Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Peggy Noonan thinks the "liberal media" gave Bush a pass

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
DaveSZ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 04:12 PM
Original message
Peggy Noonan thinks the "liberal media" gave Bush a pass
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 04:15 PM
Response to Original message
1. Why would I care about anything Peggy Noonan says?
A sample paragraph might make me click on the link, but not blind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 04:16 PM
Response to Original message
2. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
vi5 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 04:17 PM
Response to Original message
3. God, I fucking loathe that woman....
Seriously, I think probably even worse than Coulter. Noonan is just so smug, arrogant, self righteous, and condescending. I can just picture and hear her saying every word in that piece in her fucking smug little tone. Prefacing it like she does when Tweety Matthews gets her into a corner. "Christopher, Christopher, Christopher...."

AAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DaveSZ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 04:19 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. I hate her too
Edited on Sun Apr-18-04 04:21 PM by DaveSZ
I tend to agree with her though that the media could have destroyed Dubya like they did to Dean, but they didn't.

The only people we have on our side now are the late night comedians. :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 05:51 PM
Response to Reply #3
18. Amen. Unctuous, smarmy, sycophantic, mendacious, oleaginous,
cloying, wheedling, nauseating, sanctimonious, pharisaical, perverted, servile reichswhore. :puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 04:18 PM
Response to Original message
4. Ms. Noonan is a certified Bush Whore
she has no credibility whatsoever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Zanti Regent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #4
10. No, she's Reagan's concubine
Remember how obsessed she was with Poopy Pants' feet???????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zinfandel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 04:18 PM
Response to Original message
5. yeah like Helen Thomas...tossed to the back of the room, Because Thomas
Edited on Sun Apr-18-04 04:20 PM by Zinfandel
who asking real questions that Bush's handlers didn't like and weren't scripted?
Noonan is a conservative cum dump for any right-wing liar!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DaveSZ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 04:21 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. LOL
The entire WSJ editorial page is really a neocon cum dump.

:P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eaprez Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 04:26 PM
Response to Original message
8. This commentary doesn't say....
...what you think it says.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 04:26 PM
Response to Original message
9. In other news, my dog farted. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grasswire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 04:30 PM
Response to Original message
11. here's a few grafs
I noticed once again at the news conference that Mr. Bush has turned garrulous. He has taken to speaking at great length in venues of his choosing, and more and more he chooses. A week ago I took part in a seminar on book writing at a gathering of Republicans in Georgia. The president spoke to the gathering later that night, at an informal dinner for a few hundred, and I stayed on to watch. Everyone knew his remarks would be brief, but they were not. After an hour the governor of Florida, sitting behind him on the small stage, shifted like someone who knew big brother was going on too long, and finally threw a dinner roll at his back to make the point. I made the last part up, but Jeb Bush looked like someone trying to throw his voice: Wrap it up, buddy. Eventually the president did, with what seemed reluctance, after an hour and 20 minutes of a tour of his horizons, a personal and at times startlingly blunt appraisal of other leaders and the realities they face.

When I mentioned to a friend that I'd never heard of Mr. Bush speaking so long, the friend, who sees him often, said the president had recently spoken for more than an hour at a lunch, to the startlement of listeners who wound up furtively checking their watches. Another Washington denizen shared a similar story. This is unlike our president. I don't know what it means. I suspect it means his staff, having seen his effectiveness in small groups with this style, is telling him to do it for large groups, as he did at the news conference. This should be re-examined.

The president at the news conference did not seem unprepared or uninformed. He looked to me like someone who had been coached within an inch of his life and who insisted on yet more coaching late in the day, and who began the news conference with the kind of tiredness that first expresses itself not physically but intellectually. A subject is introduced and the smooth ivory dominoes do not begin to click into place one after another, as they do when one is fresh, or lucky. (I hereby retract that unfortunate image.) Instead one furrows his brow and shakes his head. Over-stimulated and wanting to yawn is a bad place to be.

