Peggy Noonan Thinks She Knows What's Good for Democrats
By Heather Sunday Nov 15, 2009 8:00am
Peggy Noonan thinks she knows what's good for Democrats and that this Stupak-Pitts abortion amendment is somehow good for the party—but only in a “funny, little political way”. How quaint of you Peggy to be so completely dismissive of what the real life impact of that amendment passing would actually mean to the lives of women, especially those with low incomes that are the least capable of doing anything to fight back against what’s happening but most likely to be impacted by it.
Noonan had this bit of condescending wisdom to share with all of us on this weekend’s edition of The Chris Matthews Show.
Matthews: Peggy every four years the Democrats meet and write a platform and it says pro-choice, abortion rights, but you know a third of the Democratic people in this country, who vote Democrat are pro-life. Did they ever, ever have a plan here to bring them all together?—because that’s what they have to do.
Noonan: I don’t know if they had a plan but I’ll tell you in a purely political sense, for the Democratic Party to shake off for the first time in like 35 years the general understanding that they are the pro-choice and you cannot be pro-life and be in this party—it hurts the Democratic Party—everybody always said it hurt the Republicans to be pro-life. It hurt the Democrats to be rigidly pro-choice—to not let pro-life people speak at their conventions etc. In a funny, little political way this is a benefit to the Democratic Party that, that pro-life people have a serious place at the table at this moment. It’s good for them.
What’s pathetic is that religion is allowed to be used at all to get working people to vote against their own economic interests and that people don’t have the sense to see past that. And if Peggy Noonan thinks that it is acceptable to call any aspect of this debate “funny” or “little”, she needs to go read Digby’s post from last week-Goldilocks Was Betrayed:
In case you are wondering about the real life effects of playing cheap politics with pregnancy, read this. And this. Contra McGaskill and Tweety, who are misinformed about just about everything, this is actually a big deal. This amendment doesn't just punish Lord Saletan's little sluts. All women will be losing coverage for necessary abortions when a wanted pregnancy goes wrong. It only has an exemption for the life of the mother, but not for her her health, nor for severe and fatal fetal abnormalities. Click those links for what that means in real life.
Login or Register to post comments.
...& that must be why she's such a cheerleader for moderates in the Republican party.
you know, in a funny, little political way.
She has no relevance in my world. She might be stunned to hear that, but she never will anyway. So why should I care what this "person" has to say? She's part of the elite criminal class.
Turn off your TV's. If we are to deal with these people, armed resistance is the only solution. Otherwise they have us over the barrel. They are the law makers. They have the media. We have the Bill of Rights? LOL.
Opponents of abortion speak at Democratic conventions all the time.
The Republican lie that Democrats don't allow abortion opponents speak goes back to 1992, when Governor Casey of Pennsylvania didn't get to make a speech. In fact, as has been documented too many times to count, he didn't get to make a speech because he wouldn't endorse Bill Clinton. By then, Clinton was the party's nominee for president. The denial of speaking time had everything to do with party loyalty and nothing to do with his views on that one issue.
If anyone's too rigid, it's the Republicans, who have marginalized themselves by purity tests on issues to the point where they lost their congressional majorities and the white house, have no members of the House left in New England, and only two Senators in the entire Northeastern United States.
Noonan, to no one's surprise, is wrong as usual.
The Democrats are so busy trying to appear conciliatory that they have positioned themselves into irrelevance. The media perpetuate (and many believe) that there is some type of political opposition between them and the Republicans. This is a fallacy. At Noonan's level they are all on the same team. The team that has power and intends to keep it to themselves.
NOW, NARAL, and the pro choice movement were totally asleep at the switch on this. But what this episode showed in bright colors is that the Dems are as much their enemies as the republicans, and in no way can be trusted to defend our liberties in the congress.
Yeah, I DEMAND my liberties to be a libertine!
I got your liberties here: Paper or plastic?
I don't disagree with a woman's right to choose.
I will not pay for an abortion!
That is my RIGHT TO CHOOSE!
I don't like Republicans or Blue Dog DINOs in congress and wouldn't vote for one.
That too is my Right to Choose!
but I can't choose, same with having a road that leads to FOX 'News' studios.
