Crazed Wall Street Journal Writer Compares Obama To Stalin

-A +A
0

The Wall Street Journal's Peggy Noonan has been drinking out of the Tea Party's cup; and their brew is toxic, volatile, putrid, obnoxious, vile, ugly, racist and destructive. Sadly, the potent mix has gone into the head of this columnist who writes for a major newspaper owned by the racist Australian owner, Rupert Murdoch

[Publisher's Commentary]

David Brooks and Peggy Noonan are two prominent columnists who have for months been critical of President Barack Obama's push for healthcare reform and his other "big government" projects.

In today's New York Times, Bob Herbert also weighed in critically.

These columnists believe the president's priorities are upside down. Brooks is a Times columnist and is generally conservative; Herbert is liberal; Noonan, also conservative, was until recently persuasive --like Brooks and Herbert-- even when you disagreed with her.

Lately she has been more abusive and angrier in her criticism of the president's policies and the attacks have become more personal. In a recent column, Noonan completely lost her mind; the anger boiled into madness--lunacy. She compared President Obama to a genocidal Russian dictator.

Brooks was ahead of the pack in arguing that the country can't afford the president's proposed healthcare reform due to the gap between the national revenue and spending trajectory. He does not believe the government's argument that the reform will be deficit neutral; paid for with new taxes or reduced spending. One can respect this position even while disagreeing with it.

Herbert's argument is that at a time when Americans are still losing jobs and unemployment now above 10%, and nearly 15% in the African American community --the actual rate in some Black communities may be well over 30%-- the country can't make healthcare reform the number one priority. Moreover, sending more troops to Afghanistan should be out of the question, given the stress on the troops that have already been there, the number of rotations they have served, and the additional cost to the nation.

I disagree with Herbert because I believe that unless the trajectory is altered health care cost could ultimately bring down the economy. The dwindling presidential capital makes it imperative that it be dealt with now; there will never be a better opportunity. Yet Herbert's argument is based on logic and factual information; not hateful hysteria.

Now let's consider Noonan's "critique" under the headline "The Rose Garden Path," in the November 7-8 edition of The Wall Street Journal. In recent weeks, Noonan's columns have been extremely abusive in tone and language; especially the last two weeks. She seems quite appalled that the President is not listening to her demand that he abandon his pea-brained idea to reform national healthcare. Most Americans feel like her, she insists. There is the Obama path (Rose Garden) and the other path being followed by Americans. Her column's illustration shows Obama marching alone on one side; on the other side, separated by a canyon sized rift are the rest of Americans marching in formation.

What's her evidence? Why the results of the recent elections of course.

She claims --completely falsely-- that the president's blind march toward healthcare reform is why the Democrats lost New Jersey and Virginia in the recent governors' races. "Mr. Obama carried Democratic New Jersey by more than 15 points exactly a year ago," Noonan wrote in her column. "The Democratic governor lost by nearly five points this week. That is a 20 point swing."

How could editors that have presumably been to school allow such gibberish to be published, notwithstanding the fact that columnists are granted considerable latitude? Was Obama a candidate in New Jersey? Most sensible analysts actually believe that Obama's stomping for the defeated Jon Corzine helped him close what was once a 20 point gap.

The victor Chris Christie benefitted from anti-incumbency sentiment. Had the Democrats succeeded in getting Corzine to step aside in favor of Cory Booker, the Democrats would have held New Jersey. Moreover, Corzine won the first time around because he spent heavily on his campaign. This time around, he changed his own winning formula and spent less; and lost. Noonan is aware of this --or I hope she's aware of this factual information-- yet she continues the nonsense argument this way:

"Mr. Obama won Virginia a year ago by six points. The Democratic candidate for governor lost by more than 18 points. That is a 24-point plummet."

Aha! Plummet. This is of course wishful thinking. The suggestion here is that were Obama to run today in Virginia, his performance would be 24 points worse than his performance last year. This is completely twisted logic; asinine logic; false logic; almost lunacy.

Obama clearly was not the candidate in Virginia, in case Noonan somehow failed to notice this fact. The Democratic candidate in Virginia was blown out of the water precisely because he failed to embrace Obama and ignored advice from the White House. He was a hopeless candidate beyond redemption.

