Peggy Noonan descends into madness

My Dad and I have had this bet since high school...  $100 paid anytime one of us gets our name in the Wall Street Journal.  Pay up, sucka!   (ps:  Stolen from Nick Felton, who's the superstar of this article)The Wall Street Journal (cc photo by dpstyles)

We are in the midst of the worst Washington scandal since Watergate.

That’s the way Peggy Noonan’s latest column in the Wall Street Journal starts, and it goes downhill from there. Here’s Andrew Sullivan’s reply to the much ridiculed WSJ columnist:

Can she actually believe this? Has this president broken the law, lied under oath, or authorized war crimes? Has he traded arms for hostages with Iran? Has he knowingly sent his cabinet out to tell lies about his sex life? Has he sat by idly as an American city was destroyed by a hurricane? Has he started a war with no planning for an occupation? Has he started a war based on a lie, and destroyed the US’ credibility and moral standing while he was at it, leaving nothing but a smoldering and now rekindled civil sectarian war?

So far as I can tell, this president has done nothing illegal, unethical or even wrong.

But this isn’t the first time Peggy has written a column that has been regarded as crazy as it is inaccurate – in fact only a week before she wrote a rather stupid article about the Benghazi scandal, suggesting that President Obama deliberately decided to kill Americans to save his re-election:

The Obama White House sees every event as a political event. Really, every event, even an attack on a consulate and the killing of an ambassador. Because of that, it could not tolerate the idea that the armed assault on the Benghazi consulate was a premeditated act of Islamist terrorism. That would carry a whole world of unhappy political implications, and demand certain actions.

….All of this is bad enough. Far worse is the implied question that hung over the House hearing, and that cries out for further investigation. That is the idea that if the administration was to play down the nature of the attack it would have to play down the response—that is, if you want something to be a nonstory you have to have a nonresponse. So you don’t launch a military rescue operation, you don’t scramble jets, and you have a rationalization—they’re too far away, they’ll never make it in time. This was probably true, but why not take the chance when American lives are at stake?

What you read there is absurd, libelous and totally disingenuous. What Noonan basically suggests is that on September 11th of last year, Barack Obama sat in the situation room and consciously decided that saving Americans would be bad for his campaign. The picture she draws is one of Obama stroking his chin and smoking a cigar, refusing to save Americans he certainly could have saved.

Unfortunately, she has a rather large and influential platform to spew her nonsensical garbage fronting as journalism. Fortunately, Americans have become pretty good at pointing out the crazies, and Noonan is certainly one of them.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Comments are closed.