Do Miss America
War Child
Now I think you may want to lay off before you overdose.
Bush's inaugural speech
- Thread starter eviltwin
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Macfistowannabe
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
He's just a little buzzed, I don't think it's going to kill him any time soon. 
diamond
ONE love, blood, life
not to mention a charming dancer..
db9
Macfistowannabe
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
Clinton's a whale of a dancer too. I used to have a picture of him dancing with Barbara Streisand.
ahmedadam
The Fly
I am very pleased on this morning waking up to know that Mr George Johnnie Walker Bush will also be my President and he will make me to be free and end tyranny for me. Thank you America.
Macfistowannabe
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
Maybe he ended up inspiring half the country when he finally became president, but during the race, he didn't achieve the majority of the votes. The opposition was a million more votes, but thankfully, they did not have a two-party system in 1860. They showed us what brings a leader, not always the majority, but abiding by his moral compass.drhark said:
Attachments
Last edited:
Judah
War Child
Almost-a-Cliche-Bowl -- Final Score:
"Freedom" 27 - "Liberty" 15
[Score courtesy The Daily Show]
"Freedom" 27 - "Liberty" 15
[Score courtesy The Daily Show]
Last edited:
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
remember Peggy Noonan? Reagan's speachwriter? very amiable conservative? believes in things like the Iraq War?
***she*** was put off by Bush's speach, saying it had way too much "God" in it and, shockingly, lacked nuance.
Read on ... i've edited out her thougths on the day, and left in her thoughts on the speech ... you can find the whole thing at:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pnoonan/?id=110006184
Way Too Much God
Was the president's speech a case of "mission inebriation"?
Friday, January 21, 2005 12:01 a.m. EST
[...]
The inaugural address itself was startling. It left me with a bad feeling, and reluctant dislike. Rhetorically, it veered from high-class boilerplate to strong and simple sentences, but it was not pedestrian. George W. Bush's second inaugural will no doubt prove historic because it carried a punch, asserting an agenda so sweeping that an observer quipped that by the end he would not have been surprised if the president had announced we were going to colonize Mars.
A short and self-conscious preamble led quickly to the meat of the speech: the president's evolving thoughts on freedom in the world. Those thoughts seemed marked by deep moral seriousness and no moral modesty.
No one will remember what the president said about domestic policy, which was the subject of the last third of the text. This may prove to have been a miscalculation.
It was a foreign-policy speech. To the extent our foreign policy is marked by a division that has been (crudely but serviceably) defined as a division between moralists and realists--the moralists taken with a romantic longing to carry democracy and justice to foreign fields, the realists motivated by what might be called cynicism and an acknowledgment of the limits of governmental power--President Bush sided strongly with the moralists, which was not a surprise. But he did it in a way that left this Bush supporter yearning for something she does not normally yearn for, and that is: nuance.
The administration's approach to history is at odds with what has been described by a communications adviser to the president as the "reality-based community." A dumb phrase, but not a dumb thought: He meant that the administration sees history as dynamic and changeable, not static and impervious to redirection or improvement. That is the Bush administration way, and it happens to be realistic: History is dynamic and changeable. On the other hand, some things are constant, such as human imperfection, injustice, misery and bad government.
This world is not heaven.
The president's speech seemed rather heavenish. It was a God-drenched speech. This president, who has been accused of giving too much attention to religious imagery and religious thought, has not let the criticism enter him. God was invoked relentlessly. "The Author of Liberty." "God moves and chooses as He wills. We have confidence because freedom is the permanent hope of mankind . . . the longing of the soul."
It seemed a document produced by a White House on a mission. The United States, the speech said, has put the world on notice: Good governments that are just to their people are our friends, and those that are not are, essentially, not. We know the way: democracy. The president told every nondemocratic government in the world to shape up. "Success in our relations [with other governments] will require the decent treatment of their own people."
The speech did not deal with specifics--9/11, terrorism, particular alliances, Iraq. It was, instead, assertively abstract.
"We are led, by events and common sense, to one conclusion: The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands." "Across the generations we have proclaimed the imperative of self government. . . . Now it is the urgent requirement of our nation's security, and the calling of our time." "It is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in the world."
Ending tyranny in the world? Well that's an ambition, and if you're going to have an ambition it might as well be a big one. But this declaration, which is not wrong by any means, seemed to me to land somewhere between dreamy and disturbing. Tyranny is a very bad thing and quite wicked, but one doesn't expect we're going to eradicate it any time soon. Again, this is not heaven, it's earth.
