Posted on 11/16/2001 1:21:48 PM PST by Pokey78
Edited on 04/23/2004 12:03:54 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
He walked into history an obscure, flat footed, bantamy little fellow in a light gray suit, the inhabitant of an eloquence-free zone who gave boring speeches in a flat voice. He was not compelling. This was more obvious because he followed a charismatic leader who did big things and filled the screen. He was quickly defined and dismissed by the opinion elite as "a first-rate second-rate man." And maybe at the beginning he feared the appraisal was correct, for when he became president he said very frankly that he felt the moon and the stars had fallen upon him.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
FWIW ... Chruchill was indeed a GREAT man, and if the poltroon who posted his insane hyperpole wants to keep making juvenile, contemptable statments, he is going to have to put up with a whole lot of us fist clenchers. : - )
FWIW ... Churchill was indeed a GREAT man ! If the poltroon who posted his insane hyperpole wants to keep making juvenile, contemptable statments, he is going to have to put up with a whole lot of us fist clenchers. : - )
FWIW ... Churchill was indeed a GREAT man ! If the poltroon who posted his insane hyperbole wants to keep making juvenile, contemptable statments, he is going to have to put up with a whole lot of us fist clenchers. : - )
>I guess that you feel utter contempt for Jesus Christ too.
No.
Pity.
What a great line describing a GREAT President! What a great post! I can't wait to read the replies.
Just smiling.
Are you now backing away from your postion ?
Why did you ignore my question about George Washington ? What about every president, general, or members of both Houses, who held elected office during a war ? What about the members of the jury and the judge who sent the Rosenbergs , RIGHTLY , to their deaths ? All of those people, throughout the centuries were horrible ?
You are absolutely ALONE , in your stance. That does NOT make you correct, and everyone else wrong. It makes YOU a KOOK !
No.
Pity.
Jesus feel the same toward you. Best get right with Him while there's still time.
I just don't like that Noonan is engaging in over the top hyperbole and people seem to be lapping it up.I have said nothing critical of Bush. Noonan, however, must be read critically. She is a professional propagandist. She was a speechwriter for papa Bush. Remember the thousand points of light? That's her. She is completely prejudiced and subsequently her words must be evaluated as such. It is absurd to judge this president or the actions he's taken since the terrorist attack without living through the consequences of his actions. Noonan's ga-ga-eyed prose has already led some to think that Bush's virtues are sublime merely because the man practices the common, yes common, courtesy of punctuality. I doubt very much if Gore, as president, had said the exact same words and done the exact same things as Bush that Noonan would be a fraction as flattering. She is a partisan and should be treated as such. Her aim is not to propegate truth, but rather exaggerate what is politically expedient. Because she happens to be on your side, what she writes isn't necessarily true.
I like Bush on his own merits.
I dislike Noonan because I dislike romance novels.
Uh...apparently your reading comprehension skills are lacking. No such comparison was made. You are a perfect example of the undiscerning Noonan reader.
No, I sure wish I did. Sounds like the perfect Christmas gift for all my Freeper friends. :)
Your right. Ms. Noonan was describing Truman as bantamy.
Did something I post give you the impression that I agreed with this guy's opinion (post #15)? If so, you need to slow that speed reading down a bit (or I need to improve my communication skills).
Now, about those lunchboxes...
This is a man you can trust. He's a leader, he's a commander, he's a statesman. The best man won, thank God! This is a good man, I've known this man (by politics in West Texas) for years. He lost a congressional bid, but it wasn't as bad as the media put it. He did well in a "big time" democratic district. He gave a scary run to the democRAT and he won respect and he kept that respect in his run against the Commie GrandMommie Ann Richards. He beat her with the things she DID TO Texans, rather than to get into the mud where Richards wanted him to come. He kept himself, and his campaign, above the dirt that she wanted to wallow in. He was a true gentleman, and he prevailed.
Ann Richards hated West Texas, that's a lot of people to piss off. GW was born there. It makes a heck of a difference!
>You are absolutely ALONE , in your stance.
No.
My stance is accompanied by all of yours.
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.