The Weekly Standard, Volume 6, Number 17, January 15, 2001

42 Pages·1.5 MB·English

by  The Weekly Standard

Bye Now inkjet REV 5/2/01 2:40 PM Page 1
T ZZ
A A
H J
ALL TURNS WEST
B A
N AN
KE DI
BByyee
NNooww
JJAANNUUAARRYY 1155,, 22000011••$$33..9955
GGaallaa CClliinnttoonn
FFaarreewweellll IIssssuuee!!
Iss #17 / Jan 15 TOC/rev 4/24/01 4:28 PM Page 1
Contents
January 15, 2001 • Volume 6, Number 17
2 Scrapbook. . . . . . . . . . . . Sid’s pals, Bill’s polls, and more. 5 Correspondence. . . On Bush v. Gore, Exhibitionism, etc.
4 Casual. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Joseph Epstein, crooner. 7 Editorial. . . Competent Conservatives, Reactionary Liberals
Articles
10 What Clinton Did to the Left He tamed them, but their animal spirits may be returning.. . . . . . . . . . . . BYDAVIDFRUM
12 What Clinton Did to the Democrats Nothing good.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BYFREDBARNES
14 Ashcroft in the Crosshairs The Borking machine is trained on a new target.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BYMATTHEWREES
16 Nostradamus vs. Bush The president-elect’s critics make fools of themselves.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BYJOHNPODHORETZ
17 What Clinton Did to the Economy Surprisingly little harm.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BYIRWINM. STELZER
20 War Through Weakness Barak’s policies have increased the chances of conflict in the Middle East.. . . . . . . . BYTOMROSE
Features
22 Mr. Bush, Tear Down This Roadblock
Reopen Pennsylvania Avenue. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BYANDREWFERGUSON
25 The Clinton Legacy Abroad
His sins of omission leave us unprepared for the danger of the next decade.. . . . . . BYROBERTKAGAN
29 Women of the Clinton Scandals
Whatever happened to Paula, Gennifer, Monica, Connie, Sally, and so on? . . . . . . BYMATTLABASH
Cover: Thomas Fluharty
Books & Arts
33 All That Jazz Ken Burns in black and white. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BYDIANAWEST
36 The Poverty of Nations Is it bad culture or bad laws that keep some countries poor?. . . . . . . . . . . . . BYMICHAELNOVAK
38 Scenes of Clerical Life The life of a seventeenth-century bishop makes an improbably good book.. . . BYRUSSELLHITTINGER
41 Valley of the Dahls The misanthropic stories of Roald the Rotten. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BYBRIANMURRAY
44 Parody. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . On the death of George magazine.
William Kristol,Editor and Publisher Fred Barnes, Executive Editor
David Tell, Opinion Editor David Brooks, Andrew Ferguson, Senior Editors Richard Starr, Claudia Winkler, Managing Editors
J. Bottum, Books & Arts Editor Christopher Caldwell, Senior Writer Victorino Matus, David Skinner, Associate Editors
Tucker Carlson, Matt Labash, Matthew Rees, Staff Writers Kent Bain, Design Director Katherine Rybak Torres, Art Director
Jonathan V. Last, Reporter Jennifer Kabbany, Edmund Walsh, Editorial Assistants Jan Forbes, Production Manager
John J. DiIulio Jr., Joseph Epstein, David Frum, David Gelernter, Brit Hume,
Robert Kagan, Charles Krauthammer, P. J. O’Rourke, John Podhoretz, Irwin M. Stelzer, Contributing Editors
David H. Bass, Deputy Publisher Polly Coreth, Business Manager
Nicholas H.B. Swezey, Advertising & Marketing Manager John L. Mackall, Advertising Sales Manager Lauren Trotta Husted, Circulation Director
Doris Ridley, Carolyn Wimmer, Executive Assistants Tina Winston, Accounting
Ian Slatter, Special Projects Catherine Titus, Staff Assistant
THEWEEKLYSTANDARD(ISSN 1083-3013) is published weekly (except the last week in April, the second week in July, the first week in September, and the second week in January) by News America
Incorporated, 1211 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10036. Periodicals postage paid at New York, NY, and additional mailing offices. Postmaster: Send address changes to THEWEEKLYSTANDARD,
P.O. Box 96127, Washington, DC 20077-7767. For subscription customer service in the United States, call 1-800-274-7293. For new subscription orders, please call 1-800-283-2014. Subscribers:
