From the WSJ Opinion Archives

by JAMES TARANTO
Thursday, May 11, 2006 3:05 P.M. EDT

Tal Afar Afield
Several readers had interesting elaborations on our item yesterday on a terrorist attack at Tal Afar, Iraq, which, as a Bloomberg report noted, is "a city that President George W. Bush has cited as an example of progress in fighting rebels in Iraq." Cliff May writes:

To win--in the eyes of the media--the insurgents don't have to take the city or the airport or the radio station. All they have to do is commit an act of random terrorism. They can count on the media directing outrage not at them but at President Bush. Bush--not they--is responsible for the carnage.

And reader Merv Benson:

The al Qaeda document you reported on described the media strategy as one in which al Qaeda bombs and the media blames the U.S. and Iraqi forces for not stopping it. Sure enough, that is exactly the spin that the Washington Post puts on the Tal Afar story. Shouldn't they at least acknowledge that they are following the enemy's script?

Just to be different, how about discussing the wickedness of fooling noncombatants into thinking they are getting bargain flour so that they can be murdered and be part of a story attacking people not responsible for their murder?

On a cheerier note, reader Robert Novak (no relation) writes: "If the enemy is now reduced to injuring and killing 'mostly' innocent women and children, how strong can they really be? And how long can it be before the Iraqis completely reject these terrorists?"

Howard Fineman's Nightmare
Politics is about to get ugly, Newsweek's Howard Fineman warns:

The conventional notion here is that Democrats want to "nationalize" the 2006 elections--dwelling on broad themes (that is, the failures of the Bush Administration)--while the Republicans will try to "localize" them as individual contests that have nothing to do with, ahem, the goings on in the capital.

That was before the GOP situation got so desperate. The way I read the recent moves of Karl Rove & Co., they are preparing to wage war the only way open to them: not by touting George Bush, Lord knows, but by waging a national campaign to paint a nightmarish picture of what a Democratic Congress would look like, and to portray that possibility, in turn, as prelude to the even more nightmarish scenario: the return of a Democrat (Hillary) to the White House.

Rather than defend Bush, Rove will seek to rally the Republicans' conservative grassroots by painting Democrats as the party of tax increases, gay marriage, secularism and military weakness. That's where the national message money is going to be spent.

This prompts an amusing observation from erstwhile blogger Steven Den Beste, in a letter to Power Line:

One of my favorite B movies from the early 1960's is "The Raven," . . . starring Vincent Price, Boris Karloff, and Peter Lorre. . . .

Lorre, Karloff, and Price play wizards, with Lorre being by far the weakest and least powerful of the three. At one point the three of them are eating together, and Lorre gets drunk and challenges Karloff to a magic duel.

Karloff's magic is so much more powerful than Lorre's that he is able to foil each of Lorre's attacks with just a simple gesture of his hands, leading Lorre to mutter those immortal words, "You're defending yourself, you coward!" . . .

I keep running into this from lefties. They criticize others (us), and if in turn they're criticized suddenly they squeal about "censorship!" and "McCarthyism!" Their freedom of speech demands that we not say anything in our own defense, let alone actually point out their problems.

And so it is here. Howard Fineman is deathly afraid that the Republicans will point out what the Democrats actually stand for. How dare those scheming Republicans actually defend themselves!

Though in Fineman's description, Republicans aren't defending themselves but "waging war" and "painting Democrats" in unflattering ways. How come, though, the Republicans are being negative and nasty, while Democrats are merely "dwelling on broad themes" when they talk of "the failures of the Bush Administration"?

Serial Mom
Just in time for Mother's Day, the science section of the New York Times has a piece on "coldhearted mothers" in the Animal Kingdom:

As much as we may like to believe that mother animals are designed to nurture and protect their young, to fight to the death, if need be, to keep their offspring alive, in fact, nature abounds with mothers that defy the standard maternal script in a raft of macabre ways. There are mothers that zestily eat their young and mothers that drink their young's blood. Mothers that pit one young against the other in a fight to the death and mothers that raise one set of their babies on the flesh of their siblings.

Among several mammals, including lions, mice and monkeys, females will either spontaneously abort their fetuses or abandon their newborns when times prove rocky or a new male swaggers into town.

Other mothers, like pandas, practice a postnatal form of family planning, giving birth to what may be thought of as an heir and a spare, and then, when the heir fares well, walking away from the spare with nary a fare-thee-well.

"Pandas frequently give birth to twins, but they virtually never raise two babies," said Scott Forbes, a professor of biology at the University of Winnipeg. "This is the dark side of pandas, that they have two and throw one away."

