From the WSJ Opinion Archives
The
Rove Kerfuffle
Democrats have met the enemy, and it is Karl Rove. After standing behind Dick
Durbin's comparison of American troops to Nazis, Washington Dems are in a lather
about the White House deputy chief of staff's comments at a dinner last week.
Here's what Rove said (ellipses in original):
Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 and the attacks and prepared for war; liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers. In the wake of 9/11, conservatives believed it was time to unleash the might and power of the United States military against the Taliban; in the wake of 9/11, liberals believed it was time to . . . submit a petition. I am not joking. Submitting a petition is precisely what Moveon.org did. It was a petition imploring the powers that be" to "use moderation and restraint in responding to the . . . terrorist attacks against the United States."
I don't know about you, but moderation and restraint is not what I felt as I watched the Twin Towers crumble to the earth; a side of the Pentagon destroyed; and almost 3,000 of our fellow citizens perish in flames and rubble.
Moderation and restraint is not what I felt--and moderation and restraint is not what was called for. It was a moment to summon our national will--and to brandish steel.
MoveOn.org, Michael Moore and Howard Dean may not have agreed with this, but the American people did. Conservatives saw what happened to us on 9/11 and said: We will defeat our enemies. Liberals saw what happened to us and said: We must understand our enemies.
Rove's detractors offer two chief criticisms. The first is that Rove is overgeneralizing--that there are some liberals who are serious about the war. There is, for example, Sen. Joe Lieberman. Another example would be, um--hmmm . . . oh, did we mention Joe Lieberman? You see what we mean: This is a quibble.
The second criticism is that Rove is lumping together mainstream liberals with far-left nut-jobs like MoveOn.org, which did indeed start a petition, and Michael Moore, whose response on Sept. 12, 2001, was to lament that al Qaeda had attacked Democratic states instead of Republican ones.
Not for nothing did Andrew Sullivan famously warn on Sept. 16 that "the decadent Left in its enclaves on the coasts . . . may well mount what amounts to a fifth column." Yet elected Democrats by and large did not respond this way in the weeks after 9/11, as John Kerry recalled in an e-mail to supporters the other day:
That, of course, is what is most outrageous about Karl Rove's claim that President Bush's political opponents offered "therapy and understanding for our attackers." It isn't true. In the days after 9/11, there were no Democrats, no Republicans. We were all Americans, standing together. President Bush acknowledged that unity in a clear and compelling way at the time.
"One of the overlooked aspects of the war we are now fighting is the awakening it has spawned on the left," Sullivan wrote in The Wall Street Journal on Oct. 4, 2001:
In one atrocity, Osama bin Laden may have accomplished what a generation of conservative writers have failed to do: convince mainstream liberals of the illogic and nihilism of the powerful postmodern left. For the first time in a very long while, many liberals are reassessing--quietly for the most part--their alliance with the anti-American, anticapitalist forces they have long appeased, ignored or supported.
But the mainstream liberals proved far from steadfast, as Sullivan noted in a blog entry on March 13, 2002 (ellipsis in original):
THE ANTI-WAR DEMOCRATS: They're not exactly shouting from the rooftops. But they sure have their wetted fingers hoisted in the air. Janet Reno says in Florida that "I have trouble with a war that has no endgame and I have trouble with a war that generates so many concerns about individual liberties." Notice she doesn't say that the war has violated individual liberties, or that she believes that, but merely that there are "so many concerns" about it. Has there been any war in which such concerns have not been raised?
The Richmond Times-Dispatch also reports that "the former U.S. attorney general said she thinks the government would be hard-pressed to find a legal basis to prosecute many of the Taliban and al-Qaida prisoners being detained at Guantanamo Bay." Oh, let them go, then. Back to Sandy Berger and letting bin Laden escape from Sudan to Afghanistan. Do these people ever learn?
And then there's Senator John Kerry. As a Vietnam vet, he'll be the front man for those Democrats desperate to dispel the war atmosphere that could realign American politics away from dovish liberals for decades. Senator Hillary Clinton spelled out the formula in Boston at a Kerry fund-raiser: "John's leadership is critical to where we plan to go in this world. We need people of the stature and the experience of John Kerry . . . asking the hard questions. We are having the debate Congress is required to have--where to go, what to do."
Like most things Senator Clinton says, this is unobjectionable on its face. But its intent is clear. Some Democrats are simply uncomfortable about America having a strong and unapologetic role in the world. This isn't treason; it's weakness. And weakness in the dangerous world we face is an invitation for more terror. Be warned.
This is more or less the same as what Rove said last week--and Sullivan's observations
came barely six months after 9/11, before the Democrats did these among
many other things:
- Made MoveOn.org a center of their grass-roots political effort and a frequent
speaking venue for former and current Democratic officials, including Al Gore,
Robert Byrd and Harry Reid.
