Disseminating her mendacious apologias for American
Capitalism and its myriad manifestations of criminality from her
comfortable perch as a columnist for the Wall Street Journal, Peggy
pollutes the minds of millions of readers each week. Bear in mind that
the Wall Street Journal’s editorial section is the standard-bearer for
our ruthless de facto aristocracy, having endorsed economic imperialism
through the implementation of neoliberal policies, torture of prisoners
in the “War on Terror”, raping the poor with “supply-side economics”,
and an end to the “witch hunt” against “Scooter” Libby.
Her ties to her bourgeois masters run deep. She was married to the
chief economist for the US Chamber of Commerce, Richard Rahn. She
served Ronald Reagan (champion of the wealthy elite, enemy of the poor
and working class, and slaughterer of tens of thousands of Latin
Americans) with a gushing pride which permeates her writing to this
day. Peggy Noonan literally put the words in the mouth of this heinous
criminal as she authored a number of his speeches. Despite her recent
criticism of Bush, prior to 2005 Noonan used the power of her pen to
buttress his regime and took an unpaid leave of absence from the WSJ to
campaign for Bush’s “re-election” in 2004.
In the September 2004 issue of Crisis Magazine, Bently Elliot,
“Noonan’s former boss at the White House and now vice-president of
communications at the New York Stock Exchange,” said this of Noonan:
“She graduated cum laude with a degree in English literature and newly
acquired conservative convictions—convictions that took shape when, as
Elliot puts it, her patriotism was ‘offended by the ugly, anti-American
nature of the self-described ‘peace’ movement in the 1970s.’” (Elliot’s
words in italics)
Evidently Ms. Noonan believes that the imperialistic invasion of a tiny
nation and the resultant deaths of 58,000 US Americans and 3 million
Vietnamese were both beautiful and American. Shame on those hideous,
treasonous peaceniks who opposed our carnage in Vietnam!
In a blatantly revealing display of her pathological worldview, Peggy
trumpeted her pride at having raised her son to consort with mass
murderers. (In yet another excerpt from the Crisis Magazine profile of
Ms. Noonan):
Her son, Will, loves politics and has grown into the sort of young man
Noonan can bring to a dinner party at Vice-President Dick Cheney’s home
“and have a good conversation with the vice president of the United
States about the war,” Noonan says. “How lucky is that kid to be
exposed to that sort of thing—and how lucky am I as a parent to take my
son to such a thing.”
Like the malignant socioeconomic system she so tenaciously defends, Ms.
Noonan’s clever spin is riddled with irreconcilable contradictions and
souless priorities, which require layer upon layer of sophistry,
speciousness, and prevarications to maintain an illusion of rationality
and decency.
Let’s examine some of the “best propaganda bourgeoisie money can buy”
as we peruse some choice analyses Peggy has composed for the Wall
Street Journal in the name of God, country, and free markets:
From her September 22, 2000 “Dumb-Good vs. Evil-Smart” we have this astute observation:
“Mr. Bush, as we all know, has a tendency to mispronounce words, like a
bright and nervous boy trying to show the admissions director that he's
well-read. His syntax is highly individualistic. He's bouncy and
affectionate and funny in a joshy way as opposed to a witty way.
But he is, almost transparently, a good man. He cares about children;
he wants government to be honest; he wants to protect his country from
bad guys; he wants to stand up for those who protect us. He is a good
governor, he has a natural sympathy for those — the hardware store
owner and the woman who starts her own housecleaning company — who are
taxed and regulated to death in America. He thinks this abusive. He
wants to liberate them. If he becomes president — when, I believe, he
becomes president — he will drive conservatives to distraction with his
tendency to think with his heart, and not his brain.”
In her 10/23/2000 WSJ opinion piece, subtitled “George Bush is
Reaganesque. Now America Knows it”, she wrote of George Bush:
“George W. Bush not only won the debate Wednesday night, but in a way
that damaged a central assumption of the Gore campaign. That assumption
is that Mr. Bush doesn't know very much. But Mr. Bush demonstrated that
he knows a lot, and that his common-sense views and observations can be
spoken in a common-sense language accessible to all. He sat back in his
chair, spoke of America's role in the world, and made it clear that
that role should be grounded in moral modesty and strategic realism. He
suggested that the various forces at work in the world should be met
not with American hubris but with moderation, and with attention to the
kind of example we can, as a great power, set. He seemed thoughtful,
knowledgeable, and he buried the memory of the less-seasoned Gov. Bush
who one day in Boston flailed when pressed by an interviewer who
insisted he name the ruler of Pakistan.”
