Posted on 02/03/2005 10:35:59 PM PST by paulat
Normal Service Resumed The George Bush the nation re-elected is back.
Friday, February 4, 2005 12:01 a.m. EST
George Bush finally began his second term on Wednesday night with an address that marked the return of the Bush of the stump, the Bush who was re-elected president three months ago and whom the nation knows well. His State of the Union address underscored that he meant what he said when he ran: Efforts to move against junk lawsuits, protect marriage and reform Social Security are all on the table. America continues as a friend of liberty throughout the world. The speech was marked by an air not of insistence but of persuasion. George Bush made it clear he does not intend to cooperate with the tradition whereby second terms are all anticlimax enlivened by scandal. He will not be at the mercy of history. He means to continue doing big things. This was the plainspoken Bush of old.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
I've read all of those articles, none were "tearful".
You really DO have trouble understanding what she writes, don't you? Not to insult, but try reading it slower without your bias - you're not getting it and it makes your criticism (however valid) seem juvenille.
Look up the movie,of the same name. That should help you understand.
So rather than take up my challenge, you choose to be insulted.
The criticism directed on this thread has everything to do with her articles. Insisting that there is an ad hominem attack going on here is the only way you pretend to offer a defense.
Perhaps as a Peggy Noonan fan and defender you can explain the one thing that has befuddled me since 1/20/05. I watched Fox's coverage of the swearing-in ceremony on Capitol Hill, followed immediately by the usual punditry that included Ms. Noonan. She raved about the speech. That was 12:30pm. I then left, went off to some inaugural events in DC, and returned around 12:30am. only to find that Ms. Noonan had written an article highly critical of the speech she had praised a mere 12 hours before. What happened during those intervening 12 hours that her opinion changed? I am waiting for someone, anyone, to explain that.
I stated that I liked the description of Harry Reid.
"Look up the movie,of the same name. That should help you understand."
Google:
Little Big Man Was Either The Most Neglected Hero In History Or A Liar Of Insane Proportion!
Jack Crabb is about 100 years old as the film begins. A collector of oral histories asks him about his past. He recounts being captured and raised by indians, becoming a gunslinger, marrying an indian, watching her killed by General George Armstrong Custer, and becoming a scout for him at Little Big Horn
// no, no help there
...oh, sorry...SOB!!!...I was just about to say that I am taking my gas mask and leaving you for nine weeks to work on...oh, SOB, SOB, SOB....
Strike One: Her bashing W's inaugural was mostly bad timing. If she only waited a week, it would have been taken more as one professional speechwriter's critique of another's work. I am sorry but its like cuffing your kid aside the head and saying "forget it, you're not tall enough...and do you have any idea what the odds are?" when he dreams of going pro some day after hitting the winning shot at the local high school basketball tourney. No matter how right (you may think) you are, it's still percieved as cruel.
Strike Two: She was indirectly bashing our underlying ideal that binds us. We think and dream big...then we find ways to achieve it despite all the naysayers. Its what distinguishes us as Americans from the rest of the world. Not very diplomatic. Being percieved as a cruel naysayer.
Strike Three: Bashing outspoken heartfelt faith in God's providence. Try walking into Mecca and shouting "Muhammed's dead, get over it."
No matter how correct she thinks she is, Noonan needs to spend the next few months admitting she was wrong and apologizing. Otherwise she will lose what measure of respect is salvageable.
Per IMDB.com Tagline: Little Big Man Was Either The Most Neglected Hero In History Or A Liar Of Insane Proportion!
Note the either/or construction.
Now, note Peggy's construction:
But in a surprising way for the president the issue is win-win. If he loses in Congress, he lost on a great issue on which his large base will likely believe he was right, and on which history will not be able to prove him wrong. And if he wins, he allows the free market to energize and renew a huge creaky behemoth. My guess? Little Big Man is going to get reform.
This is an either/or, too. Either he loses in Congress, but wins with his base (and history can't prove him wrong, as Little Big Man) or wins and gets his reform.
Bush's either/or is a win/win (just like Little Big Man's either/or was to him). And she posits that Bush will get his reform...
The analogy is stretched and a little obscure, if you're not familiar with the movie (I wasn't, for one). Otherwise, we wouldn't be discussing it here, would we? But it is apt. And it's not demeaning.
Having to explain an analogy is analogous to having to explain a bad joke. It tells you it wasn't worth the effort...
Give Peggy a C+ for column-writing this time out. But she's back on board with the President and the program.
"What happened during those intervening 12 hours that her opinion changed? I am waiting for someone, anyone, to explain that."
No idea. I can only offer two theories:
1) Several pundits have remarked on how different a speech *sounds* versus the way it looks when you get a copy and carefully parse it. Perhaps she didn't find flaw with it until a careful sitdown reading.
2) Being around all the other talking heads & columnists, she may have garnered themes that most were concentrating on and decided to leave the chearleading parts to them (less competition) and write an opposing albiet conservative view.
Meanwhile, saying she's "back on board" is backing up something I complained about last week. While I may agree with her opinions most of the time, she is like Bill Kristol, in that she is not a dependable ally.
"oh, sorry...SOB!!!...I was just about to say that I am taking my gas mask and leaving you for nine weeks to work on...oh, SOB, SOB, SOB...."
She was sharing with the rest of the country what the atmosphere was like in NYC after 9-11, how they were coping and dealing with it the way New Yorkers do.
Sounds like you just skimmed the article looking for fault.
"Speaking of reading comprehension, go back and read my reply"
Sorry, I was responding to mutliple attacks at once and didn't notice that - as opposed to sitting down with an article and not just skimming it.
You are so dim!! It's her actions after the fact in each example that make her original comments silly!!
In the movie,Dustin Hoffman plays the part of an American version of the German character Baron von Munchhausen,in that he weaves THE most outrageous stories (LIES),but you sort of really want to believe him;kind of.Picture an old,down and out 100 year old Bill Clinton,trying to pass himself off as an Indian.Of course,you have to be an extreme Clintonista to swallow the lies.
I agree: I for one don't think it's helpful to give Ms. Noonan a pass for the "too much God" column.
I think what shocked me most of all is that somehow she thought President Bush's inaugural remarks were some kind of (horrific) departure from what he has been saying and doing all along.
To me it looked like she had entered the Parallel Universe. She says she took time off work (at "great financial loss") to work for Bush's re-election: well, WTH did she think he/his administration stood for? I mean, what was such a great shock to her that he believes human freedom is the key to peace in our time?
I'm just at a loss to explain where she came up with this cognitive disconnect.
Don't know exactly why, but I'd trust Peggy Noonan well before I'd trust Bill Kristol.
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.