Peggy Noonan
Would it help if the president were graceful, humble, and asked for help? Why, yes. Would it help if he credited those who opposed him with not only good motives but actual wisdom? Yes. And if he tried it, it would make news. It would really, as his press aides say, break through the clutter.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Registration is currently closed. That means if you're not already registered, you can't comment. We will let you know if and when registration re-opens. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Didn’t Peggy say that Bush should say he was wrong last year? He did and what did it buy him? Squat.
Sorry, Peggy, your wrong, again.
bnelson44 on August 31, 2007 at 1:27 AM
ummmm…no.
I defended her once at FR. Won’t make that mistake again.
Connie on August 31, 2007 at 1:40 AM
I KNEW Peggy was on an Island of elite Pegginess and no longer relevant a few years ago — she wrote how she never understood gardening and thought it was for small people until she went to like Holland or somewhere after 9-11 and saw tulips and this made her realize the wonders of gardening and how wonderful gardeners were after all and these tulips made her realize that whe needed a change (her analogy was this transparent)…as a person whose hands regularly get dirty in the yard whether I want to or can afford to hire help, I realized this women was so out of touch she probably doesn’t even know anything beyond lunch with a socialite…IOW Peggy is the conservative Paris Hilton…sad.
Topsecretk9 on August 31, 2007 at 1:44 AM
The permanent anti-war don’t just want conciliatory words but a say in how policy on Iraq is shaped. Saying you were right but we’re still staying regardless is not going to move consensus towards on Bush’s Iraq strategy.
This is a similar problem to how some said there was this magical consensus just after 9/11 that Bush and Rove ruined.
Unless Bush wants to go full Baker-Hamilton, the virtue of which is mostly that a set of old people from both sides of the aisles agreed on it, it is hard to see how he gets the ‘bipartisan’ stamp of approval by saying ‘You were right, I was in over my head’.
jaychandra on August 31, 2007 at 1:49 AM
Plus when Bush ostensibly listened and accepted Rumsfeld’s resignation and replaced Casey and Abizaid, as his critics suggested, that didn’t in itself rally the nation and make political enemies friends. Some have shifted as they have seen results, others have stuck Bush with his rhetoric of ’staying the course’ and used it to dismiss the new clear and hold counterinsurgency. If his tacit concessions to them on strategy are not enough, why think admissions of incompetence are going to make the difference?
jaychandra on August 31, 2007 at 1:56 AM
The libs have never accepted that the WOT and the battle in Iraq is a worthwhile endevor. The Dims have never offered constructive suggestions about how we can WIN over there. For the President to say ‘I made a few mistakes, you were right,’ would not get them to hop aboard the wagon. It would only embolden them to go for the kill on the whole effort.
Let the libs say, ‘what we are doing over there is the right thing and we would like to help achive victory.’ Then the President can be concilliatory and admit that he would welcome their suggestions.
Peggy has gone soft on us.
Mallard T. Drake on August 31, 2007 at 1:57 AM
Peggy hasn’t been consistent.
see-dubya on August 31, 2007 at 2:23 AM
Well reading Peggy Noonan’s article was a complete waste of time. Rodney King said basically the same thing with a whole lot less words, “Can’t we all just get along”.
MB4 on August 31, 2007 at 3:06 AM
You’re right, she’s not.
You know when conservative writers sorta elevate to the elite class, they sort of recognize it, and so their writing reflects the knowing perch yet because of that personal acknowledgment their writing remain relevant? Yeah, Peggy can’t bridged that gap.
She reminds me of the consummate teenager – she was deemed the golden girl – communicator for the golden communicator Reagan and the recognition surprised the crap out of her and she just can’t get past it – she relies on flowery, emotional observations of the privileged class that were neat in those speeches but are tired, wordy and weird now.
She sounds like a political Linda Goodman and instead of pumping out whispy, forlorn diatribes that cause her to feel relief and then pride a sentence end – i.e. please HER to no end but the rest of us scratch our head —she ought to sling hash at an In & Out Burger, change a diaper and utilize a toilet plunger once in her delicate stunted life.
