US DISLOYAL APPEASERS

The latest Bush Administration effort to counter critics of its incompetence is to raise the specter of Hitler, fascism, and World War II. In a speech before the American Legion in Salt Lake City, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld implied that critics of the Administration’s War on Terror, or War on Islamic Fascism, or War on Whatever, were like the appeasers of the 1930s who allowed Germany and Japan to become powerful enough to threaten the free nations of the world, or Western Civilization to use a now politically incorrect term.

An obvious point is that being critical of the Administration’s incompetence is certainly not the same thing as wanting to appease our enemies. Indeed, much of the criticism of the Administration rises from the belief that it is not countering our enemies very successfully. Sure, there have been no attacks on the American homeland since 9/11. But that would have likely been the case whoever was in charge. Does anyone honestly believe that the massive buildup in homeland security would not have occurred but for George, Dick, Don, and company? The real long-term battle for our security is being fought beyond our borders, and many Administration critics think this battle could be fought smarter, more efficiently, and more effectively, in spades.

Mr. Rumsfeld appears to think of the Bush Administration as the Winston Churchill of the 21st Century. Well, equating George, Dick, and Don with the likes of Churchill, Franklin Roosevelt, and George C. Marshall is a bit of a stretch. Indeed, if the likes of George, Dick, and Don had been in charge six or seven decades ago, we might now be saluting the Rising Sun with extended arms.

A real cynic might argue that what George, Dick, and Don want to do at this point is to get by the next two years with their policies intact. Then they can hand the mess off to someone else. They must realize by now that Iraq will be chaos for some years to come, chaos for which their bad decisions and poor implementation will be largely responsible. But if they can just hold the lid for two more years, they will be able to say when the crash comes, “If only you’d stayed the course, as we were doing.”

DSH

SENATOR PHONY

Lost in the brouhaha about Virginia Senator George Allen’s labeling of a native born Virginian as a “macaca” (say what?) is that fact that George himself is most certainly not a native born Virginian. Indeed, Senator George might be considered something that was once abhorrent to real Virginians: a carpetbagger.

Senator George is prone to wax lyrical about such things as Virginia values and Jeffersonian principles. In his “macaca” speech, he went on to talk about showing the “macaca” the real Virginia. If by real Virginia, he meant what sounded like a crowd of boisterous, at least slightly bigoted rednecks, then he did so.

But us true Virginians like to think there is more to our state than boisterous, bigoted rednecks. And many of us true Virginians have marveled at how a cowboy-boot-wearing native of California—the birthplace of Senator George—has so completely adopted the trappings of a Virginian, and even more surprisingly been accepted as a Virginian by so many of our fellow citizens. It’s certainly nothing wrong with an individual pursuing a political career in a state other than his or her birthplace. But the individual should have the humility and decency to not oversell his or her connections to the adopted state.

Which brings to mind another politician who has successfully distanced himself from his birthplace and background. Born to an old New England family that has a palatial summer estate in Maine, educated at Phillips Academy in Andover, Massachusetts, and Yale, George W. Bush has a goodly proportion of the population believing he is your basic Texas oilman and cowboy. His image is much of his appeal. Many of his supporters would no more vote for an individual who identified himself or herself as being from New England as they would vote for a, well, “macaca.” Yet they have no problem with a New Englander who has developed a Texas accent, cuts brush on a Texas ranch, and cultivates an air of anti-intellectualism

Is it just a Republican phenomenon to be taken in by image? Probably not, but at the moment the leading image politicians, most notably Senator George and President George, happen to be Republican. Maybe it is the nature of the image: Good Ol’ Boy. A sizeable segment of the population thinks of themselves as Good Ol’ Boys or the Gals of Good Ol’ Boys. So when a politician adopts the pose of a Good Ol’ Boy, that segment is sufficiently flattered to overlook the silver spoon in close proximity to the alleged Good Ol’ Boy’s mouth.

DSH

GEORGE, DICK, AND DON OF ARABIA

Okay, so maybe none of the top policy makers who have given us the Iraq quagmire and caused our standing to plummet across the Muslim world had much knowledge of that world, particularly its history, culture, and religion. Maybe any pertinent courses they took in their long ago college careers glossed over the field. Maybe their highest level of academic accomplishment on the topic was the proverbial “Gentleman’s C.” Maybe their reading habits didn’t include such esoteric matter.

But didn’t someone at least see the movie Lawrence of Arabia?

The dominant, pervasive role that tribal and ethnic disputes played in the lives of the folk that poor naïve Lawrence was attempting to educate about nation-building certainly must have left some impression. Any viewer of that movie surely had to come away with the thought that maybe the Middle East and New England-style town hall meetings lacked compatibility.

But apparently not. How else does one explain the actions and rhetoric that have probably enlarged many times over the ranks of those who would do us harm? How else does one comprehend the crusade to bring “freedom” and “democracy” to a part of the world that has known practically nothing but authoritarianism during its recorded history?

So now we have a world wrought by George, Dick, and Don of Arabia. It is a world in which our enemies are more numerous than they were five years ago, in which our military is dangerously over-extended, and in which we are fed such pabulums as the insurgency is in its last throes, Hezbollah has been defeated, and we will achieve victory in Iraq. It is world that caters to the unthinking. It is a world in which anti-intellectualism has triumphed.

The only victory that George, Dick, and Don of Arabia have thus far achieved is over any intelligent, objective analysis of the world situation. They brought myopic ideology to the table. They have lowered the level of debate to little more than slogans and buzz words. They have reached for the lowest common denominator among the American people, and they have found it.

In just over two years, the nation will have new leadership. The challenge for that leadership, whether it be Democrat or Republican, will be to make critical thinking again respectable. The challenge will be to base policy and actions on facts and not narrow ideology. The challenge will be to refocus the nation from the lowest common denominator to a more thinking part of the electorate. The challenge will be to return America to its better self.

DSH

"MY GOODNESS!"

The Secretary of Defense interrogates himself:

“Have mistakes been made in Iraq?”
“Gee wiz, certainly. Mistakes are inevitable in everything.”

“Did things go according to plan?”
“Golly, no. Everyone knows that the plan goes out the window when the shooting starts.”

“Were more troops needed?”
“Gee willikers, I gave the generals what they asked for.”

“But weren’t the generals intimidated by me?”
“Golly gee, how could anyone be intimidated by such a nice guy?”

“Shouldn’t we have foreseen the breakdown of law and order?”
“Holy moly, you can’t foresee everything.”

“Why have the optimistic predictions not come to pass?”
“Gol darn, I never made such predictions.”

“But didn’t someone say this would be an easy war?”
“Stacey wacey, it certainly wasn’t me.”

“Did I approve torturing detainees?”
“Lucy wucy, certainly not.”

“But didn’t I imply that the normal rules didn’t apply?”
“Hunky dory, I only said that I stood at my desk all day.”

“Did the President ask me whether or not we should go to war?”
“Foosy woosy, no.”

“Did I advise the President on whether we should go to war?”
“Lacey dacey, he didn’t ask.”

“Am I the best Secretary of Defense ever?”
“Tory dory, probably not.”

“But am I in the top two or three?”
“Funky wunky, quite possibly.”

DSH