Posted on 01/20/2005 9:33:31 PM PST by RWR8189
Peggy is part of the East Coast elite. She is too bipartisan, too gentle with the enemy, too quick to write condescendingly about Bush on matters of style, not substance.
She made some decent points in this column, but should have held off for a few days. She also didn't focus on the big picture, which is the essence of Bush's great message and his courage in putting it forward aggressively. Anything else is secondary.
Definitely a nut.....and very homely....bless his heart
Something about Peggy just grates on me. Not sure what. Her "God drenched" comment didn't help my opinion of her, for sure.
The following letter has been submitted via the OpinionJournal article response feature. Contents of response as follows:
#---
Subject:
Re: Way Too Much God
Comment:
Not Anywhere Near Enough Way Too Much God.
Peggy, I am so disappointed you wrote this article. I was so happy with what I heard you say on Fox, and I wish you had written that article. I believe what caused the split between "Foxy Peggy" and "Way Too Much God Peggy" is the last sentence: Perfection in the life of man on earth is not (possible). There are legitimate views which state that perfection in the life of man of earth is possible, beginning with Jesus. But to reject that view, and to name it a desire for nuance, and we all know exactly who you mean here, Peggy, is completely self destructive. The President made it completely clear that ending tyranny is the "ultimate goal". If you read the last three chapters of the Book of Revelation, you will see that ultimate goal clarified, and who it is that brings it about, and it is not the President, and you know that. To take the side of his enemies and put this vision on par with a fire drill for the glitterati mocks the central values of this nation. I am so disappo! ! inted to hear you to be the one.
ditto, that "Let the Eagle Soar" was pretty lame. I was disappointed in the musical selections myself.
Also encourage everyone to actually read the article and understand it beforehand.
This speech was a warning to everyone that we have plans to deal with other Middle Eastern regimes in the name of National Security.
Thank you for having a cool head and not pulling out the torches and pitchforks. Noonan has been one of the best friends to the conservative moment and to the election of GWB. Now that she offers up some criticism, she is just some elitist snob that is jealous that she wasn't the writer of the speech?
Lots of good conservatives disagree with the administration everyday here on FR. A day does not go by without a thread on immigration, the trade deficit, or the falling dollar where many here take GWB to task on perceived inaction or just plain being on the wrong side of the issue.
Look at how bad the democrats looked when they went after Zell Miller. All Peggy Noonan did is write one column that mostly praises the event along with some criticism thrown in and then cries of "well, I never really liked the woman anyway - educated women tend to not like God" start ringing out.
maybe I am not as demanding in my inspiration as more intellectual people are, but I found this speech very inspiring. I liked his line about self-control, spreading freedom through encouraging revolutions of repressed citizens...Maybe my problem was I never got to hear the Reagan speeches in real time? Anyway, with the military bands and the historical significance of this day plus the speech I am prouder than ever to be an American. God bless me (in the words of Mark Levin!)
This makes me wonder if there are two Peggy Noonan's. At least, in one body.
Tell us all why "Liberty for all does not mean independence from one another" is positive. Tell us why we should be happy that we are not allowed to be independent.
I am waiting. The founding fathers have risen from their graves and they are waiting also.
Go ahead Howlin, spin. . . Spinnnnnnnn.
Amazing how the euphoria of an Inauguration causes 99% of conservatives to go into temporaary blindness.
Peggy Noonan and I can still see. Thank God for 1%. We have always thanked the founding fathers for being 1%. The founding fathers are spinning in their graves over that sentence, so you might a swell spin us some terrific answer better than "Geez, talk about going off the deep end." Spin at a high RPM, Howlin. We are waiting.
Where on earth does it say that? Where did I say that?
Amazing how the euphoria of an Inauguration causes 99% of conservatives to go into temporaary blindness.
Are you speaking about yourself?
Never mind why Mr. Baker can don his trench coat and scarf before she can find her shoes.
Good thing her name is Peggy Noonan because she couldn't get her recent stuff published if her name was, oh, Margaret Woolgather.
