Impromptus
By Jay Nordlinger, NR Managing Editor
August 02, 2004, 8:56 a.m.
A question for Kerry, “Osama bin Forgotten,” B&Bs, and more
nationalreview.com
A word about Kerry and Vietnam, if you can stand it. One of the most important moments in recent history occurred in April 1975, when Congress let Saigon fall. As you remember, over 50,000 Americans had just finished dying for the protection of that government, and the holding off of the Communist North. Yet we withheld all aid from the South, and it was engulfed. The rest of the story: boat people, murder, reeducation camps — the very familiar picture.
It would be interesting to ask John Kerry what he thinks about the fall of Saigon: whether he thinks, just fundamentally, it was a good thing or a bad thing. His four months in Vietnam are, for the moment, the most famous four months in all of history — more famous than Valley Forge, by far! Naturally, we hear a lot less about his slanderous campaign against American servicemen after he returned.
But the question of April 1975 is more than historical: We have liberated Iraq; we have expended blood and treasure; it is imperative, many of us think, to make that liberation stick — to see it through. Our achievements in Iraq are reversible; that fledgling government can be overwhelmed by the Baathists and terrorists, without American resolution. Would a President Kerry provide the necessary resolution?
Our Rick Brookhiser likes to say that, seeing as the War on Terror is another "long, twilight struggle," presidents both Republican and Democratic will surely be elected during that struggle — so it is important that Democrats be committed too. Is Kerry such a Democrat?
That is not a question I would care to have tested. But it would be interesting to hear his views on April 1975. Their relevance is obvious.
And remember, before I leave this subject: When President Reagan talked of the Vietnam War as "noble," Kerry objected that this was "revisionism" — and "dangerous" revisionism at that.
So, there's a clue.
Deborah Orin had an interesting piece in the New York Post, remarking that Israel was hardly mentioned at the Democratic convention. One delegate she spoke to wondered whether the top Dems were doing a "Michigan play" — for the Arab-American vote there.
I have a different theory: that the mass of delegates, rabidly anti-war, were also anti-Israel, in the manner of the Left today. Why antagonize them?
Just a thought.
Speaking of the New York Post, I commend to you Amir Taheri's dissection of the War on Terror portion of Kerry's acceptance speech. The bottom line: bad news for the Iraqis, bad news for us — bad news for just about everybody.
Over the last many columns, I have plaintively asked the Republicans, Why don't you make an ad about X? Or I have plaintively asked Bush, Why don't you give a little talk on X?
Well, I have another X: Sen. Bob Graham, the Florida Democrat, keeps quipping about "Osama bin Forgotten" — that's what the Qaeda chief is supposed to be, in the Bushies' minds: forgotten.
Why shouldn't Bush turn this against the Democrats? And say, "Forgotten? Forgotten? How dare they. He has been on our minds at every moment, and we have spared no effort to capture him and bring him to justice [or kill him, if you like]. And we will get him. But don't think for a second that the murderer of 3,000 Americans is ever off our minds."
Many months ago, I talked to a senior administration official about this charge — that Osama has "been forgotten." He said (and I paraphrase), "Even if you thought the worst of us — if you thought we were the lowest pols on earth — wouldn't you think we had the president's interest in mind? Wouldn't you know that, if on that basis alone, we were trying like hell?"
Liked very much an article in the Metro section of the New York Times; it had some cheek. Talking of the upcoming convention, it said, "Now that . . . [New Yorkers] are preparing to welcome an alien species known as the Republican party to Manhattan . . ."
Later in the article, the two authors — Michael Cooper and Michael Slackman — said, "Of course, New York has Le Bernardin and the new Time Warner Center restaurants like Per Se. Add rich Republicans, and the city has a potentially combustible mix."
Rich Republicans? That old stereotype? How come virtually all the rich people I know are Democrats (and left-wing ones at that)? Why is the average contribution to the Republicans persistently much lower than that to the Democrats (are Republicans just stingy — I doubt it)? And I would bet your booty that Republican delegates on the whole will prove less wealthy than the Democrats.
Anyhoo, still later in the article, Hillary Rodham Clinton was quoted as saying, "I hope that in New York that not only the visitors, the Republicans who come to the city, but New Yorkers will be out and around, eating out, and watching the Republicans walk by. We've never had so many Republicans in Manhattan, so I would urge all New Yorkers to come from everywhere, and enjoy the scene. They'll get to see a Republican. Maybe it's the first Republican they've ever seen in their lives."
