Noonan on Palin

[nuu faaola]

Peggy Noonan, who briefly warmed up to Sarah Palin, comes to a thinking person's unavoidable conclusion about her candidacy:

[url]http://online.wsj.com/article/declarations.html[/url]

[QUOTE]

There has never been a second's debate among liberals, to use an old-fashioned word that may yet return to vogue, over Mrs. Palin: She was a dope and unqualified from the start. Conservatives and Republicans, on the other hand, continue to battle it out: Was her choice a success or a disaster? And if one holds negative views, should one say so? For conservatives in general, but certainly for writers, the answer is a variation on Edmund Burke: You owe your readers not your industry only but your judgment, and you betray instead of serve them if you sacrifice it to what may or may not be their opinion.

Here is a fact of life that is also a fact of politics: You have to hold open the possibility of magic. People can come from nowhere, with modest backgrounds and short résumés, and yet be individuals of real gifts, gifts that had previously been unseen, that had been gleaming quietly under a bushel, and are suddenly revealed. Mrs. Palin came, essentially, from nowhere. But there was a man who came from nowhere, the seeming tool of a political machine, a tidy, narrow, unsophisticated senator appointed to high office and then thrust into power by a careless Franklin D. Roosevelt, whose vanity told him he would live forever. And yet that limited little man was Harry S. Truman. Of the Marshall Plan, of containment. Little Harry was big. He had magic. You have to give people time to show what they have. Because maybe they have magic too.

But we have seen Mrs. Palin on the national stage for seven weeks now, and there is little sign that she has the tools, the equipment, the knowledge or the philosophical grounding one hopes for, and expects, in a holder of high office. She is a person of great ambition, but the question remains: What is the purpose of the ambition? She wants to rise, but what for? For seven weeks I've listened to her, trying to understand if she is Bushian or Reaganite—a spender, to speak briefly, whose political decisions seem untethered to a political philosophy, and whose foreign policy is shaped by a certain emotionalism, or a conservative whose principles are rooted in philosophy, and whose foreign policy leans more toward what might be called romantic realism, and that is speak truth, know America, be America, move diplomatically, respect public opinion, and move within an awareness and appreciation of reality.

But it's unclear whether she is Bushian or Reaganite. She doesn't think aloud. She just . . . says things.

Her supporters accuse her critics of snobbery: Maybe she's not a big "egghead" but she has brilliant instincts and inner toughness. But what instincts? "I'm Joe Six-Pack"? She does not speak seriously but attempts to excite sensation—"palling around with terrorists." If the Ayers case is a serious issue, treat it seriously. She is not as thoughtful or persuasive as Joe the Plumber, who in an extended cable interview Thursday made a better case for the Republican ticket than the Republican ticket has made. In the past two weeks she has spent her time throwing out tinny lines to crowds she doesn't, really, understand. This is not a leader, this is a follower, and she follows what she imagines is the base, which is in fact a vast and broken-hearted thing whose pain she cannot, actually, imagine. She could reinspire and reinspirit; she chooses merely to excite. She doesn't seem to understand the implications of her own thoughts.

No news conferences? Interviews now only with friendly journalists? You can't be president or vice president and govern in that style, as a sequestered figure. This has been Mr. Bush's style the past few years, and see where it got us. You must address America in its entirety, not as a sliver or a series of slivers but as a full and whole entity, a great nation trying to hold together. When you don't, when you play only to your little piece, you contribute to its fracturing.

In the end the Palin candidacy is a symptom and expression of a new vulgarization in American politics. It's no good, not for conservatism and not for the country. And yes, it is a mark against John McCain, against his judgment and idealism.

I gather this week from conservative publications that those whose thoughts lead them to criticism in this area are to be shunned, and accused of the lowest motives. In one now-famous case, Christopher Buckley was shooed from the great magazine his father invented. In all this, the conservative intelligentsia are doing what they have done for five years. They bitterly attacked those who came to stand against the Bush administration. This was destructive. If they had stood for conservative principle and the full expression of views, instead of attempting to silence those who opposed mere party, their movement, and the party, would be in a better, and healthier, position.

At any rate, come and get me, copper.[/QUOTE]

[jetswin]

I light of recent events I respectfully ask you to change the thread title. (I would have done this by pm, however yours are not turned on).

thanks

[nuu faaola]

[QUOTE=jetswin;2808618]I light of recent events I respectfully ask you to change the thread title. (I would have done this by pm, however yours are not turned on).

thanks[/QUOTE]

A little oversensitive, no?

Ham knows I'm just having a little fun with him.

[jetswin]

thanks, I did it myself

[jetswin]

[QUOTE=nuu faaola;2808636]A little oversensitive, no?

Ham knows I'm just having a little fun with him.[/QUOTE]

perhaps, last week was ugly and I don't want it revisited

[Section109Row15]

[quote=jetswin;2808618]I light of recent events I respectfully ask you to change the thread title. (I would have done this by pm, however yours are not turned on).

thanks[/quote]

Is the title considered a personal attack? I don't understand. Ham has been the biggest Palin supporter here and he has on many occasions talked about his fondness for Noonan.

If there was an article about Dwayne Robertson saying he was a bust posted on draftdaddy would it be out of line to have a thread saying Bitonti's head was going to explode?

[SMC]

Peggy Noonan is an American-hating, unpatriotic no talent w---.

[jetswin]

[QUOTE=Section109Row15;2808640]
If there was an article about Dwayne Robertson saying he was a bust posted on draftdaddy would it be out of line to have a thread saying Bitonti's head was going to explode?[/QUOTE]

we wouldn't want to help anyone's head explode, Bit included :D

[CTM]

:applause:

Palin is a joke as a national candidate.

[nuu faaola]

[QUOTE=jetswin;2808638]perhaps, last week was ugly and I don't want it revisited[/QUOTE]

Fair enough. You're the mod and its your call.

I do think that Ham knows where I'm coming from and would take it as a gentle ribbing. But I can understand the concern in light of recent events.

[SMC]

[QUOTE=jetswin;2808637]thanks, I did it myself[/QUOTE]

JW, you do realize the double entendre with your revised thread title, right?

[jetswin]

[QUOTE=SMC;2808694]JW, you do realize the double entendre with your revised thread title, right?[/QUOTE]

:eek:


:cool:

[nuu faaola]

[QUOTE=SMC;2808694]JW, you do realize the double entendre with your revised thread title, right?[/QUOTE]

Now that image will *really* make Ham's head explode!

[RutgersJetFan]

Clearly Obama payed her off and Noonan is now a plant.