What of the election in Upstate New York's 23rd District where Democrats wrestled control of a seat Republicans had held for a century and drove back a Republican/Tea Party/Rush Limbaugh/Sarah Palin/Michael Steel candidate?

Bah! That seat? Here's how our disingenuous Wall Street Journal columnist wishes it away since it does not conform to her preposterous logic: "The congressional race in upstate New York was too messy, too local, and too full of jumbly facts to yield a theme that coheres."

In other words the outcome --Democrats' victory-- doesn't fit with her thesis.

Noonan can't suppress her anger throughout her column; it boils and eventually she dispenses with any pretense at analyses and erupts into vehement hostility towards the president as when she claims that he is ignoring the wishes of the American public who don't want healthcare reform --when the evidence based on all polling says the exact opposite-- and that he's instead listening to his adoring acolytes.

"Most modern White House staffs, no matter who the president, wind up at a point where they're like the men around Stalin," Noonan writes --I kid you not-- and, thinking she is actually offering intellectual insight, continues, "Stalin would give a speech, and his commissars would wildly applaud. The applause would go on a long time, but it had to end at some point, so Vladimir sitting up front would, in an attempt to be helpful, stop applauding and sit down. Everyone else would follow. The next week Stalin would give a speech and everything would be the same except Vladimir was no longer in the front row. He was in the Gulag. This is how White House staffs come to think: Never be the first one to stop applauding."

Now why would even the thought of drawing such off the wall and malicious comparison between the democratically elected president of the United States and Stalin even creep into Noonan's mind unless her brain is diseased? Why would editors of The Wall Street Journal tolerate it?

Clearly Noonan has been drinking out of the Tea Party's cup; and their brew is toxic, volatile, putrid, obnoxious, vile, ugly, racist and destructive. Sadly, the potent mix has gone into the head of this columnist who writes for a major newspaper; major in the sense that it has the largest circulation of American daily newspapers. And major also in the sense that since its acquisition by the racist Australian owner, Rupert Murdoch, it's pushed hateful politics to a new zone. The detestable Murdoch just recently agreed with recovering drug addict Glenn Beck's obnoxious assertion that President Obama is a "racist" who "hates White people."

Murdoch's cheaper property, The New York Post, which in recent years deservedly has lost more than 200,000 copies in daily circulation, according to a New York Times article, some months ago published a cartoon of President Obama as a crazed baboon shot to death by two white police officers. This was at the height of the debate over the $787 billion federal stimulus package, and to make sure that the message of the cartoon wasn't in doubt, the word "stimulus" appeared in the illustration.

Noonan, and her boss, the vile Murdoch, both live rich and comfortable lives while sowing the seeds of hatred that could create harmful outcomes. Instead of using her column to courageously explore topics such as how this society tolerates the co-existence of phenomenal wealth, controlled by multi-billionaires and multi-millionaires, on one hand, and mass unemployment and suffering on the other hand, Noonan serves her master's bidding; keep the masses' attention focused on the wrong enemy, our Hitler-like and Stalin-like president.

There is one thing to criticize policy; but to compare President Obama to Joseph Stalin, that genocidal Russian thug who presided over the deaths tens of millions of Russians, including Jews who were dispatched to the Gulag, is beyond comprehension.

Noonan knows what she's doing. She saw how the Tea Party terrorists disrupted healthcare reform and almost derailed it in the summer with the incendiary attacks against the president, accusing him wildly and irresponsibly of being Hitler-like; so now, when debate on healthcare reform is on its 11th hour, she adopts the Tea Party strategy and compares President Obama to dictator Stalin, a first class genocidal killer. And a marxist to boot; a deliberate fear-mongering comparison.

Shame on Noonan. Murdoch is utter filth and shameless.

 

Please post your comments directly online or submit them to Milton@blackstarnews.com

“Speaking Truth To Empower.”

 

Also Check Out...

MASQUERADE PARTIES AND NATIVITY
Politics As Usual
Politics As Usual
NYC Tests Mali Traveler For Ebola
It Never Gets Old
BRITS HONOR FIRST BLACK ARMY