Peggy Noonan: Since You Asked . . .

Opinion Journal ^ | 02/03/03 | Peggy Noonan

[Pokey78]

Wasn't it surprising that at a time like this Mr. Bush didn't limit his State of the Union address to the two great issues, Iraq and the economy?

It surprised me when I learned of it, which was the morning of the speech. I was one of the columnists invited to meet with a high government official with intimate knowledge of the president's thinking, as they say, on background. We met in his office, which has no corners. He told us he would be presenting his domestic agenda, a blueprint for the coming year, in his speech.

[Pokey78]

Pinging Peggy's list.

[Ronzo]

Peggy Ping...

[JennysCool]

A very good Peggy piece -- but Peggy of all people should know better about joining that fainter-but-still-audible chorus which has it that The one time he didn't follow his gut--when he didn't return immediately to the White House after the attacks--he made a big mistake.

I was reporting the news live that day and I can remember the atmosphere vividly of those early hours. New York had been hit, the Pentagon was on fire and no one had any idea what was next. Mr. Bush returned to Washington at a prudent time; to have done so earlier, prior to at least a modicum of security being restored, would have been foolhardy. This is one of those brushes Mr. Bush is tarred with by people who have nothing else with which to smear him. I think better of Peggy. The President did the right thing, no matter what Peter Jennings may have snidely inferred that day.

[ThePythonicCow]

good one - thanks pokey.

[RandyRep]

Another Peggy perfecto.

So she was in the Oval Office with other columnists? I wonder who they were? Any ideas? Was this the ballyhooed meeting with Jennings/Steffie, Brokaw/Russert, etc? Was Dan there? Was Wolfie there? Tony and Brit? NYT? WP? Time?

How come we haven't heard more about this from others? Or did I miss it?

[Tamzee]

This was a delight, thank you :)

Tammy

[Jesse]

He's a conservative who means it.

Oh, barf. A conservative believes in limited federal government. Bush is anything but. Spending under Bush is exploding, and he is proposing huge spending increases across the board. If there is a federal solution to a local problem, Bush is behind it. From education, to immigration, to farm spending, to health care, Bush is the anti-conservative.

Bush is a conservative like Saddam Hussein is a humanist.

[Mr. Mojo]

AIDS is killing Africa, it is creating a continent of orphans, and this doesn't have to be. So much can be done. So give them help. Christian groups are deeply involved in the African effort.

This is a job for charities, not the U.S. government.

[Mr. Mojo]

Bush is the anti-conservative

I wouldn't go that far, but he certainly isn't a small government conservative.

[Dasaji]

joining that fainter-but-still-audible chorus which has it that The one time he didn't follow his gut--when he didn't return immediately to the White House after the attacks--he made a big mistake.

---

I kind of took that as GWB "revealing" that to her, not so much her personal opinion. Peggy's "in the know" so to speak, and for her to be in the office with no corners (I loved that!), and because of her closeness to Reagan's and Bush 1's administrations, I get the feeling she's a person our president just might reveal something like that to.

[ilgipper]

There's something I don't get though. President Bush the elder backed a lot of big government spending; he didn't make the government smaller; the deficit grew; he was open to adding on new spending. And by 1992 his Republican base turned on him, and he was finished. Now Bush the younger comes along and promises more government spending, a government getting bigger, the return of deficits. And yet after the speech Tuesday his base is more rock solid than ever. How come?

IMO, he has increased spending, but strategically - in areas that are key to pleasing the overall electorate, and in areas that are 'stealing' issues away from his opponents. Bush, the elder, simply went weak against the Democrats and let their agenda slide through Congress. Bush is controlling the situation.

I think most conservatives continue to back him because he is also enacting of a positive Republican agenda in regards to tax cuts, military build-up, forein policy decisions, etc that most Republicans continue to support him and his leadership.

[Sabertooth]

...conservatives know something about President Bush that they didn't know about his father: He's a conservative who means it. So they trust him.

...Mr. Bush didn't promise new spending in the liberal mode; he didn't ask for spending on liberal targets and programs guided by liberal assumptions.

I generally enjoy Peggy very much, but this, unfortunately, is probably the worst column of hers that I've ever seen.

The hydrogen car, $400 billion more for Medicare, AIDS programs in Africa, and prescription drug benefits are all big goverrnment programs in matters in which the government has no business.

Big government = liberal. To say otherwise is Carvillian spin.

what seemed to me to tie his domestic agenda to his international agenda was protectiveness.

Hence: the President's bold initiatives to protect our borders from terrorists and Illegals?

The President has given every indication that he wants Illegals in this country, unless it too obviously inconveniences the War on Terror. His deportation record on Illegals is every bit as lackluster as President Clinton's.

Bush's coddling of Illegals can't be excused as something for which he hasn't found the time, though. As Peggy herself, said:

He told us he would be presenting his domestic agenda, a blueprint for the coming year, in his speech.

This struck me as counterintuitive, and odd. I asked how this decision had come about. He said he had made it early on in the preparation of the speech. He said he thinks a great nation can do many things at once, and that his domestic agenda is important.

< -snip- >

Then I thought, if the domestic program he unveils tonight seems connected to Iraq, and can be understood as an expression of the thinking that guides his decisions on Iraq--well, that would be big, and helpful.

If President Bush had the security of our borders in mind as a priority, one could certainly see how that would connect back to Iraq and the War on Terror.

Heck, most Americans see that already. Most politicians, the President included, are willfully blind to the connection.

It's great that the President correctly identifies the enemy in the international theater. The domestic phase of his State of the Union address was quite disappointing.

Even a writer as talented as Peggy Noonan can't put a bow on that and make it pretty.

[ClancyJ]

I agree. Jennings' comments showed more about Jennings and his lack of concern for the safety of the President when we are under attack than about Bush.

To return directly to the White House would have put the president in the line of fire. Only by providing an unknown destination or whereabouts could safety of our President have been assured. The secret service grabbed Cheney and physically carried him to a safe spot - would they not do the same for the leader of this country? If not, what is the purpose of the secret service?

Just how ignorant does Jennings think we are?

[JennysCool]

Just how ignorant does Jennings think we are?

It'd take all night to deal with that one, wouldn't it?

[jeremiah]

Generally Noonan is right on about conservatism. This article is more fit for propaganda releases. The deficit is soaring, GW has proposed more govt spending than the man he replaced. GW is no conservative, he learned that the way to keep enough Republicans happy, was to cut taxes, while giving more money away(borrowed money by the way).

[TheConservator]

Funny, it seems to me certain elements of the right were making almost exactly this criticism of Reagan, after his first two years in office.

[goldstategop]

As I see it we don't live in a perfect world. Conservatives have learned to bend to the reality that Americans combine rhetorical conservatism with minimal operational liberalism in public policy. In other words, the public wants to have its cake and it eat it too. Make a bow to the base and promise the masses bread and circuses. Its strategery as old as Augustus Caesar and President Bush is a master at trying to holding the bureaucratic leviathian in check while at the same time assuring the sheeple they'll still get their government benefits.

[ClancyJ]

I think you hit the nail on the head.

As he made concessions in order to win over the Senate and provide the GOP with the House, Senate and Presidency, so he will now juggle as needed to win in '04 and get the four more years.

After he wins in '04 - look for the more controversial conservative initiatives to be put in place to be built on by the following GOP president. Bush is playing the chess game, he is bringing about needed changes for the nation and building for the next president to take more steps forward.

[A CA Guy]

It is never good to spend the treasury away. You are right and I thank your for your thoughts on that article.