Posted on 07/27/2006 2:40:34 PM PDT by beckett
Why does the president call the secretary of state "Condi"? And what exactly is his philosophy?
Thursday, July 27, 2006 12:01 a.m. EDT
Why does President Bush refer in public to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice as "Condi"? Did Dwight Eisenhower call his Secretary of State "Johnny"? Did Jimmy Carter call his "Eddie," or Bill Clinton call his "Maddy," or Richard Nixon call his "Willie" or "Hank"? What are the implications of such informality?
I know it is small, but in a way such things are never small. To me it seems a part of the rhetorical childishness of the age, the faux egalitarianism of the era. It reminds me of how people in the administration and Congress--every politician, in fact--always refer to mothers as moms: We must help working moms." You're not allowed to say "mother" or "father" in politics anymore, it's all mom and dad and the kids. This is the buzzy soft-speak of a peaceless era; it is an attempt to try to establish in sound what you can't establish in fact.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
Peggy Noonan is FAR FROM LIBERAL. And in a way she's right. Does Bush refer to Cheney as "DICKY?"
I agree with you. Although I hadn't really thought it about it much before this article...she's absolutely right. On so many levels.
Did you read her book, "WHAT I SAW AT THE REVOLUTION?" about her time with Reagan? It is nothing short of brilliant.
> However, that being said, I'm convinced that lately she's suffering from some sort of menopausally induced angst.
Maybe that's the cause, because she certainly has changed. Peggy, or should I say, Granny Noonan, has lost her zing. To be kind, she's become a regretful, sentimental milksop.
The relevance is that I thought it was relevant. You obviously do not. Referring to the Secretary as "Secretary Rice," is an indication of respect, and that she is deserving of respect (Note: I'm not addressing the truth of whether she really is deserving of respect here.) particularly because it would be coming from the President of the United States. Referring to her as "Condi" reduces her to a "broad," or, probably in the eyes of the Islamic World, worse.
ML/NJ
Noonan is also perfectly aware of similar gaffes on the part of other U.S. heads of state. Lyndon Johnson, another Texan, was notorious for them. One mark of good manners is not to make them. Another is not to point them out when made.
lmao!
Most conservatives have been uncomfortable with GWBush over the last 6-months to a year. Independents lost confidence in Bush43 sometime right after the 2004 election. One wonders what level of support Bush would have if historic events had taken a different direction since September 11 2001. Would Dubya had pushed for limited government? Would he have controlled his liberal spending habits? Would he have properly addresssed immigration reform, long before 2006?
Peggy is right when she says, "Mr. Bush is a good man--that he's got guts and resolve, that he can take a lickin' and keep on tickin'."
I agreeeeeeee.
No...I didn't...and I don't need to read her book talking about "the perfect Ronald Reagan"...I get enough of that on Free Republic.
"I'll take an honest, spirited, straight shooting man of his word that is grounded in solid values and morals any day over the self purported intellects of the left."
These are our choices? Oh boy.
She calls him "Bushie."
Not for tha same reason that one might refer to Ms. Noonan as "Piggy".
I admire and miss Ronaldus Magnus as much as the rest, but I resist the temptation to compare GWB and him.
GWB is most of all a congenial, friendly man without a lot of complexities in his personality. He does have bedrock beliefs, and we saw this week how those were put into action on the ECSR and fetus farming issues. He's not an intellectual, neither is he a particularly deep thinker on all subjects. He doesn't have to be.
Ronaldus Magnus was congenial, eloquent, and altogether marvellous, but with a significant wall between himself and other. All those around him, except for Nancy and including his children, say it was extremely difficult, if not impossible to penetrate that wall. Maybe it had to do with the years in Hollywood and the things one must do to have a career there, things that most self-respecting men would not do.
At any rate, the temptation to compare RR and GWB should be avoided. We should take GWB as he is, and not expect him to be perfect or something he's not. God knows, we have enough phonies and hypocrites in Washington. We can be glad we have a president who is neither.
President Clinton probably called Maddy Allbright that crazy old scumbag.
I suppose you could be right that some would view it as reducing her to a "broad" but IMO the vast majority in our country view it as a term of endearment.
As far as how the Islamic World views it, I think many treat and view their women as nothing more than slaves anyway and as Americans why should that be of any concern.
Honestly, then, you're a fool if that's the way you your though process works.
Seems a bit late into the second term for wondering whether Bush is smart enough to be president. Better luck in '08, eh?
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.