I’ve said before – Peggy Noonan is the type that would be the only one in her circle surprised to find her husband had been cheating on her for the last 20 years.
Peggy – Bliss just looking in the mirror? Yes. Clueless? Yes.
Topsecretk9 on August 31, 2007 at 4:16 AM
Just when you think Peg’s back on track with her crystal clear thinking and lucid, honey-tongued prose, she drops the ball again and dives into la la land. Hasn’t she seen enough to understand that Democrats are not motivated by good intentions?! Her apparent evenhandedness must be cover for something else – there’s no way a bright woman like her could actually believe “bipartisan” and the Democrat party could exist in the same dimension. Peg, shake yourself out of it, girl!!!
Halley on August 31, 2007 at 5:39 AM
I’m sorry, perhaps Peggy could explain this to me, but which part of “Bush Lied Ponies Died”, or “No Blood For Oil!!”, or “Impeach the ChimpHitler!” contains this “actual wisdom” she is describing?
Lehosh on August 31, 2007 at 6:54 AM
I could be wrong but didn’t Bush invite the dems to talk after they won the 2006 elections and didn’t the dems pretty much tell him to stuff it? I think Bush has remained open to suggestion from the “other side” and they have continued with the “My way or the highway” attitude. I also feel that the war in going the way it is precisely because he has been accommodating in everything from ROE to letting far too many of the truly vile to live. The problem is that from the start we have been saying “bad boy” rather than giving them lead poisoning.
jmarcure on August 31, 2007 at 7:35 AM
In a word: Hell no.
Darksean on August 31, 2007 at 7:44 AM
Ok, let’s do what the anti-war freaks want. Let’s pull all of our Troops out … and watch Iraq decend into an all out civil war with millions dead. Then the Lefties can say to Bush: “You were right.”
“It would only embolden them to go for the kill …” – Mallard
Absolutely right sir! Now apply that same sentence to the jihadists. They have so much in common with our “friends” on the Left. You know, “religion of PEACE” and all of that.
Tony737 on August 31, 2007 at 8:16 AM
Boy, that was one of the dumbest articles I’ve read in a long, long time. If a student of mine turned in something with that sort of “reasoning” it’d get a big, fat “F”. Pathetic, really.
What passes for intelligence in this world really astounds me, sometimes.
progressoverpeace on August 31, 2007 at 9:20 AM
Peggy Noonan is proof that all elitists are not liberal. The premise is okay except for the fact that there is absolutely no reason for GWB and his administration to show grace to a bunch of people that have spent the last four years undermining the troops and the very effort! More importantly, you could show “grace” to Dick Durbin, Carl Levin, John Kerry, Jack Murtha, and all the rest of the rat bastard traitors and it would get you nowhere.
Put another way, showing grace is how you respect other adults. It is a waste to show grace to the children of the rabid left.
highhopes on August 31, 2007 at 9:24 AM
Noonan is just wrong. The problem now is not those who always openly opposed the Iraq war, it’s those who voted for the war (based on public support) then changed sides (when public support decreased).
Cue Replay: One side commits to the war …
• The other side goes along and votes in favor because the country is angry and voting against is political suicide;
• Then the other side balks as the anger subsides;
• Then the other side wages an anti war campaign;
• Then the other side lies about being misled to cover for their insincerity from the beginning;
• Then the other side wages a leak campaign of secrets and false “secrets” to further influence the public against the war;
• Then the other side engages prosecution against the administration for responding to false leaks;
But don’t call them unpatriotic.
Don’t call them traitors.
Don’t call them hypocrites.
Call them craven.
boris on August 31, 2007 at 9:39 AM
Peggy makes some good points, the problem is that she is asking for a one sided reconciliation. Bush admits he was wrong and that solves all the problems. Problem is that Bush wasn’t wrong and admitting to something he wasn’t isn’t reconciliation.
Did the Bush administration make mistakes in Iraq, yes. Was going to Iraq a mistake, no. Bush has already admitted to having made mistakes and the progress of the surge is proof of his working to correct those mistakes.
