An open letter to Peggy Noonan

Dear Ms. Noonan,

As someone who has read your WSJ column intermittently for quite some time, I feel compelled to call you out on your treatment of Sarah Palin. Your unseemly displays of scorn, derision, and contempt are most unbecoming, and border on journalistic jihad.

As I recall, in a different time, you were among the hoard of conservatives who circled the wagons in a near-unanimous defense of Dan Quayle, perhaps the single least qualified candidate for the job ever. This man, perhaps the single dumbest individual to ever hold public office (no small feat that!), got the kind of defense from his allies that Sarah Palin can only dream of.

And let's not forget George W. Bush, a man you staunchly defended right up until the last year. You accuse Sarah Palin of being without ideas? This is a man whose next original idea will be his first!

Back to the topic of Sarah Palin being without ideas. Hello? Reality calling. The VP candidate is SUPPOSED to appear to be without ideas! The whole point of the VP candidate, at least in terms of the campaign, is to be the parrot repeating the "big ideas" of the presidential candidate. Last I looked, that was John McCain. I would venture that both you and I would look stupid trying to pass off the steaming pile of "ideas" being offered by John McCain as having any sort of basis in Constitutional government, let alone any sort of relationship with logic or reason. I'm sure that if Sarah Palin were at the TOP of the ticket we'd get a whole different look at her core beliefs and the ideals that form her vision of government.

John McCain's campaign (or, as I like to call it "Bob Dole: the sequel") was in a death spiral until Sarah Palin was added to the ticket. She's the only positive he has going.

And yet, you and other defectors from the so-called conservative commentariat have gone out of your way to heap scorn and derision on this lovely woman. You've questioned her intelligence (and I thought that only the Left resorted to that tired smear tactic). You've accused her of dodging the media, but how much of that is dictated by the campaign? You don't question McCain's misuse of her proven ability to draw crowds to hear the message, you just question HER.

And as far as I can see, that's the whole of it. It's her. You dislike her. Most of the female baby boom wing of the conservative commentariat dislikes her. Coincidence? I think not.

Sarah Palin (and I) hail from the tail end of the baby boom. We aren't mystified by the Beatles or JFK. The first time we had the opportunity to vote, our man was Reagan. We don't belong to your little 60's generation.

I expected the paleo-feminist womyn to reject Sarah Palin. Those calcified old crones, who probably still believe that heterosexual sexual relations is always rape, will only vote for a candidate who (a) supports the holy sacrament of abortion, and (b) got to where she is through "help" from the government or the feminist movement.

But seeing your reaction to Sarah Palin, I'm thinking that the 60's generation women, liberal AND conservative, hate the thought of being surpassed by someone who is not one of them! The night Sarah Palin was nominated, you were seriously bent. Why, it should have been Kay Bailey Hutchinson or Elizabeth Dole or some such! Notice anything about those names? They are women in their mid 60's and up. They're boomers. They're YOUR people. It would seem that your attitude is no one should EVER get picked until YOUR people are picked.

Perception isn't always the truth, but my perception is that you're a disingenuous, bitter woman who just can't STAND the idea of giving way to a younger generation of female leaders. You're disingenuous for representing John McCain as any sort of conservative. And you're a bitter woman for trying to slap down the one person on either of the bipartite tickets whom any American outside of your social circle sees as having any redeeming qualities, simply because the honor didn't go to one of "your kind".

Shame on you!