You don't get to 'Choose' what your taxes pay for. Abortion is a legal medical procedure. Some people disagree with blood and organ transfusions, find them utter abominations, any kind of medical treatment at all, yet they HAVE to pay for them as taxpayers, participants in this country. They can choose not to have these procedures for themselves, but they still have to pay into a system that pays for others to have it done
Anyone know if circumcision has been forbidden to be covered in the PO and on the Exchange? I've heard from plenty of people who think it's immoral and/or just a cosmetic procedure.
Do I get to choose if my tax dollars are paying for executing prisoners? I'm virulently anti-death penalty.
No.
Abortion is a legal medical procedure. Just like the death penalty is a legal criminal justice procedure.
You don't get to choose how your tax money is spent.
I've always said the same about war.
At least with the Death Penalty they supposedly did some crime to warrant it.
With war it's one enlistee/draftee killing another enlistee/draftee for no reason other than being born on the wrong side of an imaginary line.
But then the chicken hawks have their excuse there too, see I didn't kill him, the other guy did.
Are you also against your tax dollars going to provide health care to others, or do you just selectively discriminate against pregnant women who want to terminate the pregnancy to prevent, stop, or mitigate pain, illness, suffering, and risk to life and limb?
I'll help pay for her healthcare and other expenses of her children's adoptions, educations, foster homes, medical and more. I'll even pay for her legal fees and execution if she murders her living kids; should she have any? I just do not want to pay for her to kill her unborn. One has to equate the difference between "Abortion on Demand", which I strongly oppose, with Therapeutic Abortion in cases of life and death; no matter what happens one or both are going to die and it is a weighty decision that can only be decided between a woman, her family, Doctor and/or Minister or priest; if she has one and wants to include him/her in the decision?
"can only be decided between a woman, her family, Doctor and/or Minister or priest;"
How about this... can only be decided by THE Woman? Does that fit in with your spiritual leaning opinion?
Semantics maybe... though I doubt it...
If we limit medical care to only those therapies where someone's life is in danger, then we've pretty much done away with the idea of health care and have reduced our system to health neglect until crisis stage.
Preventive medicine and screening, not anywhere near a life being in immediate danger. Antihypertensive medication, not necessary. Vaccinations, not necessary. Antibiotics, not until sepsis and high fever result. Statins, thrombolytics, or angioplasty, not needed, CABG can deal with "real" life threatening thrombosis. Chemotherapy? Not necessary and any real "life in danger" moment can be dealt with through surgery or depending on what body system is failing, dialysis or intubation or colostomy bag or what-have-you.
See how this plays out when people think it's ok to adopt a wait-and-see attitude with other people's health and lives? And not just adopt a wait-and-see attitude, but forbid safe and effective medical intervention in the meantime.
It seems rather discriminatory that pregnant women are singled out and reduced to only worthy of medical intervention when their life is at immediate risk.
When I read supposed progressives pointing to the "life in danger" exception as suggesting that's adequate or makes it "ok," they lose any credibility with me on any of their other claims to needing health care reform. If people are so content to attach this "when one's life is at stake" condition to pregnant women, then they should be perfectly happy with that limited conditional protection for themselves. I don't agree with them, but I will use their argument against them. So, we have emergency rooms that are required to provide such care. I thought this was one reason we needed health care reform, to avoid crises where people's lives are endangered, but apparently waiting until such a time as life is in danger is sufficient for pregnant women, so it should be sufficient for all of us in an egalitarian society.
It seems perhaps we need to first define what is meant by health care before we go forward with health care reform, because a lot of people are all to happy to start weaseling around the concept when it comes to women who are pregnant and want to terminate the pregnancy to prevent, stop, or mitigate pain, illness, suffering, and risk to life and limb.
Brainless, ignorant Reslug Women, like her should have been sterilized years ago, so they couldn't possibly muddy or dumb down the gene pool.
Taxpayer paid! Willingly.
Seriously, the Republican Party is rapidly becoming the American Taliban. Suck on it women.
