Best of the Web Today - May 13, 2005
By JAMES TARANTO
Scenes From the Class Struggle--II
Our item yesterday about Democrats' puzzlement over failing to win the votes of "working class" Americans prompted this interesting reply from reader Jonathan Kahnoski:
When the American intelligentsia bought the whole Marxist-Leninist vocabulary back in the 1920s and 1930s, they bought into the idea of social classes. Marxism-Leninism is a product of the European experience, with its long history of often rigid social classes (royalty, nobility, bourgeoisie, etc.). This vocabulary has had great appeal to Europeans, especially on the Continent. Today, Europeans claim their societies are more egalitarian than America's because of their social welfare programs, while completely overlooking how stationary their citizens are both geographically (what Frenchman will leave his birthplace to take a better job?) and socially (can a "working class" German aspire to a university education or obtain a bachelor's or master's later in life?).
The American experience has been quite different. From the colonial period on, the ideal of America was to free the individual from the artificial constraints of social class. In America, so the pitch went, every person was able to pursue his dreams, whatever they might be, without regard to family or place of birth. It is true that America's fulfillment of that dream has been imperfect, but not nearly as imperfect as the American intelligentsia would have us believe. Indeed, it might be that more Americans would strive and succeed if there was less talk about class barriers and more talk about freedom.
This is not to argue that every plumber mistakes his wrench for a scepter. The same working stiff who takes offense at being called "working class" is quite comfortable being called "blue collar." It is easy to understand why. A class is something you are born into, and trapped in--concepts completely antithetical to the American self-image. A collar, blue or white, is something a person chooses for himself--a concept congruent with the American ideal.
It is puzzling that so many American academics do not understand the great gulf between the European experience and the American experience. It is as if they say: Americans mostly are the descendants of white Europeans, therefore most Americans must think and feel and perceive themselves the same way Europeans do. The simplicity of this line of thought is tempting, but it demonstrates how little these otherwise highly educated and well-traveled people know about their fellow Americans. Perhaps they would feel more at home in Europe?
Thus, as you say, some janitors and secretaries and carpenters are insulted when they are referred to as "working class." However, perhaps most ignore the term because they don't associate themselves with "working class" or any other "class." They may agree they wear a white collar or a blue collar, practice a trade or a profession, but these they do by choice. They also will insist they are born-free, "jen-u-ine" Grade A, USDA Choice Americans and they don't know what class you are talking about. Bully for them!
To which we would add that most Americans probably consider themselves "middle class." But they do not understand this as a class per se, merely as a synonym for "normal."
Here's another way of looking at the whole question: One reason cries about "inequality" ring hollow in America is the radical egalitarianism that underlies our political culture. If all men are created equal, then differences in material wealth don't imply differences in the inherent worth or dignity of individuals. Thus there is no reason for differences in economic status to become a source of antagonism.
Mr. Government
Sen. George Voinovich says he'll vote against U.N. ambassador-designate John Bolton, but yesterday, in the manner of John Kerry*, he voted for him first. Or, to be precise, he voted to send the nomination to the Senate floor "without recommending that he be approved." The Associated Press reports Voinovich explained the reason for his opposition:
Voinovich called Bolton "the poster child of what someone in the diplomatic corps should not be." He said Bolton would be fired if he was in the private sector.
How the heck would Voinovich know? The résumé on his Senate Web site lists no private-sector jobs and a string of government positions beginning with the Ohio House in 1967 and lasting through the present, continuous except for a two-year gap between 1988 and 1990 (during part of which time he was campaigning for the Ohio governorship). There is a six-year gap between his graduation from law school (1961) and his taking a seat in the Ohio House, so perhaps he practiced law or some other occupation for a time 40 or more years ago--though his official congressional bio shows that he was an assistant attorney general in 1963.
And of course as an elected official rather than a civil servant, he is guaranteed a job until his term ends, in January 2011. Which perhaps explains why he has engaged in behavior that would be unacceptable in the private sector--to wit, missing a series of important meetings, then finally showing up and demanding that business be brought to a halt until he can get up to speed.
Voinovich's agreeing to allow the nomination out of committee shows that the Republicans have some ability to exercise discipline, even if he cannot discipline himself. And Bolton still is likely to be confirmed.
Naturally, Democrats are unhappy: "I think we have undermined our authority and shirked our constitutional responsibility," the Associated Press quotes ranking Democrat Joe Biden as saying. The New York Times reports that Angry Left heartthrob Barbara Boxer "placed a hold on the nomination," which could also prevent a vote.
The Constitution says nothing about Senate committees or about holds, but the Dems seem to think it compels them to prevent the president's nominees from coming to a vote. Must be in one of those penumbras somewhere.
* The--the--um, who is he again? We could've sworn we knew. Ah well, it'll come to us . . .
