Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
"A Time For Choosing" has been considered one of the most effective speeches ever made by an eventual presidential candidate. Following "A Time For Choosing" in 1964, Washington Post reporter David S. Broder called the speech "the most successful national political debut since William Jennings Bryan electrified the 1896 Democratic Convention with his 'Cross of Gold' speech."
In this televised speech Reagan stressed his belief in smaller government saying, "The Founding Fathers knew a government can't control the economy without controlling people. And they knew when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. So we have come to a time for choosing." The speech launched ...
Reagan and other conservative advocates of the Reagan Doctrine advocates also argued that the doctrine served U.S. foreign policy and strategic objectives and was a moral imperative against the Soviet Union, which Reagan, his advisers, and supporters labeled an "evil empire".
Refugees must leave their country to escape war, persecution, natural disasters or extreme poverty. The American people, at our best, welcome refugees and reject the impulse to close our borders.
Reagan exhibited these changes more toward the end of his presidency. Bush, who has not been diagnosed with Alzheimer's, did not show the same subtle changes in his speech.
Reagan's cue card with the speech's namesake line. The speech drew controversy within the Reagan administration, with several senior staffers and aides advising against the phrase, saying anything that might cause further East-West tensions or potential embarrassment to Gorbachev, with whom Reagan had built a good relationship, should be omitted.
Reagan was arguably ahead of the curve in his view of immigrants. As recently as the early 2000s there was substantial disagreement in the field of economics about the impact of immigration.
The question we must ask is, what are the consequences to our security of letting conflicts fester and spread. We cannot, indeed, we should not, do everything or be everywhere. But where our values and our interests are at stake, and where we can make a difference, we must be prepared to do so.