The following week Peggy scribbled a column entitled, “The Loyal
Opposition” and further glorified the future Nuremberg-class war
criminal:
“….He is a good man. He'd be a better man if his life had been harder.
But you can't have everything…..I was thinking the other night: Mr.
Bush seems the least radical politician in America. He lives in the
middle of the land of the possible. He is by nature moderate, by habit
and thinking a moderate man…..”
Evidently prognostication and character assessments are not Ms.
Noonan’s strengths. Or perhaps it would be more accurate to conclude
that George Bush was the best man to serve as the “democratically
elected” front man for the criminal enterprise we call a government,
and that Ms. Noonan is a highly paid shill for our deeply entrenched
oligarchy.
In February 2007, the WSJ published her, “Happy Birthday, Mr. Reagan”,
subtitled “He was a man of determination and good cheer — -one of
America’s greats”:
“Lesley Stahl of "60 Minutes" was CBS's White House correspondent
during the Reagan administration, and I asked her what she remembered
most. She said, "We reporters would stake out 'the driveway' to see who
was going in to see the president. In the first few years there was a
stream of people who came to argue against his budget-cutting
proposals. They would march up that driveway in a huff, smoke coming
out of their nostrils as they rehearsed their angry arguments about why
he was destroying the lives of poor people, or schoolkids.
‘I remember specifically a group of mayors from big cities, livid about
cuts to their welfare programs, school-lunch programs, etc. They were
there to give the president a scolding; they were going to tell him.
And in they'd march. Two hours later, out they came. We were all ready
with the cameras and the mikes to get their version of the telling off.
But they were all little lambs, subdued. . . . He had charmed them. . .
. The mayors told us Reagan agreed with them. That they had persuaded
him. . . .
Thirty minutes later Larry Speakes was in the press room telling us the
numbers would not in fact change. The mayors had 'misunderstood' the
president. Still, I'll bet anything if you talked to those mayors
today, they would tell you Reagan was a great guy.’"
Peggy is right. America needs more “greats” who can subdue people like
"little lambs" when they dare to demand we use public money to provide
assistance to the poor or to hungry children. One with the guile to
defuse the anger of those fighting for social justice with lies and
false promises most certainly qualifies as a “great guy”.
When Gerald Ford died, Ms. Peggy opined in her 12/29/06 WSJ piece, “Ford Without Tears,”
“The first is that when he pardoned Richard Nixon, he threw himself on
a grenade to protect the country from shame, from going too far. It was
an act of deep political courage, and it was shocking. Almost everyone
in the country hated it, including me. But Ford was right. Richard
Nixon had been ruined, forced to resign, run out of town on a rail.
There was nothing to be gained — nothing — by his being broken on the
dock. What was then the new left would never forgive Ford. They should
thank him on their knees that he deprived history of proof that what
they called their idealism was not untinged by sadism.”
Thank you, Peggy, for having the courage to be the voice of reason.
Ford’s pardon of Nixon was a noble act indeed. Imagine if he hadn’t cut
a deal with Alexander Haig to become president in exchange for the
pardon. We might actually have seen a US President tried, convicted and
imprisoned, for crimes both foreign and domestic. (Let’s not forget
Nixon’s secret, illegal bombings in Cambodia that annihilated 600,000
human beings). Compliments of Gerald Ford, the US ruling elite can
continue running rough shod over the Constitution and committing mass
murder with impunity.
Peggy offered us this gem on the notoriously reactionary Rick Santorum
in November, 2006. She called it, “We Need His Kind”:
“Mr. Santorum has been at odds with the modernist impulse, or
liberalism, or whatever it now and fairly should be called. Most of his
own impulses — protect the unprotected, help the helpless, respect the
common man — have not been conservative in the way conservative is
roughly understood, or portrayed, in the national imagination. If this
were the JFK era, his politics would not be called "right wing" but
"progressive." He is, at heart, a Catholic social reformer. Bobby
Kennedy would have loved him.”
She actually characterized Rick Santorum as a progressive. Displaying
such utter disregard for truth in a widely read column took some real
chutzpah! My hat is off to her on that one.
