Noonan: 'Americans Are Snake-Bit' From War She Cheered For

Peggy Noonan has time and again shamelessly attempted to rewrite her own history and her cheerleading of our invasion of Iraq. This Sunday, she did her best to completely ignore that cheerleading as well, and told the panel on Face the Nation that American's are "snake-bit" when it comes to more military intervention in the Middle East.

Peggy Noonan has time and again shamelessly attempted to rewrite her own history and her cheerleading of our invasion of Iraq. This Sunday, she did her best to completely ignore that cheerleading as well, and told the panel on Face the Nation that American's are "snake-bit" when it comes to more military intervention in the Middle East.

No mention of that past rah, rah, rah for war on her part, of course. Noonan also apparently now believes that members of Congress should care what their constituents think and that should have some bearing on how they vote.

It's too bad she hasn't seen fit to feel that way when it comes to raising taxes on the wealthy, or protecting our social safety nets, or putting Americans back to work, or a whole host of other issues that are very popular with the public, but that Republicans have voted against time and time again.

Nope, the only time Noonan cares about Republicans listening to their constituents for once is when it means they're doing something politically damaging to the president, because that seems to be one of the few things Republicans love more than starting wars these days.

Full transcript below the fold with Noonan deciding to talk to the audience like she was speaking to a bunch of third graders.

SCHIEFFER: So Peggy, what does this agreement that the secretary of state and the Russian foreign minister come up with? How does that impact all of this? Do you think this is a good thing?

PEGGY NOONAN, WALL STREET JOURNAL: Well, I gotta tell you, I think your question about how to help is the essential one. I think the most interesting thing that has happened in the past few weeks is that the American people looked at this potential action, looked to some degree at what was going on in Syria, and thought Assad is bad. And the people who are up against him seem bad. And the president is saying we're going to do a strike. We're not going to knock over the bad guy, and we are not going to hurt or help too much the other bad guys. And it all seemed like a big-- a big confusion, the kind of confusion America gets in now and then and nothing good happens from the moment they jump in.

On the agreement itself, oh, my goodness. I think-- I think everybody's relieved that the U.S. right now is not striking Syria. I think there's just a lot of widespread relief on that. We will see how the agreement that has avoided that, least temporarily, works out. Doesn't look to me like anything but a time saver and ultimately an agreement that probably keeps Mr. Assad in power, lets a lot of time goes by, lets the subject shift, lets it all disappear into past. [...]

NOONAN: But it was Americans on the ground even more than liberal left Democrats, or libertarian Republicans. It was Americans on the ground who started emailing and calling their congressmen with things like -- congressmen were saying I got 632 calls, 612 were against action. That tells you something. That tells you something very big is bubbling up in America. Interestingly, it used to be Washington used to be the moderating force on American impulses. In this case, I think rather historically, America was the moderating force on Washington's impulses looking for action. Very interesting. [...]

GERSON: It was, in fact, deeply unpopular in 1940 to send U.S. troops abroad. And that does mean that sometimes the president and the Congress, to be credible in the world, in important regions like the Middle East, may have to defy their own constituents and say there are important national interests here and that, you know, need to be reinforced.

NOONAN: Yeah, but this was also a story about specifics. The American people were looking at the Mideast and thinking "We're snake- bit." They're looking at Iraq and Afghanistan. They are looking at Syria and thinking, "If we strike, we could become enmeshed in a war. Is this man, the president, a war president?" They're worried about their culture, their infrastructure, their economy. Their children don't have jobs, which means they won't develop the human habits of constructive lives. Americans got -- I think looked at this Syria case very specifically and voted no.

About Heather

Comments

We welcome relevant, respectful comments. Please refer to our Terms of Service for information on our posting policy.