"I am well-known on this forum for speaking out about vulgarity. I have even been attacked occasionally because of it."
Anti-Vulgarity noted. But I have yet to see you call out anyone on the "other" side for personal attacks. Just me. Hmmmm?
"Now, back to the matter at hand. Do you admire Peggy as a writer, or as a conservative ally?"
Both. Although her Inaugural was wrong & well-written, and this one was right & medicore.
"If you admire her as a writer, that is your taste. If you think she is an ally, then we are going to have a little discussion about the meaning of that word."
Lets talk. Consider her leave from the WSJ, in her own words, so there would be "no conflict of interest". She drops the WSJ cap and dons the Bush volunteer cap. Keeps her mouth shut and works for Bush. Elections over? She puts her WSJ cap back on. I have no prob with that.
Lets consider that she can support conservative causes and the Republican Party as a whole and NOT like the way Bush (or his comm team) presents the administration's position. Will you grant thats okay?
The problem is that Peggy confuses the issue. She made a point of telling everyone she was going to work for the Bush campaign. So, one thinks of her as an ally. Then she returns and apparently is assuming her critical cap, without announcing beforehand that she is no longer in the ally role.
To top it all off, those who disagree with her column are told to cut her some slack because she is a "good conservative" (ally) and then are told about how she wrote all these wonderful speeches for Reagan (for two whole years).
As I said, I do not think she is dependable, since she is wearing the pundit hat, rather than the loyalist hat.
And I still maintain she has very poor timing, which seems rather odd.