BY WILLIAM C. HENRY On March 31st Peggy Noonan authored a piece for the Wall Street Journal entitled “Not-So-Smooth Operator” in which she feebly attempted to articulate her opinion(s) as to why President Obama was increasingly coming across as devious and dishonest. Well, Peggy, all I can say is — and, trust me, there are a multitude of things about this administration with which even I take exception — that after reading it I have come to the inescapable conclusion that America should finally grant you the recognition you so richly deserve as one of this country’s most cognitive and astute judges of character, namely, your own. Actually, I’ve long felt that you were one of our most pitifully pretentious, sanctimonious, self-aggrandizing, and, most damning of all, intellectually dishonest of columnists, an aptly descriptive list to which I can now happily and unhesitatingly add: prevaricating, and, oh, so easily and pleasurably, refutable. Let’s run a test utilizing some of your own text:
1. “Something’s happening to President Obama’s relationship with those who are inclined not to like his policies. They are now inclined not to like him. His supporters would say, ‘Nothing new there,’ but actually I think there is. I’m referring to the broad, stable, non-radical, non-birther right. Among them the level of dislike for the president has ratcheted up sharply in the past few months.” Surely you’re being facetious. First off, if there actually is a broad, stable, non-radical, non-birther right in this country, they must be hiding under rocks, and even if there were, they sure as hell wouldn’t be voting for Obama. For goddamn sure, none of your candidates have been appealing to, or even recognizing the existence of, such a group. Secondly, you might want to expend the time and effort to at least check out the latest national polls. Every recognized polling organization in the country (except, oddly enough, the conservative Rasmussen Reports) has Obama’s “approve” ahead of his “disapprove.” Gallop’s most recent has Obama leading Romney 51% to 42%. In fact, it appears it’s your guy who’s having a real “unlikability” problem.
2. “What is happening is that the president is coming across more and more as a trimmer, as an operator who’s not operating in good faith. This is hardening positions and leading to increased political bitterness. And it’s his fault, too. As an increase in polarization is a bad thing, it’s a big fault.” For God’s sake, woman, what planet have you been living on for the past three years?! It’s Obama’s fault?! He’s
3. “The shift started on Jan. 20, with the mandate that agencies of the Catholic Church would have to provide birth-control services the church finds morally repugnant. The public’s reaction? ‘You’re kidding me. that’s not just bad judgement and a lack of civic tact, it’s not even constitutional!’ Faced with the blowback, the president offered a so-called accommodation that even its supporters recognized as devious. Not ill-advised, devious. Then his operatives flooded the airwaves with dishonest — not wrongheaded, dishonest — charges that those who defend the church’s religious liberties are trying to take away your contraceptives.” Boy, it’s hard to decide which outright lie and/or distortion to begin with. Seriously, Peg, you can’t remember the last time you beat your husband? Aside from the complete lack of deliberate intent to intrude on a church’s wrongly conceived tenet (who cares what the percentage is, suffice to say that a hell of a lot of your fellow Catholic women are deliberately disregarding the church’s teaching) so stop with the phony platitudes! The situation was corrected to the great relief of Catholic “women” (as expected, most of the church’s all male hierarchy are still pouting) everywhere. End of that story. No so for the “morally repugnant” crap. Wow, the colored frocks are finally labeling and speaking out on something they claim to find morally repugnant! Now, let me tell you, Ms. Noonan, that’s news! Why? Well, you’ll forgive me for wondering just where the hell all that moral repugnance was hiding when the catholic hierarchy was covering up the rape and sodomy of literally thousands of young boys by its oh, so holy underlings all around the world! What an absolutely dirty, filthy joke! Do me a favor, Peg, keep your “morally repugnant” catholic sentiments to yourself. I don’t need them and neither does any seriously responsible discussion of what has been one of this nation’s greatest failings, namely, affordable healthcare for all of its citizens, not just the pompous and pampered like yourself!
4. “Events of just the past 10 days have contributed to the shift. There was the open-mic conversation with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in which Mr. Obama pleaded for “space” and said he will have “more flexibility” in his negotiations once the election is over and “those pesky voters have done their thing” (my quotation marks, Noonan’s wholly contrived non-existent addition to the conversation). On tape it looked so bush-league, so faux-sophisticated. When he knew he’d been caught, the president tried to laugh it off by comically covering a mic in a following meeting. It was all so . . . creepy.” Creepy? Grow up naive little gradeschooler! How long have you been rubbing elbows with big-league politicians, Peg? Did you learn anything as a result? You’re the best selling author of seven books on politics, history and culture. Did you learn anything in the process? In 1996, you were one of ten historians and writers who contributed essays on the American presidency for the book, “Character Above All.” Your essay was on Ronald Reagan. You really admired him, didn’t you? I guess all that “character” of his was on holiday when he flat out lied about our country’s involvement in Nicaraguan affairs and the consequent deaths of tens of thousands of innocents. Same convenient character “gone fishing” situation when he flat out lied about exchanging arms for hostages with Iran? Come to think of it, maybe a wee bit of that “character” stuff of his rubbed off on yourself.
5. “Next, a boy of 17 is shot and killed under disputed and unclear circumstances. The whole issue is racially charged, emotions are high, and the only memorable words from the president’s response were, ‘If I had a son he’d look like Trayvon.’ At first it seemed OK — not great, but all right — but as the story continued and suddenly there were death threats and tweeted addresses and congressmen in hoodies, it seemed insufficient to the moment. At the end of the day, the public reaction seemed to be: ‘Hey buddy, we don’t need you to personalize what is already too dramatic, it’s not about you.’” Finally at least one of the true motives behind this entire lame excuse of yours for “responsible” journalism comes to light, i.e., a phony, biased, rent-a-reporter seeking an opportunity (and an audience) to turn whatever the President might say on this matter into a barely disguised closet racist rallying cry. Nice try, but no stogie, sweetie.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Fed up early stage septuagenarian who has actually been most of there and done most of that. Born and raised in the picturesque Pocono Mountains. Quite well educated. Very lucky to have been born into a well-schooled and somewhat prosperous family. Long divorced. One beautiful, brilliant daughter. Two far above average grandsons. Semi-retired (how does anyone manage to do it completely these days?) and fully-tired of bullshit. Uncle of the Editor-In-Chief.
1927 = The number of Americans killed in action in Afghanistan.
100,000 plus = The number of Americans seriously wounded in Afghanistan including those requiring extensive long-term treatment for severe mental trauma.
0 = The number of financial industry kingpins indicted for having committed the most massive FRAUD in American history and wrecking the global economy, plunging untold millions into lives of misery and deprivation.