There were moments of eloquence: "America will not pretend that jailed dissidents prefer their chains, or that women welcome humiliation and servitude, or that any human being aspires to live at the mercy of bullies." "We do not accept the existence of permanent tyranny because we do not accept the possibility of permanent slavery." And, to the young people of our country, "You have seen that life is fragile, and evil is real, and courage triumphs." They have, since 9/11, seen exactly that.
And yet such promising moments were followed by this, the ending of the speech. "Renewed in our strength--tested, but not weary--we are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom."
This is--how else to put it?--over the top. It is the kind of sentence that makes you wonder if this White House did not, in the preparation period, have a case of what I have called in the past "mission inebriation." A sense that there are few legitimate boundaries to the desires born in the goodness of their good hearts.
One wonders if they shouldn't ease up, calm down, breathe deep, get more securely grounded. The most moving speeches summon us to the cause of what is actually possible. Perfection in the life of man on earth is not.
***she*** was put off by Bush's speach, saying it had way too much "God" in it and, shockingly, lacked nuance.
Read on ... i've edited out her thougths on the day, and left in her thoughts on the speech ... you can find the whole thing at:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pnoonan/?id=110006184
Way Too Much God
Was the president's speech a case of "mission inebriation"?
Friday, January 21, 2005 12:01 a.m. EST
[...]
The inaugural address itself was startling. It left me with a bad feeling, and reluctant dislike. Rhetorically, it veered from high-class boilerplate to strong and simple sentences, but it was not pedestrian. George W. Bush's second inaugural will no doubt prove historic because it carried a punch, asserting an agenda so sweeping that an observer quipped that by the end he would not have been surprised if the president had announced we were going to colonize Mars.
A short and self-conscious preamble led quickly to the meat of the speech: the president's evolving thoughts on freedom in the world. Those thoughts seemed marked by deep moral seriousness and no moral modesty.
No one will remember what the president said about domestic policy, which was the subject of the last third of the text. This may prove to have been a miscalculation.
It was a foreign-policy speech. To the extent our foreign policy is marked by a division that has been (crudely but serviceably) defined as a division between moralists and realists--the moralists taken with a romantic longing to carry democracy and justice to foreign fields, the realists motivated by what might be called cynicism and an acknowledgment of the limits of governmental power--President Bush sided strongly with the moralists, which was not a surprise. But he did it in a way that left this Bush supporter yearning for something she does not normally yearn for, and that is: nuance.
The administration's approach to history is at odds with what has been described by a communications adviser to the president as the "reality-based community." A dumb phrase, but not a dumb thought: He meant that the administration sees history as dynamic and changeable, not static and impervious to redirection or improvement. That is the Bush administration way, and it happens to be realistic: History is dynamic and changeable. On the other hand, some things are constant, such as human imperfection, injustice, misery and bad government.
This world is not heaven.
The president's speech seemed rather heavenish. It was a God-drenched speech. This president, who has been accused of giving too much attention to religious imagery and religious thought, has not let the criticism enter him. God was invoked relentlessly. "The Author of Liberty." "God moves and chooses as He wills. We have confidence because freedom is the permanent hope of mankind . . . the longing of the soul."
It seemed a document produced by a White House on a mission. The United States, the speech said, has put the world on notice: Good governments that are just to their people are our friends, and those that are not are, essentially, not. We know the way: democracy. The president told every nondemocratic government in the world to shape up. "Success in our relations [with other governments] will require the decent treatment of their own people."
The speech did not deal with specifics--9/11, terrorism, particular alliances, Iraq. It was, instead, assertively abstract.
"We are led, by events and common sense, to one conclusion: The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands." "Across the generations we have proclaimed the imperative of self government. . . . Now it is the urgent requirement of our nation's security, and the calling of our time." "It is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in the world."
Ending tyranny in the world? Well that's an ambition, and if you're going to have an ambition it might as well be a big one. But this declaration, which is not wrong by any means, seemed to me to land somewhere between dreamy and disturbing. Tyranny is a very bad thing and quite wicked, but one doesn't expect we're going to eradicate it any time soon. Again, this is not heaven, it's earth.
There were moments of eloquence: "America will not pretend that jailed dissidents prefer their chains, or that women welcome humiliation and servitude, or that any human being aspires to live at the mercy of bullies." "We do not accept the existence of permanent tyranny because we do not accept the possibility of permanent slavery." And, to the young people of our country, "You have seen that life is fragile, and evil is real, and courage triumphs." They have, since 9/11, seen exactly that.
