Best of the Web Today - March 15, 2005
By JAMES TARANTO
The National Insecurity Democrats
The New Yorker's Jeffrey Goldberg has a piece about "national security Democrats." He focuses on Sen. Joe Biden but also mentions Biden's colleagues Hillary Clinton, Joe Lieberman and Evan Bayh, Gov. Bill Richardson and ex-U.N. ambassador Richard Holbrooke. Goldberg succeeds in making these people look mostly sensible and responsible.
But if his aim is to persuade readers that the Democratic Party is capable of dealing with national security, he probably ends up doing more harm than good. That's because his piece includes lots of anecdotes about and quotes from what one might call the national insecurity Democrats--including the party's presidential nominee last year:
Kerry considers himself to be a national-security-oriented Democrat. . . . But he seemed displeased when I asked whether the Democrats had a credibility problem on defense issues, and he finally said, "Look, the answer is, we have to do an unbranding." . . . "We have to brand more effectively. It's marketing." . . .
Barbara Boxer . . . told me that she took "great offense" at Bush's inaugural speech. "He said that our freedom and our democracy depend on the freedom of other countries," she said. "I think that America is so strong, it has such a strong Constitution and a great history of freedom, that while we must, of course, be deeply concerned about what happens in other countries, what happens to this country is up to us. His words ring hollow because of the mess in Iraq, and all over the world. Every day, another terrible thing is happening." . . .
"How should democracy be exported?" [Ted Kennedy] asked. "The First Amendment and food. We know how to grow it, and how to deliver it. The First Amendment is a pretty good starting point." . . .
[Biden] told me about a recent visit to Los Angeles, where he met with a group of wealthy liberals and laid out the following scenario: "Assume you're the President, and I'm your Secretary of Defense or State or C.I.A. director, and I come to you and tell you we know where bin Laden is, he and four hundred of his people, and they're in this portion of Pakistan the Pakistanis won't go into, and they told us not to go in. This is going to cost us five hundred to five thousand lives, of our soldiers, but we can get him. What do you do?" Biden said they had no answer. "The truth is, they put their heads down," he said.
The Democrats' problem here runs very deep. Even if the party has many members who are capable of dealing seriously with national security, something like half the party--including most of its activist base--has a worldview that is as unserious and incoherent as Walter Cronkite's.
Dick Holbrooke, one of the national-security Democrats quoted in Goldberg's piece puts his finger on the party's problem, albeit perhaps unwittingly:
He believes that if the Iraq war actually does bring about the hoped-for results it might help the Democrats. "We'd be better off as a country and better off as a party if Iraq is a success and we get it behind us. The Democrats can then talk about their traditional strengths, domestically and internationally."
This is more or less what happened in the 1990s: America having won the Cold War, national security seemed less important, and a Democrat was able to win the presidency by campaigning almost exclusively on domestic issues. But the "peace" of the 1990s was illusory, and the results might have been disastrous if the party of Barbara Boxer, Ted Kennedy and John Kerry were in the White House in 2001. It's not good for the country if one of the two major political parties is incapable of dealing with foreign threats.
Kerry Takes On the 'Submedia'
Back in 2003, we observed that liberals were "employing many of the same complaints and tropes that Republicans and conservatives used during their decades in the political wilderness," among them "media bias." The Weekly Standard's P.J. O'Rourke attended a recent appearance by John Kerry* at the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library at which Kerry whined about the media--or, to be precise, the "submedia":
"We learned," Kerry continued, "that the mainstream media, over the course of the last year, did a pretty good job of discerning. But there's a subculture and a sub-media that talks and keeps things going for entertainment purposes rather than for the flow of information. And that has a profound impact and undermines what we call the mainstream media of the country. And so the decision-making ability of the American electorate has been profoundly impacted as a consequence of that. The question is, what are we going to do about it?"
Kerry is hilariously bad as a demagogue. A low subculture and its inferior sub-media are thwarting the will of the sacred mainstream?