I swear, it's the first time Hillary Clinton has ever said anything that made me smile — that made me like her a smidge.
I know, I know: A Republican has been mayor for three terms in a row. I make this point all the time. Please hold your fire.
More New York Times cheek, or whimsy: "The two men [Kerry and Edwards] will then meet up in St. Louis, appropriately enough, for a train ride to . . ."
Took me a second to get it. I like it, I like it! The New York Times is letting its hair down. Maybe they'll even relax a little about Augusta National.
I bring you good news: The marvelous Michael Walsh has won an American Book Award. He has won for his novel And All the Saints . . . . Michael is a music critic, a screenwriter, a political analyst, and about a hundred other things. Mainly, he's a damn good mind, and a damn good pen, and how nice to have that recognized.
In the current American Spectator, veteran journalist K. C. Grubbs Jr. has some wonderful reminiscences about Reagan. In the course of them, he mentions the old newspaper proprietor R. C. Hoiles, for whom he worked (in California). Grubbs provides the credo "that appeared every day on [Hoiles's] mastheads, later to be surrendered to political correctness . . .":
This newspaper is dedicated to furnishing readers with information so that they can enjoy the blessings of liberty. Liberty is a gift from God, not a political grant from government. It is neither license nor anarchy. It is self-control, no less and no more. It is thus consistent with the Golden Rule, the Ten Commandments, and the Declaration of Independence.
Wow! Wow again!
But that's just what the Times thinks, right?
A correction: Previously, I said that Senator Kerry had referred to Al Sharpton as the Democrats' "moral compass." He did not say "moral." What he said — according to UPI — was, "During the primaries, there was one person who consistently was always there, keeping the peace and the compass going in the right direction, and that was Al Sharpton." (June 18)
Would you like to glimpse some of my fan mail (I say this ironically)? I will print a letter unabridged and unedited. Its significance lies only in this: It comes from a woman at Turner Studios, down in Atlanta, part of that empire about which conservatives harbor dark thoughts. And why not?
Good Morning Mr. Nerdlinger,
you're frothing at the mouth and talking about nothing. Can't tell when you're exhibiting "humor" or plain ignorance. aren't the important issues the impending re-legalization of ak47's and uzi's, the terrible slap in the face to children and educators (killing head start and not funding NCLB), our ongoing vietnam-like war? I guess all of that pales in the face of make-it-or-break-it religious issues such as abortion (not even for victims of rape) and gay marriage (does it really affect YOU at all what they do behind closed doors?). I don't see how that's any different from the "Islamic fanatics" your RW [right-wing, I guess] press raves on about to up their ratings and whip their viewers/readers into a fear frenzy. Bush/Cheney certainly know the power of fear, as they use it so effectively upon their constituents.
Nice, huh? On to something nicer. You may recall that, in my Impromptus of last Monday, I published a letter from the proprietor of a bed-and-breakfast on Amelia Island, Fla.: the Ash Tree Inn. A couple had left his establishment because they had spotted National Review on the coffee table, and some conservative books on shelves. (And one of the best things about this couple — they were bookstore owners. Of course!)
Anyway, I got much mail concerning this, including a note from a couple who had decided to spend their wedding anniversary at Ash Tree.
But I also thought you'd like to see the letter below, against the whole phenomenon of bed-and-breakfasts, a prize specimen of crankiness and curmudgeonry (I say this approvingly). (By the way, don't miss the P.S. — it's the best.)
Mr. Nordlinger,
I feel compelled to say that anyone who isn't outraged by the thought of a decorated Army Ranger being incarcerated at a B&B facility is, well, downright un-American. [The original letter had cited an Army Ranger.] I've been to some of those insufferable hellholes under subtle but intense pressure from my wife. You carry your bags up a narrow hallway and into your room and there it is . . . that Victorian lamp on the undersized nightstand. The pedestal sink festooned with pastel-colored soaps the size of Junior Mints. The promise (threat?) of the little basket of scones and bran muffins outside your door in the morning . . . Aughhhhh!
But no more. No, sir! I'd rather wear an orange jumpsuit at Gitmo. At least the humiliation would be out there for the whole world to see. And tossing a few worthwhile publications on the coffee table reminds me of the old aphorism, "You just can't polish a turd." It's still a dreaded bed 'n' breakfast.
[NAME WITHHELD!]
[CITY WITHHELD!]