Please send new subscription orders to THEWEEKLYSTANDARD, P.O. Box 96153, Washington, DC 20090-6153; changes of address to THEWEEKLYSTANDARD, P.O. Box 96127, Washington,
DC 20077-7767. Please include your latest magazine mailing label. Allow 3 to 5 weeks for arrival of first copy and address changes. Yearly subscriptions, $78.00. Canadian/foreign orders
require additional postage and must be paid in full prior to commencement of service. Canadian/foreign subscribers may call 1-850-682-7653 for subscription inquiries. Visa/MasterCard pay-
ment accepted. Cover price, $3.95. Back issues, $3.95 (includes postage and handling). Send manuscripts and letters to the editor to THEWEEKLYSTANDARD, 1150 17th Street, N.W., Suite 505, Washington, DC 20036-4617. Unsolicited
manuscripts must be accompanied by a stamped, self-addressed envelope. THEWEEKLYSTANDARDAdvertising Sales Office in Washington, DC, is 1-202-293-4900. Advertising Production: Call Ian Slatter 1-202-496-3354. Copyright
2000, News America Incorporated. All rights reserved. No material in THEWEEKLYSTANDARDmay be reprinted without permission of the copyright owner. THEWEEKLYSTANDARDis a trademark of News America Incorporated.
www.weeklystandard.com
Iss17/Jan 15 scrapperev 4/24/01 4:30 PM Page 2
Sid’s List
Arriving unbidden on THE SCRAP- Heraldmissive, THESCRAPBOOKseems magazine, an extremely non-partisan
BOOK’S desk last week—who also to have acquired a longish list of fellow, motivated only and always by
knows how many layers of forwarding folks through whom he likes to spread principle. Go figure.
removed from its original and his special brand of “information.” Go figure, too, the inclusion on Sid-
unknown recipient—was a most inter- The list surpasses self-parody. Its ney’s list of columnists John Judis,
esting copy of an e-mail recently sent first two names: Clinton-ophantic Michael Tomasky, and Robert Scheer.
by White House staff ideologist Sid- columnists Joe Conason and Gene And a couple of people at the online
ney Blumenthal. The actual message Lyons. Followed by, among others: magazine Salon. And Tom Oliphant of
in that e-mail is for present purposes Jane Mayer and Jeffrey Toobin at the the Boston Globe. And unsuccessful
inconsequential: It’s just a full-text New Yorker; Jill Abramson, Eleanor author David Brock. And so on, and so
copy of a late December Miami Herald Randolph, and Anthony Lewis at the on, and so on. None of these esteemed
story on the “undervote” in Florida’s New York Times; “Greta” at cnn.com; ladies and gentlemen would ever actu-
majority-black voting precincts. Harold Evans of U.S. News; and Sean ally take instructionfrom a Blumenthal
What’s truly interesting about the doc- Wilentz of Princeton and Todd Gitlin e-mail. Would they?
ument, instead, is something that a of NYU. One other question, come to think
quirk of Blumenthal’s office computer Speaking of academics, THESCRAP- of it: What official, government busi-
has revealed: the full roster of people BOOK is puzzled by the presence in ness could Sidney Blumenthal possi-
to whom the e-mail was addressed. such company of Cass Sunstein of the bly have been performing when he
The delightful result? Having inadver- University of Chicago, who is, as he wrote and mailed this thing while at
tently acquired Blumenthal’s Miami himself has recently written to this work in the White House? ♦
How Clinton Won
opinion numbers is already familiar: framed copy of the Washington Post
that he has used those numbers not to from the day Clinton was acquitted.
The best reporting on the Clinton decide what he thought, but to help And on this Postfront page, Bill Clin-
administration is appearing only him choose the words by which he ton has scrawled one word: “Thanks.”
as the president prepares to depart. would persuade other people to think But no thanks, THE SCRAPBOOK
For example, the morning of New it, too. Harris bends over backwards would add. ♦
Year’s Eve, the Washington Post’s lead to be fair to Clinton, and acknowl-
story was a superb review, by White edges that it’s “true” the president
House reporter John F. Harris, of the didn’t “always” do what Penn told The View from the
unprecedented extent to which the him to.
