BY JAMES TARANTO
Thursday, November 6, 2003 3:03 p.m. EST
George W. Bush, Progressive Internationalist
In a speech marking the 20th anniversary of the National Endowment for Democracy, President Bush this morning affirmed America's commitment to democracy in the Muslim world:
Some skeptics of democracy assert that the traditions of Islam are inhospitable to the representative government. This "cultural condescension," as Ronald Reagan termed it, has a long history. After the Japanese surrender in 1945, a so-called Japan expert asserted that democracy in that former empire would "never work." Another observer declared the prospects for democracy in post-Hitler Germany are, and I quote, "most uncertain at best"--he made that claim in 1957. Seventy-four years ago, the Sunday London Times declared nine-tenths of the population of India to be "illiterates not caring a fig for politics." Yet when Indian democracy was imperiled in the 1970s, the Indian people showed their commitment to liberty in a national referendum that saved their form of government.
Time after time, observers have questioned whether this country, or that people, or this group, [is] "ready" for democracy--as if freedom were a prize you win for meeting our own Western standards of progress. In fact, the daily work of democracy itself is the path of progress. It teaches cooperation, the free exchange of ideas, and the peaceful resolution of differences. As men and women are showing, from Bangladesh to Botswana, to Mongolia, it is the practice of democracy that makes a nation ready for democracy, and every nation can start on this path.
It should be clear to all that Islam--the faith of one-fifth of humanity--is consistent with democratic rule. Democratic progress is found in many predominantly Muslim countries--in Turkey and Indonesia, and Senegal and Albania, Niger and Sierra Leone. Muslim men and women are good citizens of India and South Africa, of the nations of Western Europe, and of the United States of America.
Bush cited a two-decade-old speech by a previous great progressive internationalist:
In June of 1982, President Ronald Reagan spoke at Westminster Palace and declared, the turning point had arrived in history. He argued that Soviet communism had failed, precisely because it did not respect its own people--their creativity, their genius and their rights. . . .
A number of critics were dismissive of that speech by the president. According to one editorial of the time, "It seems hard to be a sophisticated European and also an admirer of Ronald Reagan." Some observers on both sides of the Atlantic pronounced the speech simplistic and naive, and even dangerous. In fact, Ronald Reagan's words were courageous and optimistic and entirely correct.
Weasels of the world, take note.
'Real Feelings'
"The partisan rift over a Senate inquiry into prewar intelligence on Iraq" has "deepened," according to the Associated Press, because of the revelation, which we noted yesterday, of a draft Democratic staff memo outlining ways to use investigation for political gain. Sen. Pat Roberts of Kansas, the committee's chairman, took to the floor of the Senate yesterday and called the memo "an effort to discredit the committee's work, undermine its conclusions, no matter what those conclusions may be." Fellow Republican Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona said: "I never saw the kind of blatant partisan politics emerge that has apparently emerged as revealed in this memorandum."
The strongest condemnation of the memo, however, comes from a Democrat, Georgia's Sen. Zell Miller, who issued a statement yesterday:
"I have often said that the process in Washington is so politicized and polarized that it can't even be put aside when we're at war. Never has that been proved more true than the highly partisan and perhaps treasonous memo prepared for the Democrats on the Intelligence Committee.
"Of all the committees, this is the one single committee that should unquestionably be above partisan politics. The information it deals with should never, never be distorted, compromised or politicized in any shape, form or fashion. For it involves the lives of our soldiers and our citizens. Its actions should always be above reproach; its words never politicized.
"If what has happened here is not treason, it is its first cousin. The ones responsible--be they staff or elected or both should be dealt with quickly and severely sending a lesson to all that this kind of action will not be tolerated, ignored or excused.
"Heads should roll!"
Sen. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, the committee's ranking Democrat, distanced himself from the memo, saying he hadn't approved it and it hadn't been circulated among the senators on the committee. But he didn't exactly repudiate its contents. "It is disturbing that individuals are seeking to score political points and that a draft paper describing the rights of the minority to push for a full and fair review of these issues is being so grossly mischaracterized to try to deflect attention from the real issue," the AP quotes him as saying.
Adds Sen. Dick Durbin, an Illinois Democrat: "If [the memo] expresses the frustration of many senators on this committee that we have created this firewall to protect the administration, then this memo frankly speaks to real feelings." Those who suspect that Democrats would rather indulge their partisan feelings than seriously tend to matters of national security have certainly had their suspicions confirmed.
Just What We Need in a President
"I tend to be reflective rather later than sooner. Now, unfortunately, we all know that nobody's personality is perfect. So the things that make me a strong candidate are also my Achille's [sic] heel."--Howard Dean, as quoted in the New York Times, Nov. 6
Please Ignore My Positions
Fresh from the Confederate flag kerfuffle, "Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean said Tuesday that Southerners must stop basing their votes on 'race, guns, God and gays' and forge a multiracial coalition that focuses next year's presidential election on jobs, health care and a foreign policy reflecting American values."
