From opinionjournal.com
Best of the Web Today - April 14, 2004
By JAMES TARANTO
GWB as JFK's Heir whitehouse.gov
President Bush was at his best last night, in an hour-long televised speech and news conference on the war on terror. Some of the highlights:
-"The violence we are seeing in Iraq is familiar. The terrorist who takes hostages, or plants a roadside bomb near Baghdad is serving the same ideology of murder that kills innocent people on trains in Madrid, and murders children on buses in Jerusalem, and blows up a nightclub in Bali, and cuts the throat of a young reporter for being a Jew."
-"Over the last several decades, we've seen that any concession or retreat on our part will only embolden this enemy and invite more bloodshed. And the enemy has seen, over the last 31 months, that we will no longer live in denial or seek to appease them. For the first time, the civilized world has provided a concerted response to the ideology of terror--a series of powerful, effective blows."
-On the comparison of Iraq to Vietnam: " I think the analogy is false. I also happen to think that analogy sends the wrong message to our troops, and sends the wrong message to the enemy. Look, this is hard work. It's hard to advance freedom in a country that has been strangled by tyranny. And, yet, we must stay the course, because the end result is in our nation's interest."
It's hard to believe, but Democrats used to talk like this, back when it was the party of Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry S. Truman and John F. Kennedy, rather than of George McGovern, Jimmy Carter, Michael Dukakis and JFK's dissolute youngest brother. In his Inaugural Address bartleby.com , for example, JFK famously said:
*** QUOTE ***
Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.
*** END QUOTE ***
And as Thomas Sowell notes, the 35th president also said of America's enemies: "We dare not tempt them with weakness"--an almost identical sentiment to the one Bush expresses in the second quote above.
To show how decadent the Democratic Party has become since President Kennedy's day, we turn to blogger Josh Marshall talkingpointsmemo.com , whom this column regards as the authoritative voice of partisan Democrats. Not surprisingly, he gives President Bush an unfavorable review:
*** QUOTE ***
What I saw was a man with a quiver of cliches and a few simple stock arguments. . . . It's become a bit impolitic in Washington to question whether the president really knows what he's doing or whether he has any sort of a detailed handle on what's going on on his watch. But I didn't see much sign of either. I just saw a lot of push harder, freedom, we're changing the world, ditching my policies means the terrorists win, etc.
*** END QUOTE ***
So freedom is just a cliche? Such sneering cynicism is certainly a far cry from "pay any price, bear any burden." If this is really what the 21st-century Democratic Party thinks of freedom, maybe John Kerry should make Bobby McGee ivory.org his running mate.
Bush Blooms in Garden State newsday.com
New Jersey has of late become one of the most Democratic states in the country, at least in federal elections. It hasn't elected a Republican to the U.S. Senate since 1972, and the last GOP presidential candidate to carry the Garden State was the elder George Bush in 1988. In 2000 Al Gore beat George W. Bush by a whopping 15.8%, his seventh-best showing.
So a new Garden State poll of 802 registered voters, conducted by Fairleigh Dickinson University publicmind.fdu.edu , ought to raise some eyebrows. In a two-man race, John Kerry outpolls Bush by only 41% to 40%. Each candidate gained 7% when undecided voters were asked in which direction they're leaning, giving Kerry a 48% to 47% edge.
In a three-man race, independent Ralph Nader gets 4% and Bush has a clear lead, 42% to 37%. Adding in leaners, Bush's lead narrows slightly, 48% to 44%, with 5% for Nader.
Several disclaimers are in order: The election is still more than half a year away, the survey would have been more reliable if it had asked likely voters rather than registered ones, and third-party candidates seldom do as well at the ballot box as they do in opinion polls. So take these results with a grain of salt--but if Bush does carry New Jersey come November, it won't be a total surprise.
'A Tragedy for Our Country' nytimes.com
John Kerry has been on a tour of college campuses in the Northeastern U.S., and the New York Times reports on an odd comment he made yesterday at the University of Rhode Island:
*** QUOTE ***
"There are so many young people now who take time out of college to actually go give back to their community locally, but they don't want to be involved in national politics," he added, "because they don't think they're going to get the same reward that they will get just working quietly, locally, and doing something you can measure, and actually get something done.
"I think that's a tragedy for our country."
Mr. Kerry has been giving speeches like this his whole life.