Faculty Club
Clinton presidency was dependent But Harris’s legwork leads him
upon public opinion polling. “No pre- unmistakably close to an entirely
vious president read public opinion opposite conclusion. According to For its Jan. 5 issue, the Chronicle of
surveys with the same hypnotic inten- unnamed “close associates” of Clin- Higher Education, industry newslet-
sity” as Clinton, Harris wrote. “And ton, he is a man “for whom polls fill ter of eggheadery, asked a number of
no predecessor has integrated his poll- important intellectual and emotional “scholars and writers” to predict how
ster so thoroughly into the policymak- needs.” Polls were “the essential future historians will view the Supreme
ing operation of his White House.” device” by which the president sur- Court’s recent election-deciding ruling.
That would be Mark J. Penn, who ran vived an often hostile Washington. The result, the Chronicle’s headline on
a private poll for Clinton “at least Polls were even, it seems, the essential this feature promised, was “9 Views on
once a week all through the second device by which the president sur- Bushv. Gore.”
term.” vived his impeachment ordeal. There must be a new, new, new
The president’s defensive explana- Hanging on the wall of Mark J. math now being taught in university-
tion for this obsession with public Penn’s office, Harris reports, is a land, because the “9 views” in ques-
2 / THEWEEKLYSTANDARD JANUARY15, 2001
Iss17/Jan 15 scrapperev 4/24/01 4:30 PM Page 3
Scrapbook
one in the Florida Supreme Court.
“I don’t think it was a violation of
principle by the U.S. Supreme Court.
It’s true they mainly support states’
rights, but I don’t think that’s a prin-
ciple that people can hold to on every
occasion. I think they would have
made a grave mistake and looked
quite foolish if they had held to the
right of the Florida Supreme Court to
abuse its discretion in this matter. It
would have been better if Florida had
been able to decide its own affairs
constitutionally, but states’ rights are
not an absolute—we live under a con-
stitution that also has a federal gov-
ernment. It’s good for Republicans
and conservatives to remember this.
But it’s not inconsistent or malicious
of them to resort to the final constitu-
tional power of the U.S. Supreme
Court.
“It was unfortunate that the
majority of the court had to go to the
equal-protection clause, which hasn’t
been applied in voting cases before
this and has potential for future
mischief if it comes to be supposed
that equal protection requires each
vote to have the same power. That
would run counter to our federal sys-
tem. But I think the five conservative
justices agreed to using the equal-pro-
tection clause in order to get two
tion, so far as THESCRAPBOOKcan tell, “This decision saved the country more votes, from Breyer and Souter,
actually add up to only two. One of from possible turmoil and a good deal and that was a reasonable and states-
them, beautifully expressed by the of further partisan confusion. In this manlike thing to do in the circum-
extremely non-partisan Cass Sunstein election, there seemed to be more stances.
of the University of Chicago (see partisanship after people voted than “The two parties were very much
“Sid’s List,” above), is that Bush v. before. I heard hardly anyone agree- themselves throughout. The Republi-
Gore will be judged “illegitimate, ing with the thesis of the person he cans stand for the rule of law, and the
undemocratic, and unprincipled.” Six didn’t vote for in the matter of the Democrats for the rule of the people.
other academics, plus Gore Vidal, Supreme Court. So I voted for Bush, And the Democrats, because they
reach pretty much the same conclu- and I very much supported the final stand for the rule of the people,
sion, while writing less well. decision made by the U.S. Supreme believe that rule should be para-
And then there’s a lonely, token Court. It very correctly overruled the mount, and that technicalities are
dissent by WEEKLY STANDARD friend Florida Supreme Court, which had subordinate to that will. Whereas the
and contributor Harvey C. Mansfield, gone much too far in the direction of Republicans believe in doing things
professor of government at Harvard judicial activism. And it took an properly or legally. It really was a
University. Which THE SCRAPBOOK activist majority in the U.S. Supreme contest of principle between two
likes so much it reprints now: Court to correct an even more activist parties.” ♦
JANUARY15, 2001 THEWEEKLYSTANDARD/ 3
Iss17/Jan15 casual 4/24/01 4:33 PM Page 1
Casual
Santa Monica”—“Roshashonna I
spend in Arizuna, / And Yom Kippa
way down in Mississippa”—is only one
S ( ) R line longer; and “Miss Emily
INGING SORT OF IN THE AIN
Brown”—that lovable, huggable girl
who’s coming to town—is precisely
sonnet-length. “Send in the Clowns,”
Stephen Sondheim’s one entirely
Ihave a friend who scored heavily “You’re the nimble tread of the feet of memorable song, took a bit more work,
early in life and became a venture Fred Astaire, / You’re an O’Neill dra- but was worth it.
capitalist. Over lunch one day he ma, you’re Whistler’s mama, / You’re Above all I’ve come to prefer the
entertained me by recounting the camembert”—my taste has run to sim- songs sung by my idols in this realm,
nutty projects that people brought to pler, more off-beat tunes. Among them Louis Armstrong, Jack Teagarden, and
him for financing: a geriatric dog food, have been “Ain’t Misbehavin’,” “I’m Fats Waller. All three could take the
an electric fountain pen, cell-phone Late, I’m Late,” “Fine Spring Morn- dopiest of lyrics and make them amus-
implants. I wish he were still capital ing,” “You’ve Come A Long Way from ing by ironically undercutting them
venturesome, for I have an item that St. Louis,” “Comment Allez Vous,” even while singing them. “My Very
needs a backer—not yet invented, true, “Stars Fell on Alabama,” “The Way Good Friend the Milkman” contains
but one I long for: a karaoke machine You Look Tonight,” and “Sweet and two lines that may be as wretched as
that you can take into the shower. Slow.” any ever written—“Then there’s a very
The Sharper Image, Hammacher I began with mnemonically more friendly fellow, who brings me all the
Schlemmer, Brookstone, and other difficult songs. One of the first was latest real estate news, / And every day
consumer old-boy-costly-goofy- he sends me blueprints of cottages with
toy catalogs sell radios you can country views”—and yet Fats Waller,
take into the shower, but thus even while mocking them, is able to
far no waterproof karaoke ma- make them charming.
chines. Pity. I can so easily see I often use one or another of these
myself, shampoo in hair, soap on songs in the morning as a mental calis-
bristly cheeks—I am among the thenic—“cloak and suiters by the
small but happy minority who oodles, say it to their cute French
have learned the art of shaving in poodles”—a way to ease my little
the shower—microphone in hand, grey cells into the day. But they have
belting out “I’ve Got A Right to other uses. “I’m stepping out, my
Sing the Blues” or “I Guess I’ll Get dear, to breathe an atmosphere that
the Papers and Go Home” or “Mack simply reeks with class” is especially
the Knife.” Oh, Bobby Darin, thou useful to have in mind when step-
shouldst be alive not at this but at that ping out into an atmosphere—an
hour! academic conference, say—that
Older generations of literary men Darren Gygi doesn’t. Sometimes the sheer throw-
and women have had yards of poetry away cleverness sends me: “I’m a
by memory. I envy people who can supper-club fanatic, / thunderstorm
keep the vocabularies of four or five Noel Coward’s “Mad Dogs electrostatic, / from three points I’m
languages in their heads. I have had and Englishmen,” which I love for its automatic, / I’m your guy.” Yo.
only bits of popular songs boppin’ intricacy. I later memorized his Donald Tovey, the great English
around in mine. But of late I have tak- “Regency Rakes”—“Complacency music critic, once claimed that he had
en to memorizing entire songs. I do so never forsakes / roistering Regency enough music by heart to play at his
partly as a stay against the inevitable rakes”—which shows the clear line, at piano for seven, possibly eight weeks. I
loss of those little grey cells that Her- least in this strain, between Coward now have enough song lyrics memo-
cule Poirot so often refers to, and partly and W.S. Gilbert. But these songs need rized to last, maybe, twenty minutes. A
for the sheer pleasure of singing them fairly frequent rehearsal, lest whole waterproof karaoke machine, I feel,
to myself, on long walks but more chunks of them slip from my mind, would encourage me to expand my
often in the shower. which they inevitably do. repertoire greatly. To own such a
I’d like to be able to report that I’ve I do better with shorter songs. And machine would be heaven. Or, as in the
just about mastered the Gershwin it came as a surprise to learn how short old joke about Nikita Khrushchev
song-book; or committed all of Cole some songs are. “The Way You Look making love to Marilyn Monroe, heav-
Porter and Rodgers & Hart to memory. Tonight”—“Keep that breathless en for me, hell for my neighbors.
But aside from Porter’s “You’re the charm,” etc.—is two lines shorter than
Top,” which I do have by memory— a sonnet; Tom Lehrer’s “Hanukkah in JOSEPHEPSTEIN
4 / THEWEEKLYSTANDARD JANUARY15, 2001
Iss17/Jan 15 letters 4/24/01 4:29 PM Page 1
Correspppondence
LASTWORDONTHECOURT for which Bush v. Gore furnishes prece- ethical sanctions), express only the self-
dential authority vindicates the preroga- righteous outrage of frustrated agendists.
IN “EQUAL PROTECTION RUN AMOK,” tives of state legislatures much more than It is most refreshing to see the left’s
John J. DiIulio Jr. expresses unfounded it overbears those of state judiciaries. long-standing and heretofore successful
trepidation about the long-term effects of In addition, the per curiam volubly anti-ethic, “The benefit of our expedien-
the U.S. Supreme Court’s Bush v. Gore signals this is a unique and singular case, cies for us, the detriment of your princi-
decision (Dec. 25). For several reasons, by no means to be applied to any except ples for you,” give way to a level-field
Bushv. Goredoes not substantially threat- virtually identical, therefore exceedingly contest based on reciprocity, or, in other
en federalism. Tod Lindberg’s preceding rare, situations presenting facts identical words, a goose-and-gander rule restored
article, “Al Gore’s Legal Doomsday to its own—to be “limited to its facts,” in at last.
Machine,” strikes nearer the determina- legal parlance. JOHNG. LANKFORD
tive point of the U.S. Supreme Court’s But the less legalistic, more political San Pedro Town, Belize
decision: The process fiddled and fum- point is strategic, gratifying to propo-
bled until time ran out. nents of pluralistic democracy, and
The decisive holding that time had appealingly consistent with the Bush IAGREEWITHJohn J. DiIulio Jr.’s and
expired on December 12 was grounded in campaign’s postelection posture. Justice Michael Greve’s assertion that the U.S.
an emphasis on the significance of the Ginsburg’s paeans to deference to state Supreme Court’s reliance on Equal Pro-
Florida legislature’s having chosen to courts were blatantly outcome-oriented, tection grounds for their per curiam
take advantage of the “safe harbor” provi- opinion was improper and very worri-
sions of Title 3 U.S. Code Section 5. That some going forward (“Equal Protection
section exempts from U.S. congressional Run Amok,” “The RealDivision in the
challenges those presidential electors Court,”Dec. 25). And this undermines
identified through a legally instituted Nelson Lund’s otherwise welcome sug-
state electoral process by the prescribed gestion that a majority of the U.S.
deadline. The Florida electoral scheme’s Supreme Court has now found the
involvement with that federal statute fur- courage to do what the Constitution
nished one of two federal-law grounds commands even when its decision will be
supporting the U.S. Supreme Court’s met by derision in circles of fashionable
jurisdiction, the other being equal protec- opinion (“An Act of Courage,” Dec. 25).
tion of law. Had Justices O’Connor and Kennedy
The per curiam opinion joined by five been willing to sign the Article II por-
justices—the only component of the legal tions of the chief justice’s opinion, there
literature handed down that will be bind- would have been no good reason to con-
ing legal authority—acknowledges the sider the equal protection claim raised by
U.S. Constitution’s literal language desig- the Bush team. It is easy to see why
nating state legislatures, as distinguished O’Connor and Kennedy couldn’t bring
from entire tripartite state governments, themselves to do so. It would have
arbiters of the conduct of state elections, required them (a) to admit that such a
including federal and particularly presi- thing as judicial activism does in fact
dential elections. It nevertheless leaves as she is hardly so disposed where that exist and (b) to do so in reference to a
state courts room to interpret legislation principle does not suit her views of indi- constitutional provision that expressly
and even fashion remedies to correct per- vidual civil liberties, as in abortion cases. confers power on a state legislature,
ceived omissions in legislation, but Her stance is consistent with a long- seemingly in derogation of the courts.
