Okay, let me say a couple of things that have more to do with Noonan than they have to do with the whole Cheney accident. First, I get a little worn out reading FR posters calling a veteran Republican speechwriter a whore or an addled brain simply because she isn't genuflecting at the altar of George W. Bush all the time. She was a loyal Reaganite during the Revolution and helped the Bush family in two campaigns, and I am deeply troubled at the willingness of Freepers to disregard her Republican past simply because she raises what she believes to be some mild criticisms of Bush's speaking style.
I am also deeply ashamed of the personal attacks against Noonan from some Freepers on this board. There is simply no call for that. She has supported President Bush in the past and continues to do so. There is nothing wrong with constructive criticism of the Administration. She is not a disingenous self-promoter like Chuck Hegel!
Noonan wants what is best for the country and the Administration. She is loyal to the Bush family, but that loyalty does not extend to slavish, unquestioning devotion to everything that George Bush says or does. Sometimes she is dead wrong, as in her analysis of George Bush's Second Inaugural. And we should criticize her rightly when she is wrong. In the case of Dick Cheney here, she is probably passing on some Bad Mojo from some of Bush's underlings within the Administration who have chafed at his influence. We'll all see how this plays out. The Tony Blankley column of today on the craven nature of the Washington Press Corps is instructive as to how and why this played out the way it did.
However, to attack Noonan personally and compare her to that bourbon-swilling gossip columnist who writes for the New York Times, Maureen Dowd, is to bring this board to a new low.
Be Seeing You,
Chris