Ever since she has parlayed her service to Reagan as a credential for her usually banal and sometimes offensive sniffing and huffing around the edges of the ruling class.
While she evidently fell loopy in love with Reagan, just as she did with Obama in 2008, there is no evidence that she has ever had any personal conservative leanings.
People change and often deceive themselves that they have. I believe Noonan is one of those.
My brother, who introduced me to Rush Limbaugh, married a Chicago teacher and before I knew it he was trying to convince me to vote Obama. His wife I expected, him? You could of knocked me over with a feather. He pretended to me he was considering Romney but I could tell from his rhetoric he was pulling the lever for the one.
People change and you don’t always know why. In my brother’s case I suspect it was a cold shoulder in the bed.
Noonan's speechwriting for Reagan was an example of "automatic writing." The words were nice, but she had no actual connection to the content thereof.
National Review's savage review of her What I Saw at The Revolution said it best. "How is it possible a person could have written the things she has, and have so little apparent understanding of what they meant?"
In recent years, the disconnection between her mind and the typewriter have become increasingly apparent, and her columns verge on the unhinged.