recites that they must, when they do so, standing leftist contention that conserva- The close call was between invoking
conform to the equal protection, one-per- tives are obliged to adhere to their advo- the U.S. Supreme Court’s “political ques-
son, one-vote norms imposed by the U.S. cated standards of consistency of princi- tion” doctrine and beginning the process
Constitution. Neither state legislatures ple, whereas liberals, who deem their own of revitalizing our tattered republican
nor state judiciaries can waive or erode vindication the highest good and so advo- institutions—as Robert Nagel’s “From
those norms. cate situational expediency in the interest U.S.v. Nixonto Bushv. Gore” (Dec. 25)
Seven justices agreed that the Florida of prevailing, are entitled to wide doctri- suggests—or deciding the case on its
Supreme Court had defaulted that duty, nal latitude. merits. It is reasonable to argue that the
but only five of those considered the Ginsburg’s snippy omission of an greater civics lesson would have been for
deadline parameter sufficiently impor- expression of respect for the Court she the Florida legislature and Congress to
tant to declare that time to correct the sits on in concluding her dissent, and correct the errors of the Florida Supreme
equal protection problem had run out. Justice John Paul Stevens’s bitter denun- Court than for the U.S. Supreme Court to
The others would have dismissed the leg- ciation bordering on impeachable act as it did. It is also reasonable to argue
islature’s selection of the “safe harbor” malfeasance (a lawyer who said the same that the Florida Supreme Court’s error
for its electors as trivial. In sum, the point of the Court would clearly be subject to was a specifically judicial error, one of
JANUARY15, 2001 THEWEEKLYSTANDARD/ 5
Iss17/Jan 15 letters 4/24/01 4:29 PM Page 2
Correspppondence
judges improperly interpreting a legal SCHNITZEL WESTERNS the litany of NEA controversies (Map-
text, which is susceptible of appellate plethorpe, Serrano, Finley, et al). Exhibi-
review. Either decision is wiser, more IHADCHILLSrun down my spine while tionism contains criticism for those on
reasoned, and more reasonable than any reading Ben Novak’s “Cowboys und both sides of the art wars who have
of the Florida Supreme Court’s three Indians” (Dec. 25), as it took me back to fanned the flames of controversy instead
decisions. the early 1940s when this then 10-year- of engaging in a serious discussion about
NATHANIELT. TRELEASE old devoured at least 40 of Karl May’s 70- what ails our art institutions.
Cheyenne, WY plus Gesammelte Werke. Novak is right in I’ll spare your readers a full review of
asserting that Einstein and Schweitzer Hildebrand’s factual errors, which
were hardly alone in their appreciation of include her confusion of the NEA’s advi-
PLEASETHANKMICHAELGREVEfor his Karl May—and it did not end with Her- sory council with its peer panels and her
analysis of the Supreme Court’s deci- mann Hesse and Zuckmayer. repeated reference to 1966, rather than
sion. As an attorney who has studied the My generation grew up with Old 1967, as the year when the endowment
decisions issued by the Court, I appreci- Shatterhand and Kara Ben Nemsi in the inaugurated its grant program for visual
ate Greve’s careful analysis and his will- midst of World War II (in Berlin, in my artists. Suffice it to say that Hildebrand’s
ingness to criticize the majority’s amor- case). Somehow two of these volumes, review describes neither the content nor
phous equal protection argument. Winnetou I and Kapitan Kaimanare, are the tone of Exhibitionismwith any reason-
BILLPEPER still in my possession. Novak didn’t men- able degree of accuracy.
Warren, MI tion Winnetou’s sister, Nscho-tschi. I LYNNEMUNSON
wonder how many young readers fell in Boston, MA
love with her, as I did.
JOHN J. DIIULIO JR., protesting the Thanks for the memories.