Reid Baiting
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid took to the floor yesterday to discuss President Bush's nomination of Judge Henry Saad, one of the many judicial appointees whose votes the Democrats are blocking via the filibuster. Here's what Reid had to say, according to the Washington Times:
"Henry Saad would have been filibustered anyway," Mr. Reid said on the floor yesterday, about the Michigan Appeals Court judge who is nominated to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit.
"All you need to do is have a member go upstairs and look at his confidential report from the FBI, and I think we would all agree that there is a problem there," Mr. Reid continued.
This is a particularly nasty bit of innuendo, and it may be a violation of Senate rules. It's not clear from Reid's comments what he is accusing Saad of, and Saad is not allowed to see his own FBI file, which consists of raw information that may or may not be accurate. Moreover, the only people who are supposed to see the file are members of the Judiciary Committee and the nominee's home-state senators; Reid does not qualify. And Senate rules provide that members can be expelled for revealing confidential information, though it's not clear if Reid's "revelation," vague as it was, qualifies.
A Reid aide claims the senator based his information on information that leaked when the Judiciary Committee inadvertently left open a microphone during private discussions on the Saad appointment. National Review's Byron York says that what is at issue is what Sen. Patrick Leahy, who is a member of the Judiciary Committee, called "a temperament problem." Apparently the evidence of this "problem" was an e-mail Saad sent:
Saad wrote of [Sen. Debbie] Stabenow, "This is the game they play. Pretend to do the right thing while abusing the system and undermining the constitutional process. Perhaps some day she will pay the price for her misconduct." But it was Saad who paid the price, because he mistakenly sent the e-mail not only to his supporter but to Stabenow's office.
Leahy suggests that the "pay the price" line was of "a possibly threatening nature." But this is laughable. Certainly some day she will die, but to observe as much does not amount to a death threat. And of course "pay the price" has a specific meaning in electoral politics: to lose an election.
If Reid, Leahy and Stabenow don't like Henry Saad, they are free to vote against his confirmation. But this silly and vicious campaign against him shows how urgent it is to abolish the filibuster for judicial nominees. There would appear to be no other way to restore the dignity of the Senate.
Starr Gets Dowdified
The other day CBS News aired excerpts of an interview with Kenneth Starr, the former federal judge, solicitor general and Whitewater independent counsel, in which the network's Gloria Borger claimed Starr had opposed efforts to end the filibuster of judicial nominees. From the transcript:
Borger: Many conservatives consider the fight over judges their political Armageddon. But conservative icon and former federal Judge Ken Starr says it's gotten out of control.
Starr: This is a radical, radical departure from our history and from our traditions, and it amounts to an assault on the judicial branch of government.
Borger: Starr, who investigated the Monica Lewinsky case against President Clinton, tells CBS News that the Republican plan to end the filibuster may be unwise.
Starr: It may prove to have the kind of long-term boomerang effect, damage on the institution of the Senate that thoughtful senators may come to regret.
Rush Limbaugh accuses CBS of misrepresenting Starr's comments, while Mickey Kaus offers a partial defense of the network. Starr's own explanation comes in an e-mail that both Limbaugh and Ramesh Ponnuru quote:
In the piece that I have now seen, and which I gather is being lavishly quoted, CBS employed two snippets. The 'radical departure' snippet was specifically addressed--although this is not evidenced whatever from the clip--to the practice of invoking judicial philosophy as a grounds for voting against a qualified nominee of integrity and experience. I said in sharp language that that practice was wrong. I contrasted the current practice . . . with what occurred during Ruth Ginsburg's nomination process, as numerous Republicans voted (rightly) to confirm a former ACLU staff lawyer. They disagreed with her positions as a lawyer, but they voted (again, rightly) to confirm her. Why? Because elections, like ideas, have consequences. . . . In the interview, I did indeed suggest, and have suggested elsewhere, that caution and prudence be exercised (Burkean that I am) in shifting/modifying rules (that's the second snippet), but I likewise made clear that the "filibuster" represents an entirely new use (and misuse) of a venerable tradition. . . .
Our friends are way off base in assuming that the CBS snippets, as used, represent (a) my views, or (b) what I in fact said.
We can vouch for Starr's explanation of the first snippet. Last September we appeared on a panel with him and the Federalist Society's Leonard Leo, and Starr made exactly the same point, including the Ginsburg example.
Just Ask Bill Clinton
"Cigars and Women Not Uncommon"--headline, Sun News (Myrtle Beach, S.C.), May 12
Nothing Gets Past Carl Levin
From an article on the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations' report on the U.N. Oil for Food rip-off: "Sen. Carl Levin (D., Mich.), minority leader of the Senate committee, said the report held a lesson for future sanctions programs: that the target of sanctions should not be granted the power to subvert them."
Are They Voting With Their Feet?
