The All So Serious Noonan and Rove in the WSJ

I’m going to run with Glenn Greenwald on the ’serious’ punditry. In this case, the very serious and respected op-ed pages of the WSJ.

I posted yesterday on Rove’s use of “narrowly lost” in his WSJ op-ed to describe the Davis defeat by Childers in Mississippi by a 54-46 margin.

Today, Peggy Noonan weighs in with this in the WSJ:
The headline Wednesday on Drudge, from Politico, said, “Republicans Stunned by Loss in Mississippi.” It was about the eight-point drubbing the Democrat gave the Republican in the special House election. My first thought was: You have to be stupid to be stunned by that.

So what can I glean from the WSJ op-ed writers as to how to interpret the loss? Rove considers it “narrowly lost” and Noonan considers it a “eight-point drubbing”.

I think this points to how little seriousness and genius Rove brings to the table. Rather than analysis, he’s just spinning and dissembling compared to a pretty blunt assessment by Noonan.

Why does Rove get the serious nod when the very next day in the very same paper one of his cronies easily refutes and deconstructs his main talking points. And that’s really all Rove’s op-ed puts forth: talking points. Yet the WSJ retains its vaulted and serious status even when serving up talking point drivel.

~ by flippinamsterdam on May 16, 2008.