There is a concept called the “Fog Of War”, what it means is that once a war is engaged, even the best laid plans have a tendency to go wrong. The fact that America suffered from “Fog Of War” does not mean that Bush was wrong in taking America to war in Iraq.
In calling for Bush to admit to the anti-war crowd that he was wrong Peggy isn’t asking for reconciliation, but in fact full capitulation to the anti-war crowd. The anti-war crowd isnt going to engage in reconciliation, they do not want reconciliation, they want full and complete surrender.
For Ms. Noonan to call for full and complete capitulation at a time when the surge is showing evidence of success is not only not reconciliation, it is disingenuous irrational and irresponsible.
doriangrey on August 31, 2007 at 10:03 AM
peggy is probably a paleo-con at heart, with no grasp of the current conflict and state of the world. she knows how to put words together.
jp on August 31, 2007 at 10:10 AM
I don’t see her calling for full and complete capitulation. I do see her asking for President Bush to try to bring the two sides together to some degree.
He is not running for office again. Would it really kill him or the republicans for him to acknowledge that while he doesn’t agree with the anti-war proponents, he does welcome the dialog it has generated in ensuring a successful conclusion to the war, and a beginning of a long and tenuous task of helping the Iraqis secure their peace.
Noonan is right about the name calling from both sides. It serves no real purpose except to make people unwilling to discuss what is best in terms of strategy and tactics, only willing to shout and insult the other.
Bradky on August 31, 2007 at 10:13 AM
It hard to come to agreement with a faction that wishes to see American power humbled on the world stage.
If a significant portion of the Democratic party hopes for defeat in order to solidify their hold on power and to make progress in their global agenda, you fight against them…you don’t negotiate.
Asher on August 31, 2007 at 10:22 AM
She makes some good points. I don’t think Bush needs to say he was wrong. “We did this for the right reasons, and accomplished a whole lot, but we’re now confronted with problems we didn’t anticipate” would be fine.
Unfortunately, there’s not currently anyone on the left who’s gracious enough to reply “Excellent, let us help you solve it (in a way that doesn’t lead to genocide).” So the point’s totally moot.
Tanya on August 31, 2007 at 10:26 AM
Significant portion hopes for defeat, global agenda… rhetoric and labeling with no real facts to support it. But good on ya for illustrating part of the problem Noonan points out.
Bradky on August 31, 2007 at 10:27 AM
We will never know unless he makes the first move. This is one of those things that requires a little risk on the president’s part, not some corny backroom maneuvering to get a canned response from a particular Senator.
Or in a more blunt description – Guts
Bradky on August 31, 2007 at 10:29 AM
The problem with the whole “coming together” thing is that the other side doesn’t want that. Oh sure, they say that, but once you’ve done your part or taken your steps they jump on you and shove a knife in your neck. Normally, I have no problem with trying to seek common ground with the opposition. However, this opposition will take that ground and whatever ground you called your own. They will then STILL beat you soundly about the head and shoulders as if nothing happened.
No, this is a bad idea on those grounds alone. But to actually do it in this case emboldens our enemies and hurts our troops. No thank you.
Darksean on August 31, 2007 at 10:30 AM
Do you HONESTLY believe that? Do you really think for one second the left will let up for one second, try to see the other side for a mere moment, actually support our troops for once?
Darksean on August 31, 2007 at 10:32 AM
How on earth does a speech in which the president acknowledges that there have been some mistakes in the prosecution of the war and subsequent “keeping of the peace” undermine the troops? I would submit that the enemy will be a lot more impressed by a country whose leaders are united in purpose and general direction.
And yes I honestly believe that making the first move is the right thing because he is the elected leader of our country. The left and the Democrats are not the enemy and we should stop trying to frame them as such.
Bradky on August 31, 2007 at 10:38 AM
http://www.yearlykosconvention.org/
Please check out the Sponsors. Please review who spoke at this convention. Please review the content of Daily KoS.
What would you accept as proof? I’m willing to do a little research since you don’t seem capable.
Asher on August 31, 2007 at 10:51 AM
He’s already done that, but that’s not what Peggy is suggesting:
LIGHT YEARS of difference.
