 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"Who know why / Five Israelis was filming the explosion / And cracking they sides at the notion? / Who knew the World Trade Center was gonna get bombed? / Who told 4,000 Israeli workers at the Twin Towers / To stay home that day? / Why did Sharon stay away?" Well, Baraka still has a position of honor (sort of): The City of Newark, obviously piqued at the state's "diss," named him poet laureate of the local public school system. No, I am not making this up. It's easy to laugh at this travesty, of course; any number of snorted remarks come to mind. But the ongoing degradation of communities like Newark is nothing to snicker over. The kids in that system — who must trust their elders and guides — are told to view Baraka as a model. None of us has a right to complain about the society we live in if we keep silent about outrages such as this. Don't you agree?
That answer is hard to improve on. The senator from Kentucky is, indeed, impressive, in myriad ways. I was reminded of this when I read of his legislation to protect fast-food joints and other restaurants from nuisance suits — suits that can have calamitous effects. Said McConnell, "You shouldn't be able to sue someone else because of your own eating habits." McConnell spoke of the need to stop "an absurd trend in litigation . . . before it gets started." Such thinking, and acting, is so commonsensical, it ought to be barely noticeable. But in our current climate, it is practically heroic. If I had to describe the greatness of McConnell in one sentence, it would probably be this: He understands the value of freedom. Simple — and remarkable — as that.
Not a modern politician, Bunning, and refreshing — in a way — for that.
So, when a handful of Democrats declined to attend a dog-and-pony show arranged by the organization, its president, Mfume, said, "If you could not find 90 minutes to come by to address the issues affecting our nation, then you have no legitimacy over the next nine months coming into our communities and expecting our vote. . . . In essence, you have become persona non grata, and your political capital is now the equivalent of Confederate dollars." Note how Communist this is, in tone and spirit: "persona non grata." Note the claim to speak for, and represent, all black Americans, as though there were no diversity of thought whatsoever among them. And how about that reference to the Confederacy! A sheer accident, right? Mfume might as well have thrown sheets over the truant candidates (who have since repented, of course, engaging in something like Maoist self-criticisms). The moderator of the Democratic forum of the NAACP was Julianne Malveaux, the opinion journalist, who said, "Anybody who can't come here, quite frankly, doesn't need to be running for president of the United States." Frankly, anybody who would submit to interrogation by Julianne Malveaux has no business running for president. She's the beaut who said of Clarence Thomas, "I hope his wife feeds him lots of eggs and butter, and he dies early like many black men do, of heart disease." When I discussed this with an NR mate yesterday, I dwelt on the particularity of "like many black men do." And he responded — quick as a flash — "But Julianne Malveaux doesn't regard Clarence Thomas as black, does she?" Brilliant. But it's almost too sad to be funny.
Myself, I'm pretty much out of the prognostication business. I'm frequently asked for my predictions, and I almost as frequently decline to give any. I was tempered by the election — and then the reelection — of Bill Clinton. I couldn't believe that the American people would opt for him over Bush until the eve of the '92 election. Then I was convinced that Clinton had been mainly an accident of the Perot candidacy (19 percent), and that he would be a one-termer. I'm in the strange position now of thinking that '04 could be nip-'n'-tuck, a la 2000, or a 49-state blowout, a la '72 and '84. I mean, my latitude is that great. At this point, I would be shocked by neither. But we'll talk more about this, surely, as that fateful November (not this coming one) approaches.
I of course paused over, and gagged at, that phrase "Stalinist excesses." As is well known, there was no horror in Lenin's time — and would be no horror post-Stalin! And can you imagine the phrase "Nazi excesses"? I thought not. And if Stalin had excesses, what else did he have — temperance? Sometime last year, I did an appreciation of Robert Conquest, the great scholar of the Soviet Union (and other things). In a talk with me, he said, "There's still an attitude on campus of, 'Don't let's be too rude to Stalin.'" I'm afraid that's true — and not only on campus.
I was so relieved to hear Wood say that. I mean, you'd expect, say, me to say it. But . . .
Yes.
"Off of? Where did I get the impression that you knew and valued good English?" Here's the answer: I'm an American, you see, and I talk like an American, and while I value good and textbook English, I also value natural, idiomatic American English, which I employ from time to time — indeed, most of the time. Especially in this breezy, slangy lil' web column. Okay, homie? So get off of my back! (Ah, that was a strain — but I tried.)
I couldn't for the life of me remember ever writing about Bob Dylan. So, intrigued, I did a search, and discovered that the man had read an interview conducted by me with the composer Ned Rorem — who did, indeed, rip Bob Dylan six ways to Sunday. In a mischievous mood, I wrote back — just slightly disingenuously — "Excuse me, sir, I don't know what you're talking about, having never written about Bob Dylan, to my knowledge. Do you perhaps have me confused with someone else?" And he sent me back the following note: "My apologies. It was someone you interviewed. The other day, a kid was throwing rocks at a turtle in a creek in my yard. I called out to him, 'Hey! Don't do that to that turtle!' He looked at me and then at the turtle, then back at me. 'That's my hat!' he said. I must be on a roll." I'll say! |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
<% dim printurl
printurl = Request.ServerVariables("URL")%>
ed
Kennedy has spoken, and, as you know, when he speaks, we listen. His latest
pearl for the Republic (whether penned by Bob Shrum or not, I can't say):
"The great tragedy would be American servicemen and women, risking
and losing their lives in Iraq based upon flawed, distorted, and failed
intelligence." Given how bad the English is, Kennedy must have done
this on his own, Shrumless. But you know how intense Bush-hatred must
be for Ted K. to be dripping tears for "American servicemen and women."
The Left is never so sympathetic to the Army stiff as when a Republican
can be bashed in the process.
As you may have read, Sen. Orrin Hatch — a great friend of Ted Kennedy,
by the way — is pushing an amendment to allow foreign-born citizens
to run for president. This is slightly dismaying, in that we may be in
danger of Gov. Jennifer Granholm, the "telegenic" Democrat from
Michigan. (Reporters are always saying "telegenic" because they're
scared to say "attractive.") The governor — governess?
— was born in Canada. On the bright side: We could have President
David Frum!