Supreme Court’s Bushv. Goredecision, GEBSOMMER MARGARET HILDEBRAND RESPONDS:
seemed to miss an important point. The Lexington, SC Munson is right that the NEA’s first
Court was not replacing the authority of visual arts grants were awarded in
Congress to deal with the Florida mess— 1967—but Exhibitionism studies the
it was pointing out that the Congress had DON’T GET ME WRONG process by which the first grantees were
already done so with previous laws. The chosen, which took place in 1966. My
Constitution itself had already decreed THOUGH MARGARET HILDEBRAND review devotes most attention to the
that the state legislature, not the state found more than a few kind words NEA, because, as Munson herself puts it,
court, should decide on the selection of to say about my new book, Exhibitionism: the NEA “epitomized” the problems in
electors. And federal statute had already Art in an Era of Intolerance, much of her the arts. The NEA essay is also her most
decreed that the state legislature’s rules review is misleading and mistaken interesting. On another note, my review
for doing so could not be changed after (“Liberal Arts,” Dec. 25). Hildebrand cites Munson’s statement that block-
the election, not even by the state courts. ascribes to me opinions that I do not buster museum shows “do serve a civic
Constitutional law and federal statute hold and even some that I have chal- need—they bring high-quality art to
were seemingly being ignored in Florida. lenged publicly, such as the offensive and masses of people.” Apparently, she
George W. Bush asked the highest feder- absurdist notion that not everyone is believes I ascribe the statement to
al court to decide whether or not this was capable of appreciating high art. In my Exhibitionism. I do not. It’s from a 1999
actually the case. The Supreme Court book the only praise I find for block- article in The Occasional. I cited it
said it was, and ordered a stop to the law- buster exhibitions is that their “atten- because it shows she was not always as
breaking in Florida. Everyone from dance figures undermine the [decon- disparaging of average viewers as she is
gigantic corporations to schnooks sitting structionist] claim that great art is inca- in Exhibitionism.
in some alleyway knows that when some pable of speaking to everyone.”
law, written to protect your rights, is In Exhibitionism I look at how post- • • •
being ignored or abused, you have a right modern ideas have undermined our art
to go to court to seek redress. Why was it institutions, including museums, gal- THEWEEKLYSTANDARD
illegitimate for Bush to do so? Why was it leries, art schools, college art history welcomes letters to the editor.
Letters will be edited for length and
illegitimate for the Supreme Court to do departments, and the National Endow-
clarity and must include the writer’s name,
what every other court in the land does? ment for the Arts. But Hildebrand
address, and phone number.
It’s bad enough to hear liberals repeat- leapfrogs over much of the book, spend-
All letters should be addressed:
ing this tiresome cant. But a few too ing all but a few sentences of her review
Correspondence Editor
many conservative voices are joining the focusing on the less than one third of THEWEEKLYSTANDARD
chorus, too. Let’s all just say it together: Exhibitionismthat deals with the NEA. It 1150 17th St., NW, Suite 505
Courts are supposedto make legal rulings. is also disconcerting that, in discussing Washington, DC 20036.
Case closed. the endowment, Hildebrand goes on at
J.L. SCHALLERT length about what, in Exhibitionism, I You may also fax letters: [phone]
Cambridge, WI tried scrupulously to avoid—rehashing or e-mail: [email protected].
6 / THEWEEKLYSTANDARD JANUARY15, 2001
Iss. 17 / Jan. 15 editorial 4/24/01 4:28 PM Page 1
EDITORIAL
Competent Conservatives,
Reactionary Liberals
We seem to be entering a period of competent con- mously helpful to George Bush. Young people from the
servatism and reactionary liberalism. George W. ideological wing of the party, like Energy czar Spence
Bush has put together a cabinet long on manage- Abraham and Labor nominee Linda Chavez, gained
ment experience and practical skills. But liberal commen- administrative experience under Reagan and BushI. They
tators and activists, their imaginations aflame, seem to be are much smoother operators than their philosophical pre-
caught in a time warp, back in the days when Norman decessors. Meanwhile, the old pragmatists have been Rea-
Lear still had hair. They are depicting John Aschroft as if ganized. Ford hands like Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney,
he were George Wallace, Interior nominee Gale Norton as and maybe even Paul O’Neill—who must have learned
if she were the second coming of James Watt, and Labor something at all those American Enterprise Institute
nominee Linda Chavez as if she were Phyllis Schlafly with retreats—have developed conservative convictions to go
slightly darker skin. We could be in for a series of con- with their lifelong conservative instincts.
frontations in which the two parties don’t just hold differ- In short, the Republican elite has evolved over the
ent views, but live in different centuries. years, and the Bush administration reflects that. Corporate
Bush really has been able to mold an administration in America now includes many more minorities; so does the
his own image. He is our first president with an MBA, and Bush cabinet. Conservatism has evolved since Newt Gin-
it’s clear that he brings an MBA mentality to the job. grich and is now less strident, less libertarian, and less
There are almost no academics at the top of this adminis- ambitious; the Bush cabinet reflects that too.