Not only that, but, as the New Sisyphus blog points out, the mainstream media's record of "discerning" is hardly unblemished of late, "given that the New York Times, CBS and the BBC all had to fire lead personnel over the fact that they just damn well made stuff up out of whole cloth in service to an obviously partisan political agenda."
Actually, the New York Times doesn't quite fit here, since Jayson Blair's fabrications had no apparent political motive. But CBS's scandal arose precisely from the network's effort to assist the Kerry campaign by painting President Bush as a Vietnam-era slacker in contrast to the "war hero" Kerry.
This was a case of the liberal media unwittingly aiding conservatives. The whole Vietnam issue was always going to be a loser for Kerry, but the Democrats and their allies in the media kept reassuring each other that the opposite was true. And of course the proof is that George W. Bush is now serving his second term as president, while Kerry is holding little talks in which he pathetically rails against the "submedia."
* The haughty, French-looking Massachusetts Democrat, who by the way promised 44 days ago to release his military records.
George W. Bush, Arab Hero--II
Claudia Rosett reports from Beirut in the New York Sun:
Unlike the Hezbollah demonstrators with their chants of "Death to America," many in the crowd were friendly to Americans. "Thank's Free World," (sic) said one poster, held high by a woman in a bright red jacket, Rawya Okal, who told me: "We thank Mr. Bush for his position." Overhearing this in the throng, a middle-aged man in a green baseball cap, Louis Nahanna, leaned over to say, "We love the American people"--adding, "Please don't let Bush forget us. Your support is very important."
Asking more people what they thought of Americans turned up the same refrain. From a young driver, Fadi Mrad, came the message: "We want to change. We need freedom. Please don't let Bush forget us." From a group of young men came not only the message "Our hope is America," and "We believe in democracy in the Middle East," but also praise for Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz. There was also an invitation from one of them, young Edgard Baradhy, for his heroine, Ms. Rice, to come to Beirut "and I am ready to take her for coffee."
At one point, two young men sitting on a sidewalk mistook this reporter for a Frenchwoman, and called out "Vive la France!" The European nation's president, Jacques Chirac, has also come out in support of the democratic movement. When I told them that I was American, they got to their feet and came over to say, "Welcome to Lebanon."
One thing seems clear: America must continue, even step up, its support for democracy in the Middle East. That's the only way we will ever appease the Arab street.
That '70s Show
Remember the Equal Rights Amendment? Neither do we, but the Tampa Tribune reports from Tallahassee that some 1970s nostalgists are trying to revive it:
State Rep. Mary Brandenburg pointed to the 30-year-old "ERA YES" button on her lapel Monday afternoon. "I kept it," the Democrat from West Palm Beach said. "And I never lost hope that one day the Equal Rights Amendment would become a reality."
Dozens of veterans of the women's equal rights movement, state lawmakers and relative newcomers to the cause gathered at the state Capitol to renew the call for ratification of the 24-word statement. In unison, many repeated the text from memory: "Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex."
Blogger Eugene Volokh notes that opponents sank ERA in part by relying on the reductio ad absurdum. He offers several contemporaneous quotes (emphasis his):
"What foes of ERA contend were valid arguments and what advocates claim were emotional scare tactics also seemed to sway sentiment among the women against the amendment [in North Carolina]. Opponents, for example, suggested passage of ERA would mean abortion on demand, legalization of homosexual marriages, sex-integrated prisons and reform schools -- all claims that were hotly denied by ERA supporters."--U.S. News & World Report, April 28, 1975
"Discussion of [the ERA] bogged down in hysterical claims that the amendment would eliminate privacy in bathrooms, encourage homosexual marriage, put women in the trenches and deprive housewives of their husbands' support."--New York Times, July 5, 1981 (excerpt of a book by Betty Friedan)
"The vote in Virginia [against the ERA] came after proponents argued on behalf of civil rights for women and opponents trotted out the old canards about homosexual marriages and unisex restrooms." Washington Post, Feb. 19, 1982 (column by Judy Mann)
Even without the ERA, of course, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts has now imposed homosexual marriage, and yesterday a California trial judge did the same. On well, at least the "unisex bathroom" bit was a hysterical canard, right? Don't be so sure.