*** END QUOTE ***
So let's see if we have this straight: Large numbers of young people are doing volunteer work in their communities, doing "something you can measure" and "actually getting something done"--and Kerry sees this as "a tragedy for our country"?
Somewhere in Time johnkerry.com
Here's the latest evidence for our thesis opinionjournal.com that today's "liberals" are actually reactionaries: The "upcoming events" page on John Kerry's campaign Web site lists the event times as "EST"--Eastern Standard Time. The two events currently listed are one in New York and one in Pittsburgh--and none in Indiana, the only state parts of which remain on EST. The rest of the Eastern time zone--and indeed the rest of the country except Arizona and Hawaii--went on Daylight Saving Time on April 4.
And they say Republicans want to turn the clock back!
Metaphor Alert johnkerry.com
From a speech John Kerry delivered Monday at the University of New Hampshire:
*** QUOTE ***
It's great to be back in New Hampshire. When I left this state two months ago, I was riding a wave of momentum that you all built from the ground up. And over the next seven months, I'm counting on New Hampshire to keep us riding that wave all the way to the White House.
*** END QUOTE ***
Kerry's Wobbly Base boston.com
Among the groups on whose support John Kerry is counting this November are a traditional Democratic constituency, union members, and one that in recent years at least has leaned more toward the GOP, military veterans. Kerry hopes to win the latter group by emphasizing his service in Vietnam, where by the way he served. But veterans are far from unanimous in their enthusiasm for Kerry, who also became a war protester and who, in 1971 Senate testimony, lent credence to accusations that American soldiers were war criminals.
By making such a big deal of his Vietnam service, Kerry also opens himself up to an examination of his war record--which, although honorable, is not as flattering as his supporters might like to think, as today's Boston Globe reports:
*** QUOTE ***
A review by the Globe of Kerry's war record in preparation for a forthcoming book, "John F. Kerry: The Complete Biography," found that the young Navy officer acted heroically under fire, in one case saving the life of an Army lieutenant. But the examination also found that Kerry's commanding officer at the time questioned Kerry's first Purple Heart, which he earned for a wound received just two weeks after arriving in Vietnam.
"He had a little scratch on his forearm, and he was holding a piece of shrapnel," recalled Kerry's commanding officer, Lieutenant Commander Grant Hibbard. "People in the office were saying 'I don't think we got any fire,' and there is a guy holding a little piece of shrapnel in his palm." Hibbard said he couldn't be certain whether Kerry actually came under fire on Dec. 2, 1968, the date in questionand [sic] that is why he said he asked Kerry questions about the matter.
But Kerry persisted and, to his [Hibbard's] own "chagrin," Hibbard said, he dropped the matter. "I do remember some questions, some correspondence about it," Hibbard said. "I finally said, 'OK, if that's what happened . . . do whatever you want.' After that, I don't know what happened. Obviously, he got it, I don't know how."
*** END QUOTE ***
As for union members, the Associated Press guardian.co.uk reports that "Kerry 'doesn't warm anybody up,' while President Bush is seen as likable and strong, according to focus groups of undecided union voters conducted for the AFL-CIO."
There may be some overlap between Kerry's problems with vets and with union members. The AP reports that most in the focus group knew about Kerry's Vietnam service: "It shows strength and inoculates on values, but Democrats 'shouldn't obsess about it,' the findings cautioned. Some participants found his role in protesting the war upon his return as negative."
Dems Renounce Assassination Call cnn.com
We noted yesterday that the St. Petersburg (Fla.) Democratic Club had taken out an ad in a local weekly newspaper urging the assassination of Donald Rumsfeld and donations to the Kerry campaign. CNN reports the campaign has denounced the ad:
*** QUOTE ***
"We are calling the Pinellas County Democratic Party chair about this ad and demand that it be retracted," Kerry campaign spokesman Stephanie Cutter told CNN. "John Kerry does not condone this type of advertising and believes that it is wrong."
*** END QUOTE ***
It's not quite clear why they're calling a piece of furniture. Even more confusingly, a Washington Times washingtontimes.com headline says the ad has been "withdrawn," but the actual story says only that various Florida Democratic bigwigs are distancing themselves from it.