Just a few days ago, our gal Peggy lamented that "We’re Scaring our Children to Death”:
“This week saw a small and telling controversy involving a mural on the
walls of Roosevelt High School in Los Angeles. The mural is big — 400
feet long, 18 feet high at its peak — and eye-catching, as would be
anything that ‘presents a colorful depiction of the rape, slaughter and
enslavement of North America's indigenous people by genocidal
Europeans.’ Those are the words of the Los Angeles Times's Bob Sipchen,
who noted ‘the churning stream of skulls in the wake of Columbus's
Nina, Pinta and Santa Maria.’
What is telling is not that some are asking if the mural portrays the
Conquistadors as bloodthirsty monsters, or if it is sufficiently
respectful to the indigenous Indians of Mexico. What is telling is that
those questions completely miss the point and ignore the obvious. Here
is the obvious:
The mural is on the wall of a public school. It is on a public street. Children walk by.
We are scaring our children to death. Have you noticed this? And we're doing it more and more.”
How could that school have been so reckless? What could possibly have
compelled those hopelessly irresponsible school administrators to
reveal the truth about the genocide waged by Western Europeans against
the indigenous people of Turtle Island? How dare they expose our
children to such heresy! Leave Hollywood and video game manufacturers
to saturate our youth with heaping portions of gratuitous fantasy
violence to distract them from the horrific decimation we US Americans
have been inflicting on the rest of the world for many years.
In June 2002, Ms. Noonan wrote “Capitalism Betrayed” for the Journal:
“I have been reading Michael Novak, the philosopher and social thinker
and, to my mind, great man. Twenty years ago this summer he published
what may be his masterpiece, "The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism." It
was a stunning book marked by great clarity of expression and
originality of thought. He spoke movingly of the meaning and morality
of capitalism. He asked why capitalism is good, and answered that there
is one great reason: Of all the systems devised by man it is the one
most likely to lift the poor out of poverty.
Mr. Novak answered by quoting the philosopher Jacques Maritain, who
once observed that affluence in fact inspires us to look beyond the
material for meaning in our lives. "It's exactly because people have
bread that they realize you can't live by bread alone. ‘In a
paradoxical way, said Mr. Novak, the more materially comfortable a
society becomes, the more spiritual it is likely to become, "its
hungers more markedly transcendent.’"
If capitalism is the system “most likely to lift the poor out of
poverty”, it is strikingly counterintuitive that millions plunged into
inhuman working conditions, wage slavery, child labor, and economic
misery when the United States practiced a much “purer” form of
capitalism around the turn of the Twentieth Century. Interestingly, now
that US capitalism has been “tainted” through evolution into a “mixed
economy”, working conditions and wages have improved significantly. Yet
our unimaginably wealthy nation still has over a million homeless, a
high infant mortality rate, nearly 50 million people without viable
means to attain health care, and about 13% of our population living in
poverty. Apparently these wretched souls must wait for the materially
comfortable members of our society to evolve spiritually and begin
ministering to the poor.
On Thursday, August 25, 2005, Peggy cautioned us to “Think Dark”:
"The Pentagon says this huge and historic base-closing plan will save
$50 billion over the next two decades. They may be right. But it's a
bad plan anyway, a bad idea, and exactly the wrong thing to do in terms
of future and highly possible needs.
The Pentagon has some obvious logic on its side — we have a lot of
bases, and they cost a lot of money — and numbers on paper. They have
put forward their numbers on savings, redundancies, location and
obsolescence.
But they're wrong. What they ought to do, and what the commission
reviewing the Pentagon's plan ought to do, is sit down and think dark.
In the rough future our country faces, bad things will happen. We all
know this. It's hard to imagine some of those things on a beautiful day
with the sun shining and the markets full, but let's imagine anyway.
Among the things we may face over the next decade, as we all know, is
another terrorist attack on American soil. But let's imagine the next
one has many targets, is brilliantly planned and coordinated. Imagine
that there are already 100 serious terror cells in the U.S., two per
state. The members of each cell have been coming over, many but not all
crossing our borders, for five years. They're working jobs, living
lives, quietly planning.
Imagine they're planning that on the same day in the not-so-distant
future, they will set off nuclear suitcase bombs in six American
cities, including Washington, which will take the heaviest hit.
Hundreds of thousands may die; millions will be endangered. Lines will
go down, and to make it worse the terrorists will at the same time
execute the cyberattack of all cyberattacks, causing massive
communications failure and confusion. There will be no electricity;
switching and generating stations will also have been targeted. There
will be no word from Washington; the extent of the national damage will
be as unknown as the extent of local damage is clear. Daily living will
become very difficult, and for months — food shortages, fuel shortages.