The Blue Dogs are the political descendants of a now defunct Southern Democratic group known as the Boll Weevils, who played a critical role in the early 1980s by supporting President Ronald Reagan's tax cut plan. The Boll weevils, in turn, may be considered the descendants of the "states' rights" Democrats of the 1940s through '60s
The Blue Dogs are viewed by some as a continuation of the socially conservative wing of the Democratic party prominent during the presidency of Harry S Truman. President Truman signed the first National Prayer Day proclamation... President Reagan made it a permanent occasion! Under Bush, the day was a political event.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Matthews: “Because--because on this issue’, I—-we know what we’re talking about now. He didn’t even mention the word ‘abortion’ in that entire conversation…. I’m for abortion rights. I am, ultimately, ‘cause I think ultimately in this country, ultimately, after all the considerations of parental approval and reflective consent and how many days and all the rules and all the justifications, ultimately
—-ultimately, after all the advice we give to young women in counseling about the costs of abortion, what it does to you potentially, psychologically and morally—ultimately, "I think it has to be a decision made by the person…That’s what I believe – fundamentally, I’m a libertarian, I guess.” (MSNBC’s “Hardball With Chris Matthews,” June 17, 1999)
Oh great...now we'll just have funny little starving orphans
And abusive homes
And what looks like a population explosion in our prisons in about 15 years or so.
Lots of cheap labor and military recruits. They are thinking years ahead.
Cheap labor will come from Mexico, until they're economically stronger than we are.
Pro life, pro death penalty. It's all a matter of timing.
Because of complications with a pregnancy the mother dies and the newly born goes on to live. In effect the child's birth cause the death of the woman. Who is at fault? The mother for getting pregnant? The newborn for inadvertently causing the death of the mother? The medical staff for not being able to correct a complicated pregnancy or delivery? Put the newborn on trial for causing the death with death penalty repercussions.
Of course this is all nonsense. The death of the mother is chalked up to the hand of God. Or whatever. No one suffers a penalty, except, of course, the dead woman, and the father, and the newborn motherless child. There is no easy answer to everything. But you limit the choices - and answer becomes easier but its not always the choice the people of consequence would have chosen.
That was fun, let's play this game some more.
get used to it.
If I had to listen to Peggy Noonan week after week I'd jump out a window. Fortunately, I'm in a single story house. But, still....
be required to remain numb enough to achieve the company objectives.
One of my last jobs was given to me with the admonition that I had to like drinking beer. Fortunately I did and we all got along splendidly.
The company that buys kegs and hires strippers to celebrate an employee's birthday during business hours is the company that stays together.
For at least a year or so.
Thanks but no thanks you booooorish woman.
Is a pretentious, self centered, egocentric,narcissist.
And a boor as well.
Her voice is like fingernails on a chalk board.
Don'tcha have to be somewhat erudite to be pretentious?
She has the depth of an aging Paris Hilton.
Let's call the Republicans what they are, anti-choice. I hate the term pro-life, everyone is pro-life, it just depends on whose life we are talking about. The terms in this debate are pro-choice and anti-choice, why something that simple can not be figured out is beyond me.
I don't agree with their position but I understand their perspective to an extent. We can't say as pro-choicers that life specifically begins just after the third trimester. There's every reason to believe that thinking and feelings are going on pretty early in development. So I can imagine how it is not that simple for someone who holds those beliefs.
Uh oh...
... one month after birth.
In fact, the killing of a fetus is not murder (which demanded death as a penalty) and merely a property crime.
Let's try marriage in the Bible next ;)
I've always tended to use Genesis 2:7:
"And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul."
In other words, Adam was not alive until he was breathing.
Too many people have some vague notion of baby souls floating around in heaven waiting to be born despite The Anathemas Against Origen, Vth Ecumenical Council of Constantinople, CE 553, and his teaching of pre-existence, either in the reincarnationist sense and/or the pre-existence of souls in heaven. This is despite the scriptural John 9:3: "Jesus answered, 'Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.'" John 9-20: "And they asked them, saying, Is this your son, who ye say was born blind? how then doth he now see?
"His parents answered them and said, 'We know that this is our son, and that he was born blind'":
How can a man sin before being born, masturbating in the womb?
But surely even infant souls have better things to do than hang around in the womb for nine months. They ought to at least give him a handball to bounce against the walls.