The Times quotes Edna McCall, the club's vice president, as telling the Drudge Report "that the ad was not meant as a call for actual injury to Mr. Rumsfeld. ' "Pull the trigger" means let Rumsfeld know where we stand, not shoot him,' she said. 'We are getting raped, and they are planning to steal the election again.' "
Hmm, here's a full lexicon of Edna McCall-speak:
-"pull the trigger": to let someone know where you stand
-"getting raped": losing
-"steal": win
We suggested yesterday that there was a media double standard, that a Republican group would get much harsher treatment if it did something similar. A bit of evidence is in this 2000 CNN report cnn.com describing the outrage of antigun activists over a fund-raising contest for the Carroll County, Md., Republican Party. The local party didn't call for anyone's murder; it merely raffled off a 9mm handgun, an item whose ownership is not only legal but protected by the Bill of Rights.
Bob Kerrey, Ex-Patriot? washingtonpost.com
In the wake of the Sept. 11 attack, Congress passed a law reforming the rules governing the law-enforcement and intelligence aspects of the war on terrorism. The statute, bearing the unwieldy name of Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act, or USA Patriot Act for short, drew only 67 "no" votes--one in the Senate and 66 in the House.
Yet despite the overwhelming support back in 2001, the Patriot Act has become a favorite target of liberals and Democrats, including John Kerry and John Edwards, both of whom voted for it. Seldom do the critics offer any specific complaints about the act, which leads us to think that their real objection is to its name.
For decades liberals and Democrats have been on the defensive about patriotism--think Michael Dukakis in 1988, Max Cleland in 2002 and John Kerry this year, all claiming falsely that Republicans were "questioning" their patriotism. For this reason, it was a bad idea to call this law the Patriot Act; a more neutral title would better have preserved the national unity that prevailed briefly after Sept. 11. (From a partisan Republican standpoint, the Patriot name turned out to be a brilliant stroke, since it puts Democrats in the position of constantly questioning their own patriotism.)
What prompts this meditation is a comment former senator Bob Kerrey made while questioning Attorney General John Ashcroft during yesterday's 9/11 commission hearing. "You know me well enough to know that anything that you have to put the word 'patriot' on in order to get people to vote for it, I'm inclined to vote against it just on that basis."
Since the law passed by such overwhelming margins, it seems unlikely that it would have failed without the word patriot. But why would Kerrey, who like the homonymous likely Democratic nominee served with honor in Vietnam, be defensive about patriotism?
The Corrie Family opinionjournal.com
A few words are in order about today's article by Brij Patnaik, a cousin of Rachel Corrie, who defends her in response to our item opinionjournal.com and Ruhama Shattan opinionjournal.com 's article (reprinted from the Jerusalem Post), both of which appeared on this Web site March 16, the anniversary of Corrie's death in a bulldozer accident.
It would be monstrous not to sympathize with Corrie's family, who actually were innocent victims in all this. To say so is not to ennoble or excuse Corrie's actions, including the actions that caused her own death. What Corrie did was wrong, but that doesn't mean she deserved to die, nor does it make the loss any less of a tragedy for those who loved her. When a Corrie relative contacted us asking for an opportunity to respond, we thought it only fair to offer one.
That said, there is a tendency these days for people who lose loved ones in ways that are somehow related to politics to get involved in political causes as a form of therapy. Corrie's parents, for example, have engaged in various forms of political activism, including some that are repugnant ( meeting with Yasser Arafat opinionjournal.com ) and some that are just ludicrous ( joining a rally against Caterpiller opinionjournal.com , which made the bulldozer in whose path their daughter put herself).
Those who get involved in political causes open themselves up for criticism, and they are not immune by virtue of having suffered a grievous personal loss--a point our Dorothy Rabinowitz opinionjournal.com makes eloquently vis-à-vis a small group of 9/11 widows who've joined the hate-Bush cause.
In that spirit, we'd like to address one point about Patnaik's article. Among his complaints about Shattan's piece is this:
*** QUOTE ***
Ms. Shattan suggests that Rachel's criticisms of U.S. government policy may have provided "help in fanning the flames of the violent anti-American sentiment [that] led to the October 2003 bombing of the Fulbright delegation to Gaza." Drawing a connection between an individual's criticism of government policy and the murder of government officials is disingenuous.
*** END QUOTE ***
Here is what Shattan wrote:
*** QUOTE ***
On the first anniversary of her death, I want to thank Rachel Corrie for showing Palestinian children how to despise America as she snarled, burned an American flag, and led them in chanting slogans, and as she gave "evidence" at a Young Palestinian Parliament mock trial finding President Bush guilty of crimes against humanity.