“I would submit that the enemy will be a lot more impressed by a country whose leaders are united in purpose and general direction.”
I fear you don’t understand the enemy then. They don’t respect cowardice. Besides, wouldn’t they be equally impressed, under your premise, if it was the left’s leaders who actually united with their country and their people with the right general direction?
They should stop acting like the enemy then. Ask the question: What is the difference between how the left acts and votes and how the enemy would?
As to whether it should be the President making this all-important first move, he’s done that countless times and has been betrayed by that vaunted left. Besides, aren’t the left’s leaders equally elected leaders? Are you suggesting they bear no responsibility to their office or their constituency?
Darksean on August 31, 2007 at 10:52 AM
Are you like Peggy Noonan, mincing words to come up with an original idea, being paid to do this?
What the hell about “the democrats have shown themselves to be an enemy of the US by proxy” do you not understand?!
I have marked you as a lefty sympathizer so I don’t waste time reading your posts!
Mcguyver on August 31, 2007 at 10:53 AM
Of course they are and do but (a) They are not the commander in chief, nor do I want them to think they are in charge (b) Bush is not running again, for the good of the country shouldn’t he try to heal the rift between the two sides?
I don’t think you really think that the majority of democrats in the country are traitors or want to see bad things happen to our troops (many of them are democrats). Personally, i support Bush and the Iraq war. But his PR team has been absolutely lousy in framing it in a way that Americans could collectively latch onto, hence his political opponents pounced. He is responsible for that and he should strive to fix it.
Good, I have marked you as a moronic tool who doesn’t have a firm grasp on reality.
Bradky on August 31, 2007 at 11:02 AM
“Do you personally want the Iraq plan (edit: the surge) President Bush announced last week to succeed?”
Democrats: 51% Yes 34% No 15% Don’t Know
http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/blog/g/8d8912b3-bbab-4b88-a7e5-cca670278cb9
“House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) said Monday that a strongly positive report on progress on Iraq by Army Gen. David Petraeus likely would split Democrats in the House and impede his party’s efforts to press for a timetable to end the war.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/30/AR2007073001380.html
I can find more examples, Bradky. At what point does it become clear that the Democrats and a ’significant’ number on the Left don’t want the US to win? Is there a magical percentage I need to reach?
Asher on August 31, 2007 at 11:09 AM
The most damaging part of her article is the third paragraph:
Then comes the biggest piece of excrement she’s been hiding all along:
***This is flagged for potential further brain damage to the Bradky types.
It is an elitist’s (in this case neo-con) attempt at influencing the wuzzy-whipped Bradky types.
Mincing new word combos to sound sophisticated is really enticing to the Bradky types.
In a way I pity Peggy Noonan’s flailing job security and her desperate attempts to shore up Her Highness.
By surrounding the Bradky types with luuve and support she will loose her job sooner rather than later.
Mcguyver on August 31, 2007 at 11:15 AM
Like I said, he’s tried to heal said rift many, many times and they have ALL not gone well. Why should this time be any different?
As to him being the Commander in Chief, since when did they left ever recognize that? They could care less, so why would the CIC feeling the pain do one thing for them? As to him not running again, I say that’s more a reason to really stick it to them and actually fight for what’s right instead of letting them always frame the debate.
I think a great many of the Democratic leaders are traitorous, and I do think they want bad things to happen so they can regain power. Absolutely. I think a good amount of democrats in this country are also anti-American and even traitorous. The ones who blame America first, the ones who protest soldiers’ gravesites. The ones who get on all manner of message boards and post all the bad news going on over there, almost gleefully. The ones who call our troops baby killers and murderers and spit on them at airports. Yup. To wish for the death of American troops because it will help their leaders get elected is the worst sort of human behavior.
I will agree with you how how louosy he’s done in the framing. But I disagree with you in how to fix that. It isn’t to tell them they were right, but to tell them how wrong they are. We are on the right…the correct side in this but you would never know it by taking a snapshot. He should get his message out strongly and frequently. It’s a winning argument, the right American argument, and I can’t understand why he doesn’t articulate it well and enough.