Paracelsus (Theophrastus Philippus Aureolus Bombastus von Hohenheim), the great Renaissance doctor believed humans had a soul and a spirit. He tended to slip a great deal between terms, but the soul he seemed to connect to the World Soul, comparable to Sophia and Adam Kadmon, and to the animal realm, the spirit to God, and was the seat of our intelligence, which doesn't appear until some unspecified time after birth.
"How can a man sin before being born, masturbating in the womb?"
And on the third trimester, God gaveth the ability to rub one off.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vX6FXRgcKQc&fe...
Thanks fiver, ys. I have a degree in English and still don't know shit about the bible. Even though my English professors admonished me to read it and at least have a cursory understanding of what it was trying to say.
Moral: If you're an atheist, don't major in English.
Mine's in Political Science
Which can be summarized as:
"If you can't dazzle them with your brilliance
Baffle them with your bull-shit."
And I graduated with honors.
... don't read it.
More than a decade of Catholic education for me; still recovering.
Douay Rheims
http://www.morethings.com/pictures/music/lean...
Or Vulgate?
I like the sound of the latter.
I know only a little Latin, cordially dislike country music, and can effectively use "Y" as a vowel when necessary.
Plus, I was taught in the aftermath of Vatican II. It was a kinder, gentler, more friendly Catholicism. Heck, we could even use a guitar instead of an organ for mass.
Oops, link away....
Yeah I heard those religious types prefer we not play with our organs.
is George Will with a vagina. Or is it the other way around?
Not giving the anti-women's health care, anti-women's liberty cult a seat at the table?
"Representatives for the bishops were in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's Capitol suite negotiating with top officials last Friday evening as they reached final terms of the agreement. Earlier in the day, Pelosi, a Catholic and an abortion rights supporter, had been on the phone to Rome with Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick, Washington's former archbishop, on the subject."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33852621/ns/polit...
"House Democratic leaders will allow an up-or-down vote on an amendment blocking any money in its healthcare overhaul from funding abortions, risking the votes of members who support abortion rights."
http://thehill.com/homenews/house/66789-stupa...
The lying liars never stop.
Is that why I smell fish?
....still fucking Reagan's corpse?
is a sanctimonious old bitch and should not continue to have access to the public airwaves (or cable).
The mistake we made decades ago, those of us who support individual human rights, was to allow these right-wing, religious nut cases to continue to use "Pro-Life" as their rallying cry - while we were apparently assigned "Pro-Choice" by the PR geniuses who frame these conflicts.
The only people I know of who are not FOR life and healthy living for everyone are the aforementioned right-wing, religious types who support executions and the death our own soldiers by continually sending them off to kill innocents in other lands.
As it appears we're going to have the fight continually, we need to re-frame the discussion - we need to come up with new words, labels if you will, to describe the freedom every human being deserves when making decisions about their health, their bodies.
I wouldn't care if this old hag was 100% correct all the time(BTW, Noonan's never right) I never want to hear from her.
Just the sound of Peggy's voice could immediately halt an orgasm.
"Oh...ronnie...oh...ronnie...."
"Mommy?"
eeww...
NO question the Dems lose a lot of voters because of the abortion and gay rights issues , that's why they like to straddle the fence , not their favorite topics . We need a third party , Kucinich , Sanders , LIBERALS not Repug lite ! I may be mistaken but in the 8 years Bush was in power , 6 years of the 8 they had a dictatorship going on , absolute power , what did the Repugs do or attempt to do in regards to abortion , gay marriage , gay rights ? Zip , correct ? The Repugs don't care about but just use these two issues as the carrot on the end of the stick and it works , the jackasses keep chasing the carrot and keep voting Repug as they destroy the country and make our lives tougher . .
When peggy visits her gynecologist he puts a bag on over his own head.
OMG, I almost spewed latte on my keyboard and screen! Let's see, what's a good set of initials for this? ROTFLMFAO? !
What kind of horrible, fucked up disaster is the US when a complete idiot, nitwit like Peggy Noonan is given such a platform to speak and wield any kind of influence? Imagine what this asshole gets paid to do this. She, like Matthews and every other talking head shithole, contribute nothing useful to society. They are leaches. Why haven't we chopped them up with samurai swords and fed them to the giraffes?
The answer: We haven't because we are a pathetic, shallow people obsessed with nothing.