Let's make it worse. On top of all that, on the day of the suitcase
nukings, a half dozen designated cells will rise up and assassinate
national, state and local leaders. There will be chaos, disorder,
widespread want; law-enforcement personnel, or what remains of them,
will be overwhelmed and outmatched...
…And all this of course is just one scenario. The madman who runs North
Korea could launch a missile attack on the United States tomorrow, etc.
There are limitless possibilities for terrible trouble."
In this example, Peggy’s Janusian stance and shameless fear-mongering
on behalf of the military-industrial complex are beyond the pale.
Typically, Ms. Noonan extols the virtues of small government through
fiscal conservatism, cuts to federal programs to uplift the poor, and
progressive tax decreases. Yet when her cronies in the defense industry
face the potential of diminished profits, Ms. Noonan rolls out her
propagandistic Howitzer and blasts her readers in the face with a heavy
dose of dread.
Painful as it is, let’s have one final look at an excerpt from Noonan’s
loathsome agitprop. From March 30, 2001, we have “The Haves vs. the
Will-Haves”:
“Class warfare, says Mr. Barone, is at odds with Americans' hopeful
nature. ‘We don't identify ourselves as permanently downtrodden; it is
not the American experience that you're kept down and can't move up.’
In America you can not only move up, but do so quickly. The divorced
single mother of this year gets a job or remarries and suddenly she and
her children are not the bottom line on anybody's statistical readout
anymore.
It is the fantastic fluidity and hopefulness of Americans, their
enduring sense that in only one generation they can go from nothing to
everything and nowhere to anywhere, that contributes to some surprising
statistics on the death tax. Only 2% of Americans pay the levy, but in
the polls 70% are consistently against it. Maybe this is because, as
Steve Forbes used to say, they think it unfair that anyone should have
to deal with the undertaker and the taxman in the same week. But it's
also probably a good bet that this majority opposes the death tax
because they believe that some day they'll have money, or their kids
will, and they won't want to pay it.
We all think we can make it. We all think we can work hard and succeed,
or win the lottery, or our cousin's new restaurant will be a big
success and he'll hire us as greeter or maitre d'. We all dream. The
inheritance tax seems antidreamer because it seems anti-American dream.
A lot of Americans think that when you bash the rich you're bashing
their future ZIP code.”
Whoa there, Peggy! Someone needs to rein you in before you become hopelessly lost in the nether regions.
In actuality, Ms. Noonan is far too educated to actually believe the
tripe she has written here. The meritocracy myth is a cornerstone of
the opulent class’s relentless yet nearly invisible grip on wealth and
power in the United States. Once can cite numerous examples of
individuals who “pulled themselves up by their boot-straps” and “made
something of themselves” in this land of “unlimited opportunity”.
Yet we live in a nation of 300 million people and statistics expose
these “Horatio Alger's” for the anomalies that they are. The top 1% of
the US population boasts ownership of 40% of the nation’s wealth while
the bottom 80% “hoards” about 9% of our riches. A child born into the
bottom 20% of the US income stratification has a 1% chance of joining
those in the top 5%. Those born into the middle class have a “greatly
enhanced” 1.8% chance of enjoying such upward mobility. For every Larry
Ellison or Bill Gates there are tens of millions of “won’t-haves”.
Incidentally, the reason many poor and working class US Americans
oppose the “death tax” is precisely because media whores like Ms.
Noonan have convinced them that the ESTATE TAX is “anti-American dream”
and have bamboozled them into believing that there is more than an
infinitesimal chance they will acquire enough financial wealth to face
such a tax. The purpose of the estate tax is to limit the perpetuation
of the very entrenched aristocracy Ms. Noonan would have us believe
does not exist in the United States.
While Ms. Noonan is merely one soldier in an army of mendacious
propagandists waging war on behalf of the moneyed elite in the United
States, her incestuous ties with government, her veil of
respectability, and her platform from which she penetrates the
consciousness of millions who are intellectually unprepared to fend off
her toxic perversions of the truth combine to make her quite formidable.
So the next time you are reading one of her columns or books, or
listening to her speak, remember that Peggy Noonan is probably weaving
a clever, subtle, and sophistic argument to advance the agenda of
thieves and murderers. But it’s too late to worry about her soul. She
made a whore of that long ago.