Perhaps her help in fanning the flames of violent anti-American sentiment led to the October 2003 bombing of the Fulbright delegation to Gaza to interview scholarship candidates, killing three.
*** END QUOTE ***
In his article, Patnaik doesn't dispute Shattan's account of Corrie's actions; he merely describes those actions with the innocuous-sounding phrase criticism of government policy. This is a common trope on the far left: describing all manner of anti-American expression as "criticism" or "dissent" and saying or implying that those who merely criticize such expression are guilty of trying to stifle free expression.
A few paragraphs later, though, Patnaik offers this observation:
*** QUOTE ***
The day following the publication of Ms. Shattan's piece in the Jerusalem Post, the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv wrote a response calling it "disgusting", "inexcusable" and "unbefitting any serious newspaper."
The question why Mr. Taranto chose to republish the piece awaits an answer. Is he really so dismissive of his own government's opinion?
*** END QUOTE ***
The answer, in this case at least, is yes. We had read the letter, from Paul Patin jpost.com , the embassy's press attache, two weeks before we republished Shattan's piece, and we found it unpersuasive.
It's a free country, of course, and those who disagree are entitled to their opinion. But it strikes us as a bit odd that Patnaik would defend his cousin's burning the American flag and accusing the president of war crimes as mere "criticism of government policy," then turn around and criticize us for making editorial decisions heedless of the objections of a government spokesman.
In Search of Anti-Semitism nytimes.com
The Google search engine has been involved in a bit of a controversy of late. It seems that when you use Google to search google.com the Web for the word Jew, the first site that came up was a vile anti-Semitic outfit called Jew Watch. (Earlier this afternoon, Jew Watch had fallen to second, after the entry for Jew en.wikipedia.org in the Wikipedia online encyclopedia, but as we write, the two pages have switched places again. We're not providing a link to the offending site, because doing so would actually increase the likelihood of Jew Watch regaining the top spot.)
As the New York Times notes, "a Web site calling itself " Remove JewWatch.com removejewwatch.com from the Google search engine!" is circulating a petition asking Google to remove the site from its listings." No dice, says Google; "it trusts its automated program to rank Web sites accurately."
We hadn't written about this up until now, because although we sympathized with the RemoveJewWatch folks, we found Google's defense plausible. Until, that is, we learned this from the New York Times:
*** QUOTE ***
Until February 2003, a user searching for a guide to the English city of Chester would have been presented with "Chester's guide to molesting young girls" as the second entry. After officials from Chester complained, Google removed the site.
*** END QUOTE ***
There does seem to be something amiss with Google's priorities when the complaints of Jews objecting to anti-Semitism carry less weight than those of "officials from Chester."
(Carol Muller helps compile Best of the Web Today. Thanks to Michael Segal, Raghu Desikan, Monty Krieger, Carl Sherer, Barak Moore, Jim Woolsey, Tom Linehan, Edward Schulze, F.J. Elia, Tim Hughes, Jon Sanders, Thomas Dillon, Jeffrey Spiegel, Charlie Gaylord, Doug Levene, Mara Gold, Brendan Schulman, Bruce MacMahon, Ashley Tate, Steve Ginnings, Lorne Gunter, Zabelle Huss, David Brotsky and David Stoughton. If you have a tip, write us at opinionjournal@wsj.com , and please include the URL.)
~~~~~~~
Today on OpinionJournal:
- Review & Outlook opinionjournal.com : The war in Iraq is winnable, but not by the U.N.
- Dorothy Rabinowitz opinionjournal.com : Americans are beginning to tire of the activist 9/11 widows.
- Brij Patnaik opinionjournal.com : A cousin of Rachel Corrie answers her critics.
- Richard Carwardine opinionjournal.com : A view of Abraham Lincoln through British eyes.
_____
ADVERTISEMENT
Whether you're moving up, relocating, seeking a new neighborhood or merely curious about your current home's market value, you'll find answers at RealEstateJournal.com, a free site from The Wall Street Journal. It offers a complete online guide to buying, selling and maintaining a residential property, and includes 1.5 million active home listings, as well as content from many top real-estate information providers. Please take a minute to visit RealEstateJournal.com today.
realestatejournal.com realestatejournal.com
_____
From time to time Dow Jones may send you e-mails with information about new features and special offers for selected Dow Jones products. If you do not wish to receive these emails in the future, you may visit opinionjournal.com. You can also unsubscribe at the same link. |