Is this because Dean doesn't think "race, guns, God and gays" are important issues? Not exactly. On his various campaign Web sites, he holds forth on these matters at length. Examples:
Race. "I will support affirmative action, from which we have all benefited, because it has strengthened our institutions and provided opportunity."
Guns. "I believe the federal gun laws we have--like the Brady Bill--are important, and I would veto any attempt to repeal or gut them. The Assault Weapons Ban expires next year, and it should be renewed."
God. "Faith-based organizations provide important social services in this country. But when they use taxpayer dollars to deliver those services, certain basic legal rules apply. One of those rules is that a recipient of federal funds may not hire or fire an employee because of race, gender, religion or sexual orientation."
Gays. "I will work to expand equal rights to same sex couples and ban workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation, strengthen federal protections against anti-gay violence, give federal employees the right to name same-sex partners as beneficiaries, remove bias from our immigration laws, and end the military's 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Policy."
So if you're from the South, kindly forget everything you've just read and vote for Dean.
Reader Jon Sanders suggests that Dean adopt Neil Young's "Southern Man" as his campaign theme song. It already has verses on race, guns and God, and Sanders has penned an additional one on gays:
Southern man
Close them closet doors
Gays are coming
For all your mores
Southern change
With a sashay walk
You're afraid of a
Lispy talk
Southern man
"Mores" actually rhymes with "forays," not "doors," but otherwise this is pretty darn good.
Breaking Ranks
Now this is interesting: Al Sharpton, the racial demagogue and Democratic presidential candidate, is urging Democratic senators not to filibuster President Bush's nomination of Justice Janice Rogers Brown, who currently sits on the California Supreme Court, for the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. "I don't agree with her politics. I don't agree with some of her background," the Washington Times quotes Sharpton as saying. "But she should get an up-or-down vote."
Sharpton's comments came in the wake of a news conference by a group of "black leaders," including the NAACP's Julian Bond, whose idea of "civil rights" is to demand rigid ideological uniformity from all black would-be public servants. "Mr. Sharpton echoed the concerns of many conservatives--especially black conservatives--that Justice Brown is being opposed because she doesn't conform to the Democratic ideology that many blacks espouse," reports the Times:
"We've got to stop this monolith in black America because it impedes the freedom of expression for all of us," Mr. Sharpton said in a television interview conducted by Sinclair Broadcasting yesterday. "I don't think she should be opposed because she doesn't come from some assumed club."
Mr. Sharpton compared the filibusters to the same sort of "pocket vetoes" used for so long against blacks.
Wade Henderson, director of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, who attended the anti-Brown press conference, was later asked about Mr. Sharpton's remarks.
"I don't believe it. That can't be true," he said as he headed to a meeting in the Democratic leadership office. "It would be shockingly surprising."
The Times hints that Sharpton may have a political angle: His position "could create particular problems for Sen. John Edwards, North Carolina Democrat and candidate for president, who plans to vote against Justice Brown's nomination in the Judiciary Committee today." Whatever his motives, if he think this is an effective wedge issue to draw black voters away from Edwards, we have to wonder if he isn't on to something.
It's Got Them Seeing Red and Singing the Blues
"Black Activist Groups Oppose Brown Nomination"--headline, FoxNews.com, Nov. 6
This Really Slays Us
President Bush yesterday signed the Partial-Birth Abortion Act of 2003. Check out this passage from a New York Times story:
Many Democrats assailed Bush for signing the bill. Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y., called the bill "an affront to American women and this nation's Constitution."
Has someone pulled a fast one on the New York Times? Didn't it strike any of the editors as odd that a supposed member of Congress defending a monstrous abortion procedure is called "Slaughter"? Coming next: "Sen. Saddam Hussein" tells the New York Times he disagrees with the administration's Iraq policy.
The Underpants Debate--II
Yesterday we reported that Dennis Kucinich said during Tuesday's debate that he had never smoked marijuana. We may have jumped to an unwarranted conclusion. Here's how the other candidates answered the question (Dick Gephardt was absent):
John Edwards, John Kerry, Howard Dean: "Yes."
Al Sharpton: "I grew up in the church. We didn't believe in that."
Joe Lieberman: "Well, you know, I have a reputation for giving unpopular answers in Democratic debates. I never used marijuana, sorry."
Wesley Clark: "Never used it."
Carol Moseley Braun: "I'm not going to answer."
Kucinich's answer was: "No, but I think it ought to be decriminalized." That seems clear enough, but this being the party of Clinton, it's important to be precise about the question that was asked. It was: "Which of you are ready to admit to having used marijuana in the past?" Perhaps Kucinich's "no" means he hasn't used marijuana, but it could just mean he's not ready to admit it.