- Embraced Michael Moore, giving him an honored seat at the party convention
in Boston last July. When Moore's film "Fahrenheit 9/11"--surely
the crassest effort to politicize the attacks--had its Washington premiere,
many Democrats showed up, including the party's then-chairman, Terry McAuliffe,
and its then-Senate leader, Tom Daschle. "There might be half of the
Democratic Senate here," then-senator Bob Graham of Florida observed.
- Nominated for president a man who opportunistically opposed the liberation
of Iraq after having voted for it (or opportunistically voted for it before
opposing it, or both), and who cast a protest vote against funding the troops
in both Afghanistan and Iraq.
- Made a whole host of statements that reflect precisely the attitude Rove imputes to them--from Sen. Patty Murray's description of Osama bin Laden as a philanthropist who builds, among other things, "day care centers" to Sen. Dick Durbin's Nazi calumny. GayPatriot has a list.
It seems clear that the rupture between the "decadent left" and the mainstream of the Democratic Party was short-lived, and that the latter has largely made its peace with the former, whether out of conviction or out of base-assuaging political necessity. In any case, if Democrats and liberals don't like being portrayed as weak, let them show some strength. Whining about Rove's remarks is not an auspicious start.
What
Do You Mean 'We,' Mon Ami?
The New York Times' Thomas Friedman had a curious column the other day (ellipses
in original)
Lordy, it is fun poking fun at France. But wait . . . wait . . . what is that noise I hear coming from the U.S. Congress? Is that . . . is that members of the U.S. Congress--many of them Democrats--threatening to reject Cafta, the Central American Free Trade Agreement? Is that members of the U.S. Congress afraid to endorse a free-trade agreement, signed over a year ago, with El Salvador, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and the Dominican Republic? Mon Dieu! I am afraid it is. And for many of the same reasons France has resisted more integration: a protectionist fear of competition in a world without walls.
Yes, we are all Frenchmen now.
Shouldn't that read, "Democrats are all Frenchmen now?"
That
Boy Ain't Right, I Tell You What
You've heard of "South Park Conservatives," those who lean to the
right and enjoy the exuberantly obscene, and politically incorrect, Comedy Central
series. (Buy the book here.)
Matt Bai of the New York Times magazine is hoping there's a counterpart, "King
of the Hill Democrats."
Bai interviews Gov. Mike Easley of North Carolina, who is "is so obsessed with the show that he instructs his pollster to separate the state's voters into those who watch 'King of the Hill' and those who don't so he can find out whether his arguments on social and economic issues are making sense to the sitcom's fans." Easley has a whole theory of main character Hank Hill's political philosophy:
Easley told me that Hank would never support a budget like the one North Carolina's Senate recently passed, which would drop some 65,000 mostly elderly citizens from the Medicaid rolls; Hank, after all, has pitched in to support his own father, a brutish war veteran, and he would never condone a community's walking away from its ailing parents. Similarly, Hank may be a lover of the environment--he was furious when kids trashed the local campground--but he resents self-righteous environmentalists like the ones who forced Arlen to install those annoying low-flow toilets. Voters like Hank, if they had heard about it on the evening news, would have supported Easley's ''Clean Smokestacks'' law, which forced North Carolina's coal-powered electric plants to burn cleaner, but only because industry was a partner in the final bill, rather than its target.
We're pretty sure South Park conservatives don't sit around trying to figure out what Eric Cartman's position would be on tort reform or the Central American Free Trade Agreement. It's hard to avoid the conclusion that Democrats take cartoons far too seriously.
Girls
Gone Wild
Fundamentalist Muslim mythology has it that terrorist "martyrs" are
greeted in heaven by 72 virgins. With Palestinian Arabs increasingly making
use of female suicide bombers, we've often wondered what they get in heaven.
Now we have the answer, thanks to a report in London's Sunday Telegraph from
an Israeli prison:
One of the inmates, Ayat Allah Kamil, 20, from Kabatya, told me why she had wanted to become a martyr: "Because of my religion. I'm very religious. For the holy war [jihad] there's no difference between men and women shaid [martyrs]."
According to the Koran, male martyrs are welcomed to Paradise by 72 beautiful virgins. Ayat, as with many of the women she is incarcerated with, believes that a woman martyr "will be the chief of the 72 virgins, the fairest of the fair."
That is to say, the highest aspiration for a fundamentalist Palestinian girl is murder, suicide and prostitution. Has there ever been a more depraved culture?
Try
Across the Atlantic and up the Potomac
"Senator Seeks Route for England to Take Pentagon Post"--headline,
Congress Daily, June 23
Everyone's
a Critic
"Suspect Critical After Being Shot in Stolen Wrecker"--headline, Houston
Chronicle, June 24
What
Would 'N.Y. Times' Do Without Keller?