And Peggy, don't kid yourself that you're making a fragrant pomander when you're sticking pins in a doll. Readers who know you well, know your nuance-drenched, nuance-saturated, nuance-suffused approach here is just an exquisite's reaction to the Bush style and substance, for which he is not in your debt. Besides, whoever wrote that line about the Clinton years as "sabbatical," writes Noonan better than you do lately.
After all the times she's written lamentations about the effete, the over-nuanced, the decadent, after all the times she's mentioned the virtues of directness and red-blooded masculinity, it sounds mighty suspicious when the lady scorns the gamekeeper.
I hated the part where W equated the cult of Islam with the Judeo-Christian traditions that have made this country what it is today.
Where EXACTLY in his speech did he say that?
Peggy is a good writer and a big help to the GOP, she had an off article tonight. I can forgive her this one time.
I don't believe that Peggy Noonan's comments come from envy--but then, how would I know? And how would anyone? I don't think criticizing Noonan for motivations she may have is constructive.
I disagree with Peggy Noonan's assertion that there was too much "God" in the president's speech. I do, however, agree that ending tyranny is impossible, and so is establishing heaven on earth. Any attempt to make heaven here will inevitably end in failure--if we're lucky, only failure. Communism was preached as establishing Utopia; it ended in oppression and gulags. (And no, I'm not suggesting that this will be the result of President Bush's policy.)
There were a lot of things I liked about this speech, and two I didn't. The first is the exaltation of liberty, as if it is the best and ultimate cure for the world's problems. I think, personally, that the world's problems come because people are bad--the best people have a little sin in them, and the worst are like Adolf Hitler--and democracy cannot make people good. People can make democracies good; democracies can put down tyrants, and democracies can install tyrants. The Nazis were put in power by "the people". The goodness or badness of a democracy depends on the goodness or badness of a majority of its people. The idea that a government determined by the people is, ipso facto, a good government disturbed me, as did the idea of Freedom As Savior Of The World.
The second thing I disliked about the speech was the reference to the Koran: "the truths of Sinai, the Sermon on the Mount, the words of the Koran." How about these words of the Koran: "Slay the enemy wherever you find him" (Surah 9:92)? Doesn't this Islamic terrorism spring from the fact that some people pay a little too much attention to the words of the Koran? And what's with lumping Moses, Jesus Christ, and Mohammed together? Mohammed was a murderer who (talk about child-brides) married a six-year-old; is he really on the same level as Christ? Does Mohammed rank with Christ? Is the Koran just as creditable as the Bible? Am I wrong in thinking that the president's formulation puts Christianity and Islam (Christ and Mohammed, the Bible and the Koran) on the same level?
President Bush claims to be a Christian, and I believe him. But it puzzles me why he keeps on praising a religion that explicitly denies Jesus Christ.
LOL yes I forgive her lots of times. But she has less excuse than most.
Did Trent Lott write one of the songs also or did he just help pick out the music?
I see nothing with thanking God - the Founders wrote the Declaration Of Independence "appealed to the Supreme Judge Of The World for the rectitude of our intentions." And this is a country in which Americans say Grace Before Meals. We Americans believe our rights come from God and they are not our gift to the world - they're God's gift to humanity. Thus I am comfortable with the God Talk. Peggy Noonan thinks this speech is a tad overambitious in being dreamy about bringing the perfection of heaven on earth. Well to John Winthrop and the Pilgrims at the Massachusetts Bay Colony, the beginnings of America were to build "shining city on a hill" - a country which would be a light to the world in bringing out the best in men. The arc of history in our country has extended towards establishing freedom here at home. And now we mean to be on the side of those who want to make what has been a rare lot in the history of mankind a reality. We are meant to be partners with God in perfecting the world so we will rejoice in the blessings of our Author. As Rabbi Tarphon wrote in The Ethics Of The Fathers, you were not given to begin the task at hand. And yet you're not free to desist from it. In the words of the famous Civil War song, freedom and His truth is marching on. God Bless America.
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.