"Senator John McCain does not believe in a woman's right to control her own fertility," shouted Ann Snitow, a professor of literature and gender studies. "He has been opposed to Roe v. Wade for more than 20 years. He is a man who believes in female sexual slavery."

Actually, that last paragraph is from a different New York Times story. But it sort of fits, doesn't it?

Screamer Woos Thumpers
Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, gave an interview to Pat Robertson's Christian Broadcasting Network:

Dean said that "one of the misconceptions about the Democratic Party is that we're godless and that we don't have any values." . . .

"The truth is, we have an enormous amount in common with the Christian community, and particularly with the evangelical Christian community," Dean said. "And one of the biggest things that Democrats worry about is the materialism of our country, what's on television that our kids are seeing, and the lack of spirituality. And that's something we have in common." . . .

He said, "I'm a Democrat because of my values. My values include inclusiveness--they include not leaving more debt to our kids than we have ourselves. My values including wanting our values to drive our public policies. My values include not having kids going to bed hungry at night. Now those are values that I bet I share with the vast majority of evangelicals."

Our suspicion is that few evangelicals will be won over by Dean's talk of "values," but giving an interview like this is still a very smart thing to do. It helps dispel the idea that Democrats hate evangelical Christians.

Where would anyone get that idea? Well, check out this New York Times story on the kerfuffle over John McCain's commencement address at New York's New School:

[New School chief Bob Kerrey] said that he extended the invitation to Mr. McCain in January and that there had been nary a complaint until Mr. McCain came under criticism about his intentions to be the graduation speaker at Liberty University, headed by the Rev. Jerry Falwell.

Mr. McCain denounced Mr. Falwell and the religious broadcaster Pat Robertson as "agents of intolerance" in 2000, when he ran against George W. Bush for the Republican presidential nomination. This year, when asked about his appearance at Liberty, he compared it to his planned appearance at the New School.

"It didn't become a controversy until he agreed to go to Liberty," Mr. Kerrey said.

As far as we know, no one at Liberty has objected to McCain's speaking at the New School. It's pretty clear who the real agents of intolerance are.

Speaking Truth to Power
On her Puffington Host Web site, Arianna Huffington describes an encounter at a party with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice:

Here was my chance to ask her one of the many burning questions I have for her. So I ran through the options in my mind: When will our troops be coming home from Iraq? How real is the possibility of commando raids on Iran? Why is the president so intent on standing by Rumsfeld? [blah blah blah] . . .

But reality quickly dawned on me: Rice has no unguarded moments. She is so unrelentingly on message, caution is so hardwired into her DNA [yadda yadda] . . .

So after exchanging pleasantries, I decided to ask her the one question to which I honestly and truly had no idea what the answer would be:

"Who designed your dress?"

"Rene Lange," she replied. "And who designed yours?"

"Kira Craft. She's a young designer in Los Angeles."

We had found sartorial common ground.

Good to see Arianna hasn't lost sight of what's really important.

Oh Yeah, the Answers . . .
Yesterday we neglected to include a link to the answers for our presidential trivia quiz. Try this. Questions are here.

Several readers offered alternative answers to questions 3 and 9, which asked which one- and two-term president, respectively, served a different number of days from all others.

It seems that back when Inauguration Day was March 4, it was traditional to wait until March 5 when the 4th fell on a Sunday. This happened four times: in 1821 (Monroe), 1849 (Taylor), 1877 (Hayes) and 1917 (Wilson). Monroe and Wilson were already president when they were sworn in, so the delay had no effect on the number of terms they served. Taylor died in office and thus did not serve a full term.

Hayes, however, did serve a full term. He had been elected in a disputed election, and, as his biographer Ari Hoogenboom writes in "Rutherford B. Hayes: Warrior and President" (University Press of Kansas, 1995):

To avoid an interregnum in the crisis atmosphere of Washington, [President] Grant and Secretary of State Hamilton Fish persuaded Hayes to be privately sworn in at the White House on Saturday evening, 3 March, since the formal inauguration was scheduled for Monday, 5 March.

According to some of our readers, then, Hayes served one more day than other one-term presidents and Grant served one fewer day than other two-term presidents. Some also argue that James Polk, Taylor's predecessor, served one day more than other one-term presidents because of Taylor's late swearing in.

We couldn't find an authoritative source for settling the question, but here's what we think: The Constitution does stipulate (Article II, Section 1) that "before he enter on the execution of his office," the president shall take the oath of office. It does not say that taking the oath early, as Hayes did, makes one president before one's predecessor has ended his term. Thus Hayes, having taken the oath the previous day, became president on March 4 as scheduled.

