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."
Reagan preparing for his farewell address to the nation from the Oval Office, 1989. Reagan's effectiveness as a public speaker earned him the moniker, "Great Communicator." ." Former Reagan speechwriter Ken Khachigian wrote, "What made him the Great Communicator was Ronald Reagan's determination and ability to educate his audience, to bring his ideas to life by using illustrations and word ...
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".
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.
Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., lit into the “weirdos” that he said are tearing the United States apart, in a fiery speech at the Reagan Foundation that connected the hyperbolic political debates of ...
Reagan's speech, coming as the Cold War with the Soviet Union remained underway, was also a call for the U.S. to not turn its back on Europe. “We in America have learned bitter lessons from two ...
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.
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.