.
Even though she's on our side I have never "liked" Peggy Noonan. She is one of the most blatantly self-obsessed snobs out there. Working anywhere near this woman would be hell. And now she is writing articles to deal with reaction to her article? Spare us.
LOL. Glad my pea soup is still heating up and I didn't have any in my mouth at the moment I read your line.
Even in that scenario, one has to first confront the orcs. Hopefully we can limit the trolls to posting on DU.
She wrote we can't allow our enemies to accuse us of immaturity. Why not? Immaturity? I don't know if our enemies would even bother to accuse us of something so trivial. Earth to Peggy: Our enemies are people like Zarqawi, who regularly call us every name in the book. Our support of democracy is not giving these people any additional ammunition to use against us.
and how unseemly, in this column, to trump up who ELSE criticized it. sounds a bit childish to say, well so and so said WORSE things about it than i did. i have always liked her and her writing, so i am loathe to feel this way about her, but the past few weeks, she has just not sounded RIGHT to me.
**************
Ouch. Noonan's last two articles deserve discussion. I'm disappointed in both, and if that amounts to "bashing", so be it.
If either party can be called "stupid", it's the Democrat Party.
Healthy alliances are a coolant in this world. What this era demands is steely resolve, and actions that remove those who want things at a full boil. In this world we must speak, yes, but softly, and carry many sticks, using them, when we must, terribly and swiftly. We must gather around us as many friends, allies and well-wishers as possible. And we must do nothing that provides our foes with ammunition with which they can accuse us of conceit, immaturity or impetuousness.
Here is an unhappy fact: Certain authoritarians and tyrants whose leadership is illegitimate and unjust have functioned in history as--ugly imagery coming--garbage-can lids on their societies. They keep freedom from entering, it is true. But when they are removed, the garbage--the freelance terrorists, the grievance merchants, the ethnic nationalists--pops out all over. Yes, freedom is good and to be strived for. But cleaning up the garbage is not pretty. And it sometimes leaves the neighborhood in an even bigger mess than it had been.
This is the language of the 1970s, and vaguely resembles the words of John Kerry. It is not the worldview of RR. She has passed over into the Land of Irrelevance.
"You're right. But the size of our tent is irrelevant. She's still wrong."
I agree that she's wrong on this one. I just refuse to drink the kool-aide. The attacks on Noonan at FR are motivated by spite, envy, ignorance, and jealousy.
i saw her on Fox immediately afterwards and i agree, the stark contrast in her appraisal is startling. either she was disingenuously praising it at the time it was given, which reeks of being a phoney, or she had some input from someone somewhere afterwards that totally turned her against it. and that is just odd.
Bill Buckley was critical of the speech, but not in the same tone as Ms. Noonan.
That's it!! Hillary is hiring Peggy.
That explains Hillary's supposed "shift" to the center and Peggy's shedding of her former classiness.
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.