|
For reporting that is an embarrassment to the profession of journalism, and for being beholden to corporate paymasters rather than the citizens of America.
If Ann Coulter is a shameless right-wing flamethrower, Peggy Noonan is a
GOP confectioner, creating wispy cotton candy out of dung.
Noted as the speechwriter who wrote Ronald Reagan's more lofty scripts --
and did a stint with George Herbert Walker Bush -- Noonan now writes otherworldly,
almost supernatural columns at the Wall Street Journal. Her specialty is cloaking
absurd support for right-wing policies in the guise of "reasoned" commentary.
We recall reading through Noonan's hagiography of Reagan, "What I Saw
at the Revolution: A Political Life in the Reagan Era," her memoirs of
basking the radiant glow of the Gipper. While others saw Reagan's generally
silent cluelessness at White House meetings as an indication that he was just
a beard for the conservatives really running the government, Noonan claimed
his lack of active participation in policy discussions was a sign that he really
was the wisest one in the room.
Noonan offered no evidence for such an odd theory. She appeared to be able
to read Reagan's mind as he popped jelly beans into his mouth.
The irony is that Noonan was a vital member of the Hollywood style political
team that made Reagan into an icon. She was the scriptwriter; he was the actor.
Contrary to Noonan's fantasies, Reagan was not directing the film. Of this,
you can be sure.
BuzzFlash reader John Johnson of Laingsburg, Michigan, however, nominated
Noonan as the BuzzFlash Media Putz of the Week for a more recent
Noonan commentary. On
August 12, she wrote a column that exemplifies her ability to set the stage
for a political action, while appearing to be decrying politicians.
In this case, she penned a saintly portrait of General David Petraeus and
reasons, "if Gen. Petraeus comports himself like what he is, a professional
soldier, if he seems to be giving it to you straight, if he sounds as if he
didn't get rolled by the White House or pressured by the political atmosphere,
if he seems to be thinking clearly, he can make a big and even decisive impression.
And he will buy time."
Which caused BuzzFlash reader Johnson to ask, "buy time for what? Killing
more of our soldiers? What else would he be buying time for?"
Noonan somehow manages to even weave an anecdote about how Bill Frist, as
a surgeon (prior to his Senate years) allegedly saved Petraeus's life.
This leads to Noonan's extraordinary concluding thoughts: "What does
it all mean? Life is interesting, mysterious, and has an unseen circularity.
You never know in any given day what's going to happen or who's going to have
a big impact on you and on others. A future military commander got shot, and
a future leader of the Senate stopped the bleeding.
"What Mr. Frist, a supporter of more time for and renewed commitment
to Iraq, gets from the story is this: What he saw and heard that day 16 years
ago, is what he's seen from Gen. Petraeus in the years since: 'straightforward
decisiveness' and a 'call for action with results.'"
Whenever we peruse Noonan's writing, we get the feeling she's been alternating
her reading between Lord Byron poems, Harlequin romance books, and Zane Grey
Westerns, while downing a few glasses of wine.
Obviously, the Petraeus column is a setup to make him seem like a heroic straight
shooter, not a Bush "made man," so that when the only general Bush
could find who would beard for him comes up with an optimistic Iraq report
in September, it will appear professional and nonpartisan.
Give us a break, Ms. Noonan.
The propaganda wrapped in heroic portraiture is getting a little old, and
our GIs are dying because of fey shills for those who have misled this nation
because of their personal agendas or paychecks. You can script fiction, but
not reality.
As it turns out, on August 15, it was revealed that
the White House would be writing Petraeus’s
September "report" for him. So much for Petraeus' opportunity to
be a "heroic straight
shooter" in Noonan's fantasy world.
You remind us how easy it is to separate
journalism from the truth.
|