The Eliminationists; When describing pundits... "In between, it was commonplace to hear the late Barbara Olson repeat a Patriot legend, or for Peggy Noonan to indulge in plainly irresponsible speculations about Muslims, often straight out of the nativist handbook."
I curiously looked for [Peggy Noonan muslims] on YouTube and came across this. With the opinion that religion is a bane on humanity more-so then any other ingredient that fuels our beliefs on life, as we attempt to understand same.
Any-who... I was not aware that Hillary Clinton made such divisive remarks and not surprised that "Pat" Buchanan would welcome said remarks accordingly. With that in mind, it reminded me of Hillary Clinton's alleged association with "THE FAMILY". The putrid capabilities made possible by mystic theories seem far less destructive in relation to their fervor accordingly. Like a few of President Obama's picks', I am really bewildered, why B.O. would give Hillary, the position "he" presumably did. Go figure?
Noonan - please take your worthless ass out of here - just go away. This woman says the stupidest things.
There's no tread left on the Noonan tire.
*
I am no fan of Peggy "Ray-Gun" Noonan, but I am sick of the abortion debate always being framed in simplified "us against them" terms. My own politics swing pretty well "left", but I am non-religious and pro-life...consistent life, even. Unless we're down to having the make the choice between one living entity and another I find the whole notion of killing abhorrent. We must eat and we must at times defend ourselves against madmen and lunatics in order to survive, but abortion is touted on the left as birth control of last resort and it's disgusting.
If the mother's life is in danger or if there are other direct ethical implications involved then absolutely she has to make that difficult choice...but our society should nevertheless be encouraging a stance that promotes life. This has nothing to do with religion. It has everything to do with sanity. Pass the condoms.
You're presuming there's something to kill.
As noted above there's nothing scientific nor even religious to assume life begins at conception.
peg study this closely, it might help you make more sense:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fZwMcoDVJM
A totalitarian left governance is no better than a totalitarian right governance. Usurping people's liberty under the banner of the subjective and euphemistic "promoting life" leaves us with slave labor camps, compulsory organ donation, human medical experimentation without consent, outlawing contraception and condoms, and a whole host of other unethical and immoral state interference in citizens' private and personal lives.
Additionally, once one has determined that a woman is unworthy of defending from physical harm, there are no grounds upon which to suggest anything within her deserves such protections.
Pregnancy is an inherently dangerous physiological process with a high rate of morbidity and mortality, particularly without medical intervention. Prohibiting the termination of pregnancy makes as much sense as telling someone they aren't allowed to take a shit without government approval.
Have you ever become pregnant?
Big fuckin' deal.
Now she is SNARKY, in-informed, un-interesting, and she plays "cute" to a fault.
Move on... move on... nothing to see here.
reminds me of an English saying that is dear to my heart, "Mutton dressed as lamb." It's so popular over there, I was watching a show on my telly, and a 50+ year old character dressed in a short short mini, busting out of her shirt, entered, then exited. One of the other characters looked at another and said "Two words spring to mind: 'Mutton' and 'Lamb'" Well delivered. That's what this old biddy reminds me of...
So shut your condescending mouth up. If we need your opinion, we'll call you.
You just might be on to something cupcake.
Hey,and in a funny little way?
Going along with the Stupak-Pitts amendment might even keep a few doctors from have their brains blown out by one of those pesky "pro-life" types.
"Going along with the Stupak-Pitts amendment might even keep a few doctors from have their brains blown out by one of those pesky "pro-life" types."
That sounds like terrorism to me... though your point is well taken. ;)
Noonan is about as relevant and insightful as Jeane Kirkpatrick. Is she so often invited to these talkshows merely for her milf factor? I mean, as long as she doesn't speak.
...feels good after a lobotomy.
That's what I heard.
What a person thinks of the fetus is a religious decision. It's not specifically dealt with in the scripture. Democrats who are pro-life but who still vote Democratic -- most, if not all of them, realize that there are more issues than just abortion and gay rights. Republicans define themselves by those issues and are anti-abortion and anti-gay rights. The whole party has defined itself in religious terms. Fewer and fewer people go to church, and more and more people have trouble believing that there is a God. Fewer and fewer people are buying into the arguments that Republicans make.
Login or Register to post comments.