Jump to content

Talk:Peggy Noonan

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dthomsen8 (talk | contribs) at 03:59, 27 November 2019 (Assessment: Conservatism (Low); Journalism (Low); United States (Low); Women's History (Low) (Rater)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Current Work

Samuel L. Jackson? The article lists an actor for her political influences? This must be vandalism.

Noonan's Attack on Palin

Whatever leftist wrote that Palin is not speaking to the "non-partisan media" had best know that such will always be corrected. The mainstream liberal media is in fact the Obama media as we all know. Zouave44 (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 23:17, 19 October 2008 (UTC).[reply]

It was amusing that a good chunk of Noonan's bio now consists of her attack on Palin, as if Noonan now suddenly has gained credibility with the Left and is now suddenly helping in the quest to elect the liberal messiah Obama. In reality, Noonan has one undergraduate degree (same as Palin), and Noonan's own accomplishments in life don't include a governorship, a son in Iraq, a long marriage, or any number of other things Palin has done. Noonan's attack seems redolent of the usual urban snobbery and elitism aimed at any person who dares to live outside of New York or Washington. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.44.153.18 (talk) 14:19, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Um, does living outside of New York or Washington really call for an unusual amount of daring? Home of the brave, indeed. At any rate, Noonan has long had credibility with this Leftist for being intellectually honest and serious, and for displaying a desire for civil and mutually respecful political discourse. It's almost as if she believes that good people can have political disagreements and still both love America and its values. Crazy! CAVincent (talk) 01:57, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit of a Wikipedia rookie, so maybe I'm not right about this, but I was under the impression that these articles were not meant to cover current events in the way news organizations do. As such, does Ms. Noonan's distaste for Gov. Palin warrant this much coverage? That is to say, in the big picture of her career, does this one article really matter that much? I think we ought to remove the section, or at the very least reduce it to maybe one sentence in reference to her break with President Bush. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.115.190.134 (talk) 03:41, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I wrote the "unsigned" comment above (sorry, I'm not sure how exactly to sign things, and I usually access from different IP addresses). Since no on has commented on my previous comment, and as time seems to have shown that Ms. Noonan's "attack" on Gov. Palin is not particularly relevant to her overall biography, I'm going to remove the entire section. If the powers-that-be at Wikipedia deem it necessary to reinstate it, that's fine by me. But as I've had this posted for some time without complaint, I think it's high time we made Ms. Noonan's biography just that--a biography. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.115.190.134 (talk) 05:48, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I concur with removal. The section might have seemed pertinent to certain people who frequented this article during the 2008 election cycle, but it's hardly a significant or even noteworthy part of Ms. Noonan's career or fame. There's also something to be said for the fact that she's a political commentator; and if you insist on adding a section to every commentator's page each time that person criticizes (or praises, presumably) another public figure, then those articles will balloon beyond usefulness in a matter of months. Bag of Carrots (talk) 08:06, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I pruned significantly, including removing it as its own section. Agreed it is not a major part of Noonan biography, but it could retain some relevance should Palin be serious about a future presidential bid. Unfortunately the article doesn't fully explain that this is significant because Noonan was one of several conservative intellectuals who were critical of Palin and who were subsequently attacked by other conservatives as "elitist" (seemingly including those who want the weasel-worded "many" calling her an "MSNBC conservative" - is there anyone outside Free Republic that use this term to criticize someone for being insufficiently conservative?). If there are reliable sources that could flesh this out it would be helpful. CAVincent (talk) 01:57, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Read My Lips

The article states: she also was the one who pushed for Bush to pledge "Read my lips: no new taxes" in his 1988 nomination acceptance speech, the reversal of which contributed to Bush's defeat in the 1992 election. Unless this can be proven with some statistical certainty, I don't think this statement should be so emphatic. Accordingly, I tempered it somewhat. David Hoag 22:55, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From my understanding she wrote the speech.... but perhaps even in that case 'push' is not the best choice.

"Nowhere as strident"

"She is considered a political conservative, although the tone and tenor of her works is nowhere as strident as many claiming that label presently."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122419210832542317.html is the proper link to "Palin's Failin'" - I don't know how to fix it but I'm sure one of you do... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.249.77.243 (talk) 02:35, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I call foul. Braying asses can be found of all political stripes; conservatives are not unusual in this respect. Indeed, the case can be made that, historically, conservatives tend less in this direction. Note: conservative != Republican.