(snip)
More and more it seems to me Mr. Bush is not only Bill Clinton's successor but his exact opposite: Mr. Clinton perfectly poised and hollow inside, a man whose lack of compass left him unable to lead within the Oval Office but who gave a compelling public presentation of the presidency, and Mr. Bush a strong president with an obvious soul, decisive at the desk, but with no dazzling edifice. It's actually amazing that two such different men came so close together. Lucky for us, considering the history, that Mr. Bush was the one who came now.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mitchum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 04:31 PM
Response to Original message
12. I can't wait until that loon throws herself on Reagan's funeral pyre
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedSock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. bush would kill
bush would kill for some of the drugs noonan is on ...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CatWoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 04:49 PM
Response to Original message
14. I had to respond to that article
Edited on Sun Apr-18-04 04:52 PM by CatWoman
my response:

Peggy Noonan takes her mouth off of Bush's penis long enough to sprout her inane drivel once again.

Hey Peg -- If Bush is/was as good as you say he is, why do you idiots constantly try to prop him up and try to convince the rest of us who knows that he's a worthless idiot daddy's boy who has NO BUSINESS in that office?

You can never, ever defend Bush -- all you can do is attack Bill Clinton.

Fuck you you whoring hag.

you can read all responses to her whore fest here:

http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pnoonan/respon...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cat Atomic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 04:59 PM
Response to Original message
15. I don't get her point.
Edited on Sun Apr-18-04 05:00 PM by Cat Atomic
Is she saying that the mainstream press is liberal, and using their recent press conference performance as proof?

If she is, then how does that square with their treatment of Bush over the last for the last 4 years? From the 2000 election campaign through the WMD fraud, they propped him up tirelessly. They never asked a single relevant question. They were eerily similar to Noonan herself, in fact.

The fact that Bush's recent press conference stands out as unique in this respect only helps to weaken her premise.

I don't think Noonan is very sharp, to be honest. Or maybe she's just so ideological that she's acting more from faith than logic.

Either way, that article is nonsense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SemperEadem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 05:33 PM
Response to Original message
16. It's time to put the fallicy of the 'liberal media' to rest
The entertainment arm of the media (the movie studios)is liberal, but not the press/information dissemination arm of the media.. they are quite conservative, almost uber-conservative and exclusionary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gpandas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 05:37 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. i agree, and anyone who doesn't only needs to check out ..
"take back the media"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
erpowers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 06:00 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. If You Don't Agee Read Slander
I say this because in my opinion Ann Coulter's book proves there is no liberal media. First, throughout the book she lies. Second, most of the examples she used actually came from the opinion page. You may know that Republicans claim not to hate opinions; they just do not like opinions being stated in the news section of the paper.

Considering that Coulter had to lie and get her information from the opinion page there cannot be a liberal media bias. So if you think the media has a liberal bias just read Slander and then research the book. You will realize that the claim of a liberal media in just another Republican lie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-18-04 06:56 PM
Response to Original message
20. A rebuttal, designed to give to conservatives
Noonan:
Imagine it is April, 1943 and FDR is meeting with the press. Mr. President, why did you fail us on Dec. 7? You call it a day of infamy, but didn't it reveal your leadership style to be infamous? Why did you let the U.S. fleet sit sleepy and exposed at Pearl Harbor? Do you think your physical infirmity, sir, has an impact on your ability to think about strategic concerns, and will you instruct your doctors to make public your medical records?

Or, imagine it is May, 1940, in Britain:
Following the debacle of the British expedition to Norway in April of 1940, Chamberlain found himself under siege in the House of Commons. On May 7 Leo Amery delivered a devastating indictment in the Norway Debate of Chamberlain's conduct of the war. In concluding his speech he quoted the words of Oliver Cromwell to the Long Parliament; "You have sat too long here for any good you have been doing. Depart, I say, and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go".

On May 10, the day of the invasion of The Netherlands, Belgium and France, finding it impossible to retain the support of the House of Commons, he resigned as Prime Minister to allow Winston Churchill to form a new national government.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neville_Chamberlain

Note that Chamberlain was not forced to resign because of appeasement, but because he prosecuted the war badly.

If people always blindly supported a war leader who was screwing things up, where would we all be now? Dump the Shrub, before it's too late.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Sep 21st 2014, 01:38 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC