Peggy Noonan’s meltdown continues. And this time it is kind of ironic. My ex-wife had one television watching rule. If we were watching Hardball with Chris Matthews and Peggy Noonan made an appearance, the channel must be changed. It was a rule she strictly enforced. The reason she was so adamant is because Matthews and Noonan had a tendency to act like little lovebirds and swoon all over each other as they heaped praise on Bush, Cheney and the manly Republicans. It made her skin crawl. But the love seems to have lost some of its luster. Consider Noonan’s snit-fit about Matthews hosting the Republican debates.
The Washington GOP apparatus is focused on the president, on asserting the brilliance of his legacy and, at this point, I’m sure, as in the Clinton days, on making sure he has a nice and well-funded presidential library. But who is looking out for his presumptive heirs? Why, for example, are they forced into debates that seem almost designed to diminish them? Having as moderator a preening cable jockey does nothing to enhance their stature. It is a recipe for sadness. Why don’t the Republican campaigns–the Republican establishment–try to get moderators of calm stature? Ted Koppel, for one, is an old-school broadcaster; he makes you look classy because he’s classy; he lends it to you as he asks you questions. What does Chris Matthews lend? Why not Keith Olbermann? Or Al Franken?
I’d like to know the backstory on that whole thing. Did Matthews promise that he’d leave his wife and then renege? Something happened. But something has been happening to Noonan for a long time now. I think we’re witnessing a total psychological collapse. She is having some serious problems coming to terms with the last chapter of the Reagan Revolution. It just didn’t turn out to be happy story. Look at how bitter she is:
The GOP challengers, no matter how they feel about Mr. Bush, can’t knock him, because that would infuriate the president’s 20% in Iowa, New Hampshire and elsewhere…
…I suspect the Republican establishment knows all this, but I am not sure it concerns them overmuch. Why should it? If you are an absolute Bush partisan, you probably don’t really want a Republican to follow him and potentially, in decisions if not in words, rebuke him. That would be the worst thing, not being followed by Hillary or Obama. If the latter happens, the outgoing administration can–and will–blame the loss on lax candidates, on a party that wasn’t sufficiently inclusive, on congressional scandals, on immigration. “If only they’d followed our lead!”
They’ll be fine. The party may be defeated, the conservative coalition that raised them high sundered, but they’ll be all right. Which is important, because more than the president’s legacy is involved. Their very personal legacy is involved. No one wants to have worked for the biggest embarrassment in modern American political history.
Well…at least it’s safe to watch Hardball again. Sort of.