"Iranians Hold Their Noses as They Pick New President"--headline, Guardian (London), May 13
Aren't Illegal Drugs the Last Thing It'll Need?
"Rand: Palestinian State Will Need Crack, $7.7 Billion Security System"--headline, WorldTribune.com, May 9
They Like to March in the Shade
"Darth Vader and Imperial Troops to Storm Paris Boulevard"--headline, Agence France-Presse, May 12
Dems Back Bush Social Security Plan
This is rich. Columnist Don Surber of the Charleston (W.Va.) Daily Mail reports that the West Virginia Legislature, dominated by Democrats, has a plan to invest $5.5 billion in pension money for state employees in stocks and bonds:
With their $5.5 billion pension bond proposal, Democrats in West Virginia are promising voters that Wall Street will average better than 7.5 percent returns annually for the next 30 years. Most of that money will be used to shore up the teacher pension plan.
If Wall Street is good enough for their teachers, then it should be good enough for my kids, who will face 30 percent cuts in their Social Security when they retire.
President Bush ought to visit West Virginia and endorse this pension bond plan--and double-dog-dare Sens. Bob Byrd and [Jay] Rockefeller to denounce the $5.5 billion pension bond as a "risky scheme."
Zero-Tolerance Watch
Nine-year-old Tyler Stoken, a fourth-grader in Aberdeen, Wash., was suspended for five days for refusing to write a story making fun of his school principal, reports Seattle's KOMO-AM:
But when it came to the recent Washington Assessment of Student Learning, one question stumped him. He was asked to write a short essay about a make-believe situation and his principal.
Tyler paraphrases the question saying, "You look out one day at school and see your principal flying by a window. In several paragraphs write what happens next." He's asked, "So why didn't you answer that question?" He says, "I couldn't think of what to write the essay without making fun of the principal." . . .
Tyler was given a 5-day suspension. In the letter that went home to mother, the principal writes, "The fact that Tyler chose to simply refuse to work on the WASL after many reasonable requests is none other than blatant defiance and insubordination."
Soon, though, the superintendent called and reinstated Tyler. Meanwhile, the Associated Press reports that Hanna Smith, an 18-year-old junior at Tift County High in Tifton, Ga., was suspended for a day for wearing a T-shirt with a slogan that offended principal Mike Duck. The slogan: "Don't drink and drive."
Seems innocuous enough, but it turns out "the principal was arrested six years ago for DUI and running a stop sign." Duck didn't duck punishment at the time; he "made a public apology for the DUI and was himself suspended for five days."
Hat tip: ZeroIntelligence.net.
Is This Really Necessary?
"Psych Test for Man Who Skinned Mother"--headline, Expatica.com, May 11
Wow, That's Some Exclusive!
"CBS 2 Exclusive: Wall That Collapsed Had Major Problems"--headline, WCBS-TV Web site (New York), May 13
You Don't Say
"When You Were Born Influences When You Reach the Menopause"--headline, Medical News Today, May 12
And You Thought It Was the End of the War
"Doctors Attribute Baby Boom to Last Year's Hurricanes"--headline, Associated Press, May 13
What Would We Do Without Popes?
"Satan No Match for God, Says Pope"--headline, CNN.com, May 11
Do It Yourself
All right, we're stumped. A reader sent this to us yesterday, and we saved it for today in the hope that we'd come up with a headline to go above it that is (1) frightfully clever and (2) appropriate for the Web site of a family newspaper. But we're suffering from quipster's block, so feel free to send your suggestions, and if any are appropriate we'll use them Monday. Oh, here's the original headline:
"Joke-Telling Genitals Don't Get Free-Speech Protection"--Detroit Free Press, May 12
Finger Fumbler Fingered
"The finger that a woman said she found in a bowl of Wendy's chili came from an associate of her husband who lost the digit in an industrial accident, police said Friday," the Associated Press reports. Wow, her husband actually knew the guy. What are the odds of that?
We Smell a Rat
The Wildlife Conservation Society says a "long-whiskered rodent with stubby legs and a tail covered with dense hair" turns out to be "a previously unknown species that actually represents an entire new family of wildlife":
The kha-nyou, as local people call it, was discovered by a team of scientists in a hunter's market in central Laos, according to a news release from the New York-based group.
"It was for sale on a table next to some vegetables. I knew immediately it was something I had never seen before," Robert Timmins, a WCS researcher, was quoted as saying of his find.
Another colleague, Mark Robinson, later discovered other specimens caught by hunters, and identified bone fragments in an owl pellet.
Based on morphological differences in the skull and bone structure, coupled with DNA analysis, it was estimated that the animal diverged from other rodents millions of years ago.
So let's see if we have this straight: This creature has been around for millions of years. Folks in Laos have a name, and presumably some tasty recipes, for it. Yet according to these "scientists," it's "entirely new." What are they, creationists? |