Darksean on August 31, 2007 at 11:16 AM
Mcguyver, that was some harsh stuff man. In your TV show you always seemed very calm, reserved and cool under pressure. What happened?
Bradky has some legitimate concerns as does Peggy Noonan. I don’t agree with their overall conclusions in this case because I think the American left is walking hand in hand with our enemies, some knowingly some ignorantly. But there are some helpful thoughts that can be taken away from Noonan’s piece. What I took away from it is her sincere and important warning to not allow politics to interfere with doing what is right. The point she made about people’s careers being invested in a particular position is an important concern. I talk to people everyday who don’t make these decisions for a living and still, they are completely invested in a particular position with no apparent ability to recognize flaws in what it is they have so heavily invested themselves in intellectually. Can you imagine how difficult it is for a person to recognize intellectual flaws when their entire career is also dependent upon their intellectual position? Peggy’s right about the fact that we need to grow up and see things for what they are. In my opinion Peggy’s wrong about which direction to lean in order to do that. You don’t just change your mind in order to change your mind. The solution is not to do what our enemies want us to do. I think the solution is to become more unified in the goal to do what our enemies don’t want us to do.
Zetterson on August 31, 2007 at 11:19 AM
The short answer is I only use that name so as to fool people.
Mcguyver on August 31, 2007 at 11:25 AM
Of all Bush’s failed strategies for Iraq that is probably the single biggest and most damaging failure he has made. Strangely enough it is the exact same failure that his father made before him. Withdraw to the white house and not communicate with the American people.
doriangrey on August 31, 2007 at 11:26 AM
If someone were to say that people like David Duke represent the majority of republicans, it would be patently unfair to republicans and dishonest.
Most people are not gleeful about it. I think you are letting a smaller, obnoxious but vocal segement of our citizens paint a stain on a larger majority of democrats who are patriotic and care very much about the country. the party differneces generally have more to do with social issues and how much or little involvement the feds should have.
The example about spitting at the airport and babykillers is from a different war. Since the first gulf war Americans at large have been extremely supportive of the troops.
It is a long read but I’d recommend
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20070901faessay86506/william-g-howell-jon-c-pevehouse/when-congress-stops-wars.html
which has an interesting analysis of how partisan politics plays against presidents of both parties in matters of war and peace.
Bradky on August 31, 2007 at 11:29 AM
Indeed it is, but sadly the hate America first anti-war anti-America Bush Derangement Syndrome crowd have some very seriously dangerous ideas about what is good for America and what not doing what our enemies what is.
doriangrey on August 31, 2007 at 11:30 AM
Haha. Ok then. Won’t get fooled again. No no!
Zetterson on August 31, 2007 at 11:32 AM
**You are wrong here. I have said before they are idiots, but they are not stupid. They only decry the war for the sake of politics/fundraising and elevating class warfare. As such they are the enemies of the US by proxy and should be shamed into oblivion.
****Boy you are good!!!
What you are describing here is the status quo trend for the metro sexual types like Bradky who don’t want to appear to be locked stepped into a defensive position against the elitist intellectuals so as to appear to be smart themselves.
Mcguyver on August 31, 2007 at 11:37 AM
Thanks for the morning comedy.
Another prime example of how badly broken our education system is.
they are idiots, but they are not stupid
(the definition of idiot is “. A foolish or stupid person”
guess you fall into the latter?
status quo trend so the norm is a trend?
locked stepped is this related to locked and loaded?
metro sexual quit touching my foot Mcguyver/not my thing
Just who was your writing instructor? The Unabomber?
Bradky on August 31, 2007 at 11:59 AM
Ah…They are suffering Münchhausen by proxy syndrome eh?
doriangrey on August 31, 2007 at 12:01 PM
Bush has “admitted” all sorts of things the Left has wanted him to “admit.” And the response from the Dems ranged from silence, further criticism, to gloating.
Bush is not trying to kiss up to the Dems on Iraq now and the momentum is moving in his direction.