Here's a quote from John Kerry: "Look, I've been a hunter all my life. But I make a point of eating what I kill." When you consider how often Kerry mentions that he served in Vietnam, this comment seems deeply creepy.
Anti-Incumbent Mood?
"Democrats across the country rallied to support Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chairman Terry McAuliffe yesterday, a day after the party lost governorships in Kentucky and Mississippi and less than four weeks after losing the gubernatorial race in California," the Hill newspaper reports:
But on a morning of bitter misgivings for Democrats there were also rumblings in Mississippi, California, New York, Washington, D.C., and elsewhere, with many party rank-and-file members complaining that the DNC has written off the South, taken black voters for granted and picked a poor 2004 convention site in Boston.
The paper adds that McAuliffe's defenders "said that if anyone is to blame for those losses it is the Democratic Governors Association (DGA) and Democratic state and local leaders." Over at the New York Times, DGA chairman Gov. Gary Locke of Washington reprises McAuliffe's post-California spin, saying that "the national economy, moribund until recently, 'has triggered a strong anti-incumbent mood in the electorate' ":
"National Republicans should take no joy in what was really a vote to change the status quo," Mr. Locke added. "This is an unsettled electorate looking for change, and that mood is likely to linger through next year's presidential election."
USA Today picks up the theme in an editorial:
Tuesday's Republican victories mask a larger message, a warning to incumbent officeholders of both parties. . . . With Tuesday's results, Republicans have captured 11 governorships held by Democrats in the past two years. But Democrats have won even more: 12 governorships held by Republicans.
This is not a picture of a political tide running in one direction. It is a picture of voters venting their frustration on whomever [sic] happens to be in power.
The paper provides a helpful list of states whose governorships have switched parties:
Republican to Democrat (12): Arizona, Illinois, Kansas, Michigan, New Mexico, New Jersey, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming.
Democrat to Republican (11): Alabama, Alaska, California, Georgia, Hawaii, Kentucky, Maryland, Mississippi, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Vermont.
Independent to Democrat (1): Maine.
Independent to Republican (1): Minnesota.
A close look at these contests belies USA Today's analysis. While it's true that the majority of the 40 states that elected governors between 2001 and this week switched parties, the GOP defeated five times as many incumbents as the Dems did.
Of the 12 races in which the Democrats picked up previously Republican-held governorships, 11 were for open seats--that is, the Republican incumbent was retiring and did not appear on the ballot. The sole exception is Wisconsin, where the Republican incumbent, Scott McCallum, had never been elected to the statehouse but succeeded Gov. Tommy Thompson in 2001 when the latter left Madison to become secretary of health and human services.
By contrast, Republicans picked off Democratic incumbents in five states: Alabama, California, Georgia, Mississippi and South Carolina. In all these cases, the losing governors had been duly elected four years earlier (or in California's case 11 months earlier). Is an anti-incumbent sentiment evident in the results of the 2002-03 elections? Sure--just like it was in 1994.
All Stop and No Whistle
The Reuters caption reads: "Iraqis converge on a train, derailed by saboteurs at dawn, during an effort to reopen the blocked railway line south of the town of Tikrit, November 5, 2003." But Reuters misses the deep symbolism in this photo. The locomotive appears to have come off the rails by leaning too far to the left, and the marking on its face clearly reads DEM.
It's nice to have visual proof of something we've been saying for a long time.
Why They Hate Us
"It's not difficult to understand why somebody might pick up an AK-47 against us. Maybe we killed his father in the first Gulf War, maybe in this Gulf War, maybe he's just a dick."--Sgt. Reginald Abram, with the Third Armored Cavalry Regiment in western Iraq, quoted in the Asia Times, Oct. 24
Saudi Second Thoughts
Arab News columnist Fawaz Turki decides he was wrong to oppose the liberation of Iraq:
One need offer no apology for saying that the supreme virtue of this war is that Saddam Hussein was gotten rid of. Period. The very man who had established arguably the closest approximation of a genuine fascist state in the Arab world, that sustained itself on fear, repression, genocide, cult of personality and wanton murder--a state whose law was that those who rule are the law. . . .
Washington may not succeed in turning Iraq into a "beacon of democracy" but it will succeed, after all is said and done, in turning it into a society of laws and institutions where citizens, along with high-school kids, are protected against arbitrary arrest, incarceration, torture and execution.
Turki includes a ritual denunciation of "neocon ideologues" ("more con than neo"), but his column is still noteworthy. Does it reflect a broader shift in opinion in the Arab world? Stay tuned.
Department of What?
A new survey by the Polling Co. finds that 58% of Americans can't name a single department or member of the president's cabinet. Of those who were able to name one or more, 23% mentioned the Defense Department, 14% the Treasury, 13% State, 12% Homeland Security and 11% Interior.