And yet such promising moments were followed by this, the ending of the speech. "Renewed in our strength--tested, but not weary--we are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom."
This is--how else to put it?--over the top. It is the kind of sentence that makes you wonder if this White House did not, in the preparation period, have a case of what I have called in the past "mission inebriation." A sense that there are few legitimate boundaries to the desires born in the goodness of their good hearts.
One wonders if they shouldn't ease up, calm down, breathe deep, get more securely grounded. The most moving speeches summon us to the cause of what is actually possible. Perfection in the life of man on earth is not.
deep
Blue Crack Addict
actually
Reagan knew how to deliver a line
and Ws preferred experience with a line
is no longer avaiable to him
Reagan knew how to deliver a line
and Ws preferred experience with a line
is no longer avaiable to him
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
deep said:
joyfulgirl
Blue Crack Addict
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2001
- Messages
- 16,690
So Bush gave a big speech this week and everything?
deep
Blue Crack Addict
now he is on his "Jesus" drug
and he is higher than he has ever been
and he is higher than he has ever been
najeena
War Child
He scares the hell out of me. 
verte76
Blue Crack Addict
Can he keep all of these promises? This is very ambitious; how doable is it?
diamond
ONE love, blood, life
think he made a mission and visionary speech/statment for future generationsdb9
A_Wanderer
ONE love, blood, life
Bush may well get into the same league as Truman.
financeguy
ONE love, blood, life
Yep, up George W. Bush!
Why change horseman mid-apocalypse?
That guy will be the death of us (literally).
Why change horseman mid-apocalypse?
That guy will be the death of us (literally).
deep
Blue Crack Addict
A_Wanderer said:
nbcrusader
Blue Crack Addict
Are we digging into the old bag of Reagan criticism again....
diamond
ONE love, blood, life
Here's something for the more 'fair minded' folk here:
The Wall Street Journal: "Not Since JFK In 1960 Has An American President Provided Such An Ambitious And Unabashed Case For The Promotion Of Liberty At Home And Abroad." (Editorial, "Liberty Bell Ringer," The Wall Street Journal, 1/21/05)
William Safire, The New York Times: "I Rate It Among The Top 5 Of The 20 Second-Inaugurals In Our History. Lincoln's Profound Sermon 'With Malice Toward None' Is Incomparable, But Bush's Second Was Better Than Jefferson's Mean-Spirited Pouting At 'The Artillery Of The Press.'" (William Safire, Op-Ed, "Bush's 'Freedom Speech,'" The New York Times, 1/21/05)
NBC's Tim Russert: "Well-Crafted, Well-Delivered. The Themes Of Freedom And Liberty " I Thought The Call To National Service Will Resonate With All Americans -- Democrats, Republicans, Independents." (NBC's, "Special Coverage Of The 55th Inaugural," 1/20/05)
peace,
db9
The Wall Street Journal: "Not Since JFK In 1960 Has An American President Provided Such An Ambitious And Unabashed Case For The Promotion Of Liberty At Home And Abroad." (Editorial, "Liberty Bell Ringer," The Wall Street Journal, 1/21/05)
William Safire, The New York Times: "I Rate It Among The Top 5 Of The 20 Second-Inaugurals In Our History. Lincoln's Profound Sermon 'With Malice Toward None' Is Incomparable, But Bush's Second Was Better Than Jefferson's Mean-Spirited Pouting At 'The Artillery Of The Press.'" (William Safire, Op-Ed, "Bush's 'Freedom Speech,'" The New York Times, 1/21/05)
NBC's Tim Russert: "Well-Crafted, Well-Delivered. The Themes Of Freedom And Liberty " I Thought The Call To National Service Will Resonate With All Americans -- Democrats, Republicans, Independents." (NBC's, "Special Coverage Of The 55th Inaugural," 1/20/05)
peace,
db9
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
diamond said:
fair-minded?
the most conservative editorial page in the mainstream press?
and op-ed by an increasingly senile former Nixon speachwriter who still, to this day, claims some sort of Iraq/Al-Qaeda connection based upon a meeting in Prague?
the last quote is suspicious -- Russert doesn't write, he reports and interviews.
Seeking Adam
The Fly
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2004
- Messages
- 102
He means the more right-wing minded
deep
Blue Crack Addict
trevster2k
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2001
- Messages
- 4,330
verte76
Blue Crack Addict
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Someone told me it also means bullshit in sign language. Go figure.
Similar threads