So I’m guessing W won’t be taking Noonan’s sage advice.
Karl on August 31, 2007 at 12:04 PM
Elected representatives perhaps, but I was making reference to liberals in general, not just elected liberals. The general population if you will. Voters. I have some very good liberal friends who are blinded by BDS. When presented with a good, calm argument they don’t respond with the like. They get mad. They get frustrated. What they need to do is ask themselves, “why am I frustrated”? They are frustrated because they are not seeking out “the truth”, in fact, they are seeking out evidence in support of their original theory derrived from a genuine, largely irrational hatred of the President/Cheney/Rove/Rumsfeld etc. They have tricked themselves into the sincere belief that these people are evil. Their intentions are generally noble but as they say, “the road to hell is paved with…”
Zetterson on August 31, 2007 at 12:05 PM
Hmm…Is the commentary at the top from AP? I assume so. And so we have a column by Noonan, with a full endorsement by management, and not a single commenter agrees with it except Bradky, which is a given since it is a kick in the nuts for Bush.
Ho, hum, just another day.
I agree with the sentiment from Noonan, but I have learned from history that this will fail. Who was it that defined insanity as “doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results”?
No, Bush has not made a habit of admitting mistakes, apparently because he’s smarter than us and sees what he’s up against in Washington. When he has, the left has simply used it as a hammer to beat him with, rather than engage on a different level, as suggested in Noonan’s Ivy League Pretend World.
Jaibones on August 31, 2007 at 12:05 PM
Gee just when I thought you liked me you go and miss this
Bradky on August 31, 2007 at 12:09 PM
Well, he didnt get a Masters Degree from Harvard by accident in spite of what the left tards claim…
doriangrey on August 31, 2007 at 12:13 PM
Having written Peggy off myself, the comments here are encouraging to read. Taranto needs to slap her upside the head.
km on August 31, 2007 at 12:14 PM
Bradky:
Agreed, but I’m talking about the people who DO the things I described. Those I can say quite accurately are anti-American and treasonous. I’m not lumping ALL democrats in that camp, just the ones that are.
However, I DO think the rank and file democrats are lazy and don’t bother much to form their own conclusions.
No I’m not. I’m letting the smaller, obnoxious but vocal segment of the left label themselves. As to the majority of the democrats, well I’ll just say I’m reserving my opinion. That said, they sure haven’t impressed me much.
And yet all they can talk about is how bad America is and how horrible our soldiers are an how bad this war is.
The left hasn’t. Sorry, there’s NO proof of that.
As to the spitting at the airport, different war. But I’ve witnessed first hand sanctimonious liberals yell at and berate soldiers in airports. This year, actually. The babykillers claims ARE this war. In the media, and according to milbloggers.
Darksean on August 31, 2007 at 12:20 PM
Just what I have been trying to say. He’s done what Peggy suggests, since the very beginning of his Presidency. The only result that’s come from him doing that everytime is being forced to bend over and grab the ankles in front of the same liberals he’s supposed to AGAIN reach out to.
The left doesn’t want common ground, they don’t want to bi-partisanly strive for the best for America. They want to destroy Bush and the Republicans and retake the power they feel entitled to. No, following Peggy’s advice is not only wrong, but a horrible idea.
Darksean on August 31, 2007 at 12:24 PM
I do like you.
And, fair enough, I missed it. Cheers, TGiF.
Jaibones on August 31, 2007 at 1:11 PM
I appreciate any lessons from you smart metro sexuals.
Mcguyver on August 31, 2007 at 1:24 PM
There fixed that for you. Hope you don’t mind.
Mcguyver on August 31, 2007 at 1:27 PM
Oh great, someone who thinks that an MBA is an indication of intelligence (don’t know many MBA’s, do you), and that getting a degree from Harvard is even more proof in that direction.
LOL.
progressoverpeace on August 31, 2007 at 1:33 PM
Yeah it hard parsing words…. but I try.
Everything I know I learned from you.
Mcguyver on August 31, 2007 at 1:48 PM
Have a good weekend – three days at that!
Bradky on August 31, 2007 at 3:18 PM