P.S. Please don't tell my wife about this
On being Republican in public:
Dear Jay:
On weekends I wear my Bush-Cheney T-shirt around Long Island. Yesterday I was in an upscale supermarket (a Fairway), and I was approached by an employee who complimented me on my boldness and heart in wearing such a T-shirt. He apparently alerted others because as I went through the store, employees would appear and give me a thumbs-up or tell me how glad they were Bush was up in the polls [this letter's a little old]. One told me he was on the catering crew for the Republican convention and that the Kerry people didn't know what they were doing passing out voter-registration forms to the people who worked in the store.
The patrons who noticed my shirt either glared at me or gave me puzzled looks. One fellow waiting for attention from the clerk who was talking to me about how brave I was looked extremely uncomfortable. I smiled at him and he nodded but then his wife dragged him away before he could speak.
The week before I was in a Borders bookstore and I was chatting with a fellow patron about Edith Wharton's novels, which we were both looking at on the shelf. When I turned around and he saw my shirt he literally gasped. He rapidly walked away.
A related letter:
True story: A friend was having lunch in a small restaurant not far from the Transamerica building [in San Francisco]. He was reading the Wall Street Journal. The restaurant's owner walked up to his table and asked, "Excuse me: Are you a Republican?" "As a matter of fact, yes, I am," my friend replied. The owner asked him to leave the restaurant.
In southern Marin County — where the median price of a house pushes 900 Gs — every third automobile sports an aggressive leftish sticker, mostly professing hatred of Bush and peacenikism. No proclamations from the other side are to be found on bumpers, T-shirts, front porches, etc.
I can take care of myself in violent confrontations, so I think nothing of reading my NR or Commentary in public venues. When it comes to bumper stickers, though, I've been strictly a marrano: I hide my true creed, or else my car will be vandalized. I'll remain a marrano when signing this note, or else my house may be vandalized and my livelihood may be imperiled.
These are interesting times but, living where I do, it's hard to be an optimist.
We were talking earlier about the vaunted rich Republicans:
Jay —
As I walked out of the subway at Union Square [in New York], I spotted a campaign button on a young woman's bag. It read, "Billionaires for Bush" above a Republican elephant with cash flowing out of the piggy-bank slot on its back. I thought, Does that mean Kerry's voting for Bush?
The True North NPR:
Good afternoon, Mr. Nordlinger,
This is truly detestable: I was driving home a few days ago, listening to As It Happens, a Canadian All Things Considered. They were interviewing some "expert" about the possibility that there is oil in Cuba. Anyway, the line that really got me was when he said that Cuba, in many ways, was "the conscience of the Western Hemisphere."
The interviewer made an agreeing grunt; I literally felt a bit nauseated. How on earth can anyone come to that conclusion?
Oh, by attending a school, reading a newspaper, a book . . .
Johnny the Wunderkind:
Dear Jay,
Thought you would appreciate this — what John Edwards wrote when he was eleven years old, on the subject, "Why I want to be a lawyer": "Probably the most important reason I want to be a defense attorney is that I would like to protect innocent people from blind justice the best I can."
Wonderful! I hope he has a greater appreciation of blind justice as an adult. But one thing I'm impressed by: that he said "most important reason . . . is that," not "because."
Some abortion politics:
Jay,
Recently here in the Kansas City area we had a pro-choice judge decide that the feds could not deport a woman who had illegally entered the U.S. from Mexico a number of years ago because she is pregnant. His wisdom was that he had to protect the fetus. I think this is an opportunity for the pro-abortion crowd to develop a new slogan: "You can abort 'em but you can't deport 'em."
Something cute from The Economist:
Jay, this is on page 51 of the July 24 issue. The subject is Josep Borrell, the president of the EU parliament: "Although he is a graduate of Stanford University in California, he is also a fierce critic of American foreign policy . . ."
"Although"?
Marvelous.
A reader points out a wonderful statement by Nicolas Sarkozy, the French finance minister: "We simply have to accept that those who want to work longer to earn more should be allowed to do it." Our reader comments, "D'oh!"
Last, you may recall that I criticized Tom Daschle for pitting Americans against Iraqis, trying to make voters envious and resentful of Iraqis, for their receipt of U.S. government largesse (this was in his convention speech — you have to've heard it):
Jay,
Regarding your Daschle comments in today's Impromptus, the senator has ads here in South Dakota where he says that it is time to put "America first." Who knew he had so much in common with Charles Lindbergh and Pat Buchanan?
Any port in a storm, any political line, when it's handy.
I'm tempted to say, "Stay classy, Impromptusites." But probably not all of you have seen Anchorman.
Anyway, see you. |