"An incredible 70% of 18-34 year olds failed to specify a single agency or department, and while a majority of men (52%) could name at least one, less than one-third of women (32%) could do the same," says Polling Co. CEO Kellyanne Conway.
Only 6% of those polled had heard of the Commerce and Education departments, and just 3% named the Energy Department. Too bad the Republicans didn't go ahead with their plans to eliminate them back in 1995. Sounds as though no one would have noticed.
Perhaps Newcastle Would Offer Some Sand in Trade for Coal
"Saudis 'Fear Sand Shortage' "--headline, BBC Web site, Nov. 5
What Would Smokers Do Without Experts?
"JAPAN: Experts Develop Fragranced Bra for Smokers"--headline, Just-style.com, Nov. 4
What Would We Do Without Chandler Police?
"Reds outfielder Dernell Stenson was found dead Wednesday on a residential street after he was shot and apparently run over in a Phoenix suburb, police said. Chandler police said the death was being treated as a homicide."--Associated Press, Nov. 6
What Would We Do Without Taranto?
"Last night at the Waltham Police Citizens Academy, members of Class 16 came face to face with the complexities of being an officer in a post 9-11 world. . . . Sgt. Kevin O'Connell and Officer Stephen Taranto attempted to make our class more aware of terrorism and what law enforcement is doing to make us safe from a potential threat. . . . 'I don't think that I have to tell anyone that this is a different world today. Our advice to all of you is to call us if you see anything suspicious,' said Taranto."--Daily News Tribune (Waltham, Mass.), Nov. 6
What Would We Do Without 75 Percent?
"75 Percent Say Halloween Is Night to Trick-or-Treat"--headline, Manchester (N.H.) Union Leader, Nov. 5
Say What?
"Gay Bishop Expected to Unfold Slowly"--headline, Foster's Daily Democrat (Dover, N.H.), Nov. 5
Life Imitates 'The Simpsons'
"Ned Flanders decides to open his own business called the Leftorium, a store that sells tools and products aimed at left-handed consumers."--"The Simpsons" episode description, "When Flanders Failed," original airdate Oct. 3, 1991
"In a communist country being overrun by capitalism, Ma Bo may be the most enthusiastic leftist of them all. Ma, 56, an entrepreneur in the northeastern Chinese city of Dalian, has opened what the official Xinhua News Agency bills as the country's first shop for left-handed people."--Associated Press, Nov. 5, 2003
Government by Crank Letter
We may have tracked the bizarre Bolinas, Calif., "nature loving" initiative to its source. The following letter to the editor appeared in the Great Western Pacific Colonial Post in May, signed "Dakar, Bolinas" (13th letter):
Plan in the Fire Department is for trimming the trees a lot. I don't like any trimming because it requires the experience of the whole tree to understand if it is exotic, fascinating and interesting to yourself including your friends. Like how you find things in the store for yourself and also appropriate to your friends. This appropriateness without science is medically substantial to find plants. What you see as exotic, extremely interesting, extremely fascinating is good to you; boring things different for different persons--broccoli better than broccoli sprouts, better than iron, calcium, enzymes, protein and other inedibles in dirt. Broccoli the best. Vote for Bolinas, Socially Acknowledged Nature Loving Town. Because to like to drink the water out of the lakes, to like to eat the blueberries, to like the bears is not hatred to hotels and motorboats.
It seems Bolinas makes municipal policy by putting eccentric letters to the editor up for a vote of the citizenry. Wouldn't it be easier just to elect Steven Platzer mayor?
(Elizabeth Crowley helps compile Best of the Web Today. Thanks to Barak Moore, Nathan Wirtschafter, Michael Segal, Jim Orheim, Thomas Holsinger, Edward Schulze, Yehuda Hilewitz, Steven Stratton, Steve Sturm, Andy Hefty, Carter Snead, Rick Schwalbach, Michael Roberson, Robert Thompson, Arnold Nelson, M.D. Brueggen, Paul Green, Peter Stenoien, Steve Ginnings, Ben Anderson, William Schultz, John Williamson, David Schlosser, Brian Dawson, Casey Perkins, Lyle Yarnell, Vince Hancock, Adam Sparks, Natalie Cohen, James Foster, David Gerstman, T.J. Linzy, Ian Colle, Michael Siegel, Raghu Desikan, Toby Bronstein, Tim Kauffman, Allan Nadel, Mara Gold, David Wheeler, Daniel Sterman, Bill McConaghy, Gary Griswell, Jim Reingruber, Thomas Poole, Debbie Klutz, Jim Downs, Lydia Conrad, C.E. Dobkin, Jonas Zoller, Brian Ballard, Larry Rothenberg, Alan Sayre and Michael Bennett. If you have a tip, write us at opinionjournal@wsj.com, and please include the URL.) |