Taylor, on the other hand, did not become president until March 5. But the Constitution is clear that the president "shall hold his office during the term of four years," not four years and a day--so that Polk's term ended March 4. Presumably the House speaker was technically the acting president during the Polk-Taylor interregnum.

It's Bush's Fault Anyway!
"Climate, Not Humans, Said to Have Killed Off Mammoths"--headline, Reuters, May 10

Ursidae Prius
"DNA Tests Confirm Bear Was a Hybrid"--headline, Associated Press, May 10

Who Shot Katrina in Ohio?
"Beagle Who Was Rescued After Katrina Shot in Ohio"--headline, Associated Press, May 10

Anti-Incumbent Mood
"Stunned Senators Hit the Road"--headline, CBC Sports Online, May 9

The Religious Right Strikes Again
"Devils on the Verge of Elimination"--headline, CBC Sports Online, May 10

All That Pork Is Hard to Digest
"Stevens Complaint Hits CNN's Johns"--headline, Roll Call, May 11

That's the Business News, Now for the Weather
"Fed Raises Rates Again, but Clouds Next Move"--headline, New York Times, May 11

Cruel and Unusual Punishment
"Band Manager Gets 4 Years in Fatal Club Fire"--headline, MSNBC.com, May 10

Why So Sad, Big Guy?
"Giant Human Smuggling Ring Broken Up"--headline, East Valley Tribune (Mesa, Ariz.), May 10

Hey, Get a Room!
"Development Will Target Well-to-Do Outdoor Lovers"--headline, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, May 11

Bottom Stories of the Day

Music School
Our item yesterday on Beth Anne Cox's suspension from school for singing a "threatening" song brought several emails from readers reminiscing about their schoolchild jingles. Shaun Jennings:

My friends and I actually came up with that song when we were in the 5th grade and sang it to our wonderful teacher at that time. Beth Anne got the words a bit wrong but it went like this:

On top of the schoolhouse, all covered in blood,
I shot my poor teacher with a .44 slug.
I went to his funeral, I went to his grave,
He still wasn't dead, so I threw a grenade.
I watched the explosion, but he still wasn't dead,
So I took a bazooka, and blew off his head.

That was done in 1984. And my teacher had a great sense of humor and all we got was a chuckle.

Chris Keating has a variant:

On top of Old Smokey, all covered with sand
I shot my teacher with a red rubber band.
I shot her with pleasure, I shot her with pride
I couldn't have missed her, she was 40 feet wide.
I went to her funeral, I went to her grave
The people threw flowers, I threw grenades.

A kid got caught last year for this version.

Reader Eric Johnson offers this:

Tra-la-la-boom-dee-ay
My teacher died today
We threw her in the bay
The sharks had lunch today

And this comes from Richard Palmisano:

I'm Chiquita Banana and I'm here to say,
Get rid of your teacher the easy way,
Put a banana peel on the floor
And watch your teacher slide right out the door

Meanwhile, the Norfolk Virginian-Pilot profiles a Portsmouth, Va., teacher named Daron Moore, who has some lyrics of his own:

Wearing a white shirt accented with a neatly knotted dark tie and a pen in his pocket, he looks scholarly.

Students are often caught off-guard when he breaks out into what he calls "the physics rap."

"Physics phun, ICN class No. 1, coming at you fast like a bullet from a gun. But don't run, cuz you gotta stand and face the challenge. Understand how Newton's laws keep the whole world in balance . . ."

Too bad spelling isn't also phun.

(Carol Muller helps compile Best of the Web Today. Thanks to Ed Holston, James Braun, Tim Graham, Steve Bartin, Paul Wood, Ed Lasky, Jim Orheim, Robert Paci, Michael Nunnelley, Mark Cordeniz, Edward Friedman, David Shapero, Charles Green, Alan Utter, Steve Mann, Lydia Conrad, Daniel Foty, Ross Groen, Marc Segan, Jeff Currin, Doug Mooney, Andy Phillips, Holly Williams, Bob O'Hara, Kevin Coughlin, Steve Mitchell, Rick Jordan, Matt Bradley, David Kuner, Stefan Sharkansky and Thomas Dillon. If you have a tip, write us at opinionjournal@wsj.com, and please include the URL.)

Today on OpinionJournal:

  • Katrina Firlik: An illegal alien has a brush with death--and gets up to work again.
  • Peggy Noonan: It may take a defeat in November for the GOP to unlearn the lessons of power.
  • Paul Mulshine: Newark, N.J., is a botched city on the cusp of a renaissance.
  • John Miller: Down the yellow brick road of overinterpretation.

Click to email this article EMAIL THIS Click to format this article for printing FORMAT FOR PRINTING
ARCHIVE