The Other One Is a Former Enron Adviser
Reader John Sciortino disputes our statement in an item yesterday that "no one has ever accused [former Enron adviser Paul Krugman] of being a woman." Sciortino points to this passage from a November column by National Review's Jonah Goldberg:
Take the two leading liberal columnists at the New York Times, Maureen Dowd and Paul Krugman. As we all know, one's a whining self-parody of a hysterical liberal who lets feminine emotion and fear defeat reason and fact in almost every column. The other used to date Michael Douglas.
We're pretty sure Dowd is the one who used to date Michael Douglas. Still, although Sciortino has a point, technically we were correct. Although Goldberg calls Krugman "hysterical" and prone to "feminine emotion," he never directly describes him as a woman.
Real Americans Drive Toyotas
"The United Auto Workers union waved a white flag Monday in its parking skirmish with neighboring reservists, but the 1st Battalion, 24th Marines are not accepting surrender," the Detroit News reports:
Facing intense criticism, UAW President Ron Gettelfinger reversed his decision to ban Marine Corps reservists driving foreign cars or displaying pro-President Bush bumper stickers from parking at the union's Solidarity House headquarters in Detroit.
"I made the wrong call on the parking issue, and I have notified the Marine Corps that all reservists are welcome to park at Solidarity House as they have for the past 10 years," Gettelfinger said in a statement.
We noted the story Friday. What's most astonishing about this is the photo that accompanies the Detroit News article. Here's the caption:
Tony Camilleri of Dearborn Heights covered up the Chevrolet logo on his Silverado with a Toyota sign as a tribute to the Marines. The UAW has a longstanding policy prohibiting foreign makes from its parking lots.
Leave it to the UAW to turn foreign cars into a symbol of patriotism.
Will Corrie Kin Cash In?
Relatives of Rachel Corrie, the terror advocate who died in an accident she caused by standing in front of an Israeli bulldozer that was destroying weapons-smuggling tunnels, "sued the State of Israel and the [Israel Defense Forces] for damages in the Haifa District Court on Tuesday," Ha'aretz reports. "The family has asked for roughly $324 thousand in direct damages, as well as punitive damages."
World Doesn't End; Poor, Blacks Hardest Hit
"In 2002, Harris Interactive, a market research group based in Rochester, conducted a phone survey called the Daily Hassle Scale that asked 1,010 people to rank the aggravations they faced in a typical day. The survey found that poor people and African-Americans suffer the most stress from the everyday annoyances such as noisy neighbors, telemarketers and pressure at work, but it did not explain why."--New York Times, March 15
What Would We Do Without Studies?--I
"Malt Liquor Drink of Homeless and Unemployed--Study"--headline, Reuters, March 14
What Would We Do Without Studies?--II
"Study: School Leaders Poorly Educated"--headline, Associated Press, March 15
Bottom Story of the Day
"Stewart Says Ankle Device Is Uncomfortable"--headline, Associated Press, March 15
That'll Make Him a Strong Witness
"Selig Willing to Testify on Steroids"--headline, FoxNews.com, March 14
He Won't Eat Until the Trains Run on Time
"Mussolini Goes on Hunger Strike"--headline, Financial Times, March 15
HE PLAYED ON OUR FEARS!!!!
"Gibson Resurrects 'The Passion' With Less Gore"--headline, Reuters, March 14
If at First You Don't Succeed, Die, Die Again
We're not sure if this is meant to be serious or not, but the Web site SatanService.org has a page called "How to Kill Yourself: A Meta-Guide" that purports to come from something called the Church of Euthanasia. The conclusion:
Suicide is hard work, and should not be undertaken lightly. It's easyto [sic] do it badly, or make rookie mistakes. As with many things, the best results are achieved by thorough research and careful preparation.
"Rookie" mistakes? Just how many suicide veterans are there, anyway? |
