Inauguration speech:

Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.

This much we pledge—and more....

To those peoples in the huts and villages across the globe struggling to break the bonds of mass misery, we pledge our best efforts to help them help themselves, for whatever period is required... because it is right. If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.

Peggy Noonan:

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.

Of course, she was referring to Bush's inauguration speech, not Kennedy's. Undoubtedly, she honors the one, while denigrading the other, despite the huge similarity in their content, tone, and message, as well as the scope of the threat being faced in the world when the speeches were given.

The criticism she levels applies to both speeches. Yet what is laudable, optimisitic, good and noble for a Democrat to pronounce is instead cynical, unrealistic, or downright dangerous for a Republican to hope. There is clearly a double standard in play here -- even for Noonan.

Or perhaps it is that, having actually fulfilled Kennedy's idealistic dream (thank you Ronald Reagan), we now lapse into a frame of mind that says reaching for "the greatest achievements in the history of freedom" is no longer a reasonable thing for the United States of American to pursue.

UPDATE: Dafydd ab Hugh says roughly the same thing, only more eloquently. (Which is why his comments frequently appear on Powerline and mine don't!)

UPDATE 2: Er, uh, gosh! Welcome Powerline readers! Thanks Deacon. I guess I must now eat the former offhanded remark (though not part about Dafydd being more eloquent -- the guy really should get his own blog).