In any case, this betrays a less than neutral point of view. I suggest noting that she is considered a conservative, and that her works are notable for a gentle tone and tenor, and not express wonderment and awe that the two can go together.

128.165.87.144 16:36, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Infamous views on investigating torture

I think there should be a criticism section on, or at least a mention of, the insane levels of criticism Noonan's been getting for her now infamous remarks on torture. They've been widely condemned, they were mocked at length by Jon Stewart, there's even entire articles on respectable news sites on her latest stance: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/allison-kilkenny/noonology_b_190931.html

It's been nearly uniform criticism from a wide array of people.71.131.11.119 (talk) 22:25, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]


I agree with the above statements. I actually included, WITH sources, her remarks on such matters. I wrote as follows:

After the attacks of September 11th, Noonan made statements that would later warrant sharp criticism. She wrote in an op-ed article entitled "Under the Circumstances, We Must Be Wary of Young Arab Men" published in the Wall Street Journal on October 19th, 2001 quote: "I was relieved at the story of the plane passengers a few weeks ago, who refused to board if some Mideastern-looking guys were allowed to board." She continued: "I think we're going to require a lot of patience from a lot of innocent people.... And you know, I don't think that's asking too much."

In 2009 after the Obama administration's release of the Bush administration's torture memos, on an ABC interview with George Will, Noonan stated: "It's hard for me to look at a great nation issuing these documents and sending them out to the world — and thinking 'oh much good will come of that.' Sometimes in life you wanna just keep walkin', sometimes I think just keep walkin'. Some of life has to be mysterious."

This is factual and devoid of political underpinnings, and yet someone DELETED it. There needs to be a higher level of accountability on Wikipedia so that relevant and useful information such as is written above may not be deleted at whim from any page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.83.206.210 (talk) 04:35, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not a conservative...

I think we should change her political views to Republican instead of conservative. She has shown time and again that she is far from conservative principles on several issues. If anything, she's libertarian.PokeHomsar (talk) 14:50, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Noonan is not a libertarian, either.Jarhed (talk) 06:27, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No Absolute Truth

I love the back and forth of the discussion sections of politically-themed pages here on Wikipedia. No absolute truth exists, yet those of you who call yourselves "leftists/progressives/Democrats" and those of you who call yourselves "conservatives/Republicans" all seem to just nitpick over such trivial things and never go after the real sources of all our societal ills, antagonisms and discrepancies.

Palin versus Noonan is a publicity mill, just like one would have on ET or other such media that thrive on scandal, spectacle and the outrageous. Please, keep it up...maybe, one day, some desirable outcome will surge forth from the mindless opinion you all spew. In the mean time, this just confirms once again that Wikipedia is - at best - a site for topical information, but from which one can never form a serious, respectable or intelligent point-of-view on anything complex or requiring real analysis. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.233.115.23 (talk) 16:34, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

can anyone source this story

when asked about Reagan's debate "bloopers" PN supposedly said, so what, millions saw him say it on TV; 1,000s read the correction the next day in The Times — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.236.121.54 (talk) 22:48, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Asymmetrical libel

The current version states: "there were rumors that she was engaged in an affair with Jeff Greenfield, who worked for ABC News at the time.[9][10]" One of the two links to support this claim is dead, the other merely says there were rumors. This strikes me as undocumented gossip bordering on libel. I also note that a similar remark does not appear on the page discussing Jeff Greenfield, and this asymmetrical treatment suggests a dubious double standard. What purpose is served by having undocumented rumors of private affairs reported on wikipedia? I suggest this line be deleted. I tried that, but it was reverted. If it isn't deleted, it should also be reported in the same manner on the Greenfield page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:EA00:103:4803:0:0:0:14 (talk) 07:35, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not restore that material as it violated WP:BLP and WP:BURDEN Cwobeel (talk) 20:07, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Peggy Noonan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:54, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Peggy Noonan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:37, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Peggy_Noonan&oldid=928150232"