"Keller Says 'N.Y. Times' Must Look Beyond Its Urban, Liberal Base"--headline,
Editor & Publisher, June 26
Be
Thankful for Small Blessings
"An article on May 29 about the latest sex manuals from mainstream publishers
included a topic erroneously among the covered subjects. They do not include
bestiality."--correction, New York Times, June 26
Better
Fly if You're Traveling With Designs
"Amtrak Probes Break Designs"--headline, United Press International,
June 27
This
Just In--I
"Timing of Next Indonesian Tsunami a Mystery"--headline, Associated
Press, June 27
This
Just In--II
"The Internet Transforms Modern Life"--headline, CNN.com, June 24
Problem and Solution
"She Has Two Legs, but Wants Another"--headline, Washington Post, June 23
"Baby Born With 3 Legs"--headline, WKMG-TV Web site (Orlando, Fla.), June 22
Better,
Stronger, Faster?
Fifty-four-year-old Jesse Sullivan "accidentally touched live wires while
working as a utility lineman in Tennessee," reports Orlando's WKMG-TV.
"He suffered severe burns, causing him to lose his arms."
We can rebuild him, doctors said; we have the technology:
Sullivan is the first to try out the most sophisticated artificial arms ever designed.
Surgeons attached his arm nerves to healthy muscles in his chest.
"So now when Jess thinks, close hand, the impulse is picked up by a transmitter, and goes to his hand," doctor Todd Kuiken said. "He thinks, closes hand and it does." . . .
By the time it's perfected, the cost of manufacturing the bionic arm is expected to be about $6 million, according to the report.
Boy, a dollar doesn't go as far as it used to. Back in the day, $6 million was enough to buy an entire bionic man.
Legal
Foundations
The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last month heard oral arguments in a
case "over the application of civil rights laws to employers who set different
standards of grooming and appearance for women than for men," the San Francisco
Chronicle reports.
The plaintiff, Darlene Jespersen, was fired from her job as a casino barmaid for refusing "to comply with a new policy in 2000 that required female drink-servers to wear makeup--foundation, blush, mascara and lip color." The policy also prohibited male employees from wearing makeup:
Jespersen said wearing makeup made her feel degraded and hurt her credibility when dealing with unruly customers. Her suit seeks damages for lost pay, but her main goal, she told reporters Wednesday, is for women to be "taken professionally and seriously at their job without being considered an object."
The 11-judge Ninth Circuit panel "was obviously divided" over the case, the Chronicle reports. And that's hardly surprising, for this is an issue that affects the judiciary itself. As the Associated Press noted in a dispatch previewing the last day of the Supreme Court term, "expected [outside the courthouse] are nine women in judicial robes who call themselves 'Roe Rangers,' to bring attention to uncertainty about the court's makeup and abortion rights."
'Mantropy'
The Sunday Telegraph brings us this alarming report:
British men are being told to be alert to a condition that could "put them on the fast track to extinction." Symptoms of the "illness" that has been dubbed "mantropy" include a penchant for pedicures, fruit smoothies and small dogs.
American Maxim, one of the biggest-selling men's magazines in the world, has defined mantropy as "a silent killer which strikes men in the prime of life." The magazine has been urging American men to be macho rather than manicured and to indulge their passion for cars rather than clothes. . . .
Greg Gutfeld, the editor of the British edition of Maxim, said the campaign had been sparked by fashion images of hairless men. "It's that sort of thing which is driving normal men crazy," he said. "I personally think television and pubs are the best inoculation against this sort of thing."
It's
hard to indulge a passion for cars while living in Manhattan, but as you can
see from the nearby photo (click on thumbnail to view the whole thing), we're
doing our part to combat mantropy. We spent last Friday fishing and drinking
beer in Chesapeake Bay with a dozen guys, not a metrosexual among them. (Thanks
to Frank Nelowet, who shot the picture, and Jim Tauber, who organized the outing.)
Then, on Saturday, we attended The First Annual American Spectator Pig Roast and Bluegrass Festival at publisher Al Regnery's farm in the wilds of Virginia. We consumed lots of excellent meat and thus have plenty of energy to do work--which, as any physicist knows, is the opposite of mantropy.
(Carol Muller helps compile Best of the Web Today. Thanks to Mark Van Der Molen, Chris Hairel, Stuart Creque, Paul Dyak, Tim Graham, Mordecai Bobrowky, Allen O'Donnell, Chris Stetsko, Michael Zukerman, Larry O'Connor, Bob Roenigk, Clark Perkins, Joe Seely, Kurt Alden, Michael Segal, David Eike, Ruth Papazian, Tom Episcopio, John Robb, Rod Pennington, Andrew Robinson, Dan Rorabaugh, Rosanne Klass, Christopher Fountain, Al Heithaus, John Forsberg, Bill Williams, Dana Nottingham, Dan Shepherdson, Joshua Weiner, Joseph Dispenza, Brendan Schulman, Joe Browne, Evan Slatis, Tom Wolf, George Brown and Leonora LaMantia. If you have a tip, write us at opinionjournal@wsj.com, and please include the URL.)
Today on OpinionJournal:
- Review & Outlook: Zarqawi's bombs hit their target in Washington.
- John Fund: Failing to teach history is bad for democracy.
- Arthur Chrenkoff: A roundup of the past two weeks' good news from Iraq.
