Count me now among those in the president's own natural constituency who, as Noonan reports, are "no longer confident about what he does...no longer fully comfortable in their judgment of his policies and actions, or the root thoughts behind them."
If anyone can tell me the president's political philosophy, I'd be fascinated to learn what it is. Is it intellectually coherent? Or is it, as all the evidence of actions seems to indicate, just a situational hodgepodge sprouting from his own personality, subject to strong influence from the better read intellects surrounding him?
George W. Bush once joked at a dinner for William F. Buckley that at Yale, Buckley wrote a book, and he, the president, read one. He never jokes about such matters anymore. He knows, I think, that advertising yourself as a lightweight thinker is not only unseemly for the most powerful man in the world, but also harmful to the nation's prestige for so high an office to be filled by a man who doesn't have an honest intellectual grounding in the political philosophy he purports to espouse.
Self deprecating humor has its use; pity that you can't see that.
Peggy has been in a snit since President Bush was elected the first time. After his reelection, she's gotten worse. The woman is a sickeningly sweet, far too old to be coy, VERY COY, back stabber and hack.
He most likely relies on his sense of personal judgment when it comes to others and is a good judge of character, sincerity and real ability.
What Noonan is complaining about is his almost adolescent informality and playfulness in a position noted for formality and ritual. What most people who think for a living miss is that he is at all times more himself than they are, Ronald Reagan was and so on. He pays a price for this but he is unwilling to split himself up into different persona depending on the circumstances.
If you ever meet him you will find him 100% focused on you, contactful with you and you sense his great presence. This even in a reception line. I can easily see him as walking into a room (before becoming President) and "pocketing" the majority of people there as well as "pocketing" more political donations than they intended.
Different people prefer different leadership. The cognoscenti generally want predictable ideology and thinking to base policies on. People such as the President are more likely to be flexible and ready for compromise and change depending on the circumstances they find. It is not they have no consistent policies but they do have a consistent goal to succeed and basically prevail in spite of the usual ups and downs of domestic and international events.
The President might not like it, but he is closest to Harry Truman in temperament and ability to make contact with people. He is not an exact clone but they both were people Presidents with great flexibility in achieving goals. Both were and are severely criticized for lacking in ideological purity.
Finally, the President has conservative views but he is a Republican and eager to expand his influence and success. Thymos lives in his soul and the elites hate him for it. Plato would approve.
As an addendum people who see him as lacking in intellectual vigor and consistency are missing something else. The President is a fox in his approach to governance. He is not a hedge hog making decisions on a priori beliefs to the exclusion of reality. Future generations will see this more clearly than our own.