What’s worse than a politician who talks one way in Scranton and another way in San Francisco?

A pundit who writes one way in a column and talks another way on a microphone she thinks is dead.

SCOTT adds: For what it’s worth, Noonan has added an explanation of her open microphone comments to her Wall Street Journal column.

PAUL adds: The explanation is unpersuasive. Noonan says she hadn’t written the thoughts she expressed when she believed the microphone was off because these thoughts hadn’t yet occurred to her when she wrote her column. According to Noonan, they arose subsequently during a conversation with Kay Bailey Hutchison. But Noonan does not explain how being with Hutchison (and reflecting on Dan Quayle) could possibly have taken her from the view that (a) the selection of Sarah Palin represents such a “danger to the left” that it needs to “kill” her, to the contrary view that (b) this is another case in which the Republicans are going to “blow it” by fixating on “narrative.”

The problem isn’t that Noonan hadn’t written the thoughts she expressed when she believed no one except “insiders” could hear them. The problem is that what she had written cannot be reconciled with those thoughts.

To comment on this post, go here.

Responses

Books to read from Power Line