tration, but there are plenty of administrators, reflecting a So it’s all the more amazing that over in the land of the
Bush belief that intellectuals are people you can hire; exec- lefties—among the activists and the pundits—you find a
utives are people you can trust. Like Bush, this is a conser- set of prejudices that have been preserved in amber for
vative administration, but it is not doctrinaire. It has a three decades or more. For Jesse Jackson, it will always be
chief of staff who supported Hillary Clinton’s health care Selma. For Anthony Lewis at the New York Times, it will
plan, a Treasury secretary who supported higher gas taxes always be the ACLU against the forces of McCarthyism.
and spurned the supply siders, and a secretary of state who For abortion lobbyist Kate Michelman, it will always be
opposed rolling back Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait. These 1973. They really do see a world populated by the stock
are not orthodox conservative positions. characters of a decades-old morality play.
But Bush has been able to achieve something neither As Bush announced his cabinet picks, different groups
his father nor even Ronald Reagan was able to achieve. He within the liberal coalition went into well-rehearsed hys-
has put together a governing conservative team. He and terics. The tactics, the mau-mauing, the apocalyptic warn-
Dick Cheney have skillfully pleased every clique in the ings are all drawn straight from the 1960s, as if we haven’t
GOP class, from the horse country Range Rover drivers all heard the same ear-piercing cries thousands of times
who can visit Christie Todd Whitman over at the EPA already. John Ashcroft is a racist! Linda Chavez is an ene-
(Motto: “Making America’s Wilderness Safe for Steeple- my of the working class! Gale Norton once worked with
chase”) to the pro-life truckers who can park their rigs and James Watt! Civilization is in danger! Send your donations
visit Tommy Thompson at HHS. today! All that is missing is for the liberals to roll out Ted-
He has also mended an old rift. During the Reagan and dy Kennedy to reprise his Robert Bork speech as the
Bush years, conservative ideologues battled with Republi- grande finale.
can pragmatists. The ideologues had great ideas and no The performances say very little about the nominees,
clue as to how to game the Washington power structure. but they say a lot about the Democratic party. Al Gore ran
The pragmatists were great at playing the system, while on the theme of the People against the Powerful. If that
lacking principles to guide them. But something has hap- was a message that really had resonance with Democrats,
pened to the GOP over the past decade that has been enor- then they’d be attacking the Bush team for all the comfort-
JANUARY15, 2001 THEWEEKLYSTANDARD/ 7
Iss. 17 / Jan. 15 editorial 4/24/01 4:28 PM Page 2
able corporate fat cats who dominate it. But at heart, that is They know that Ashcroft voted to confirm almost every
not what the liberal coalition is about. The Democratic black judicial nominee sent up by the Clinton administra-
party is as corporate as the GOP, and liberal donors live in tion. They know that John Ashcroft didn’t defend racial
posh suburbs like Princeton and Palo Alto. Among voters profiling, as some of the more enthusiastic liberal pundits
who describe themselves as members of the upper class, Al are alleging; he convened hearings to expose racial profil-
Gore won easily. ing. Those senators will be able to easily verify that the
What the Democratic party is about, as revealed by the same sorts of smears against Linda Chavez are untrue as
screaming of the past few weeks, is two things: affirmative well.
action and abortion. Comfortable corporate nominees Aschroft, Chavez, and company will probably be con-
breeze through the confirmation process. But oppose affir- firmed because, unlike the activist and pundit wings of
mative action or legal abortion and you’d better be ready to their party, most Democratic senators are not living in the
have your character assassinated. John Ashcroft and Linda past. The larger and more interesting question is how long
Chavez are going to bear the brunt of the calumny this sea- they will tolerate the archaic tactics and mindsets of those
son. who possess the loudest voices. Surely modern Democratic
It’s probably not going to work. Because not everyone politicians were horrified by the NAACP’s election season
is living in the past. Democratic senators know John James Byrd television ad, which practically accused
Ashcroft. They know he isn’t a stock southern sheriff from George W. Bush of murder and which fit the dictionary
a Hollywood movie. Paul Wellstone is one of the most lib- definition of race baiting. Surely they are embarrassed
eral members of the Senate. On Christmas Eve he went on every time Jesse Jackson starts accusing people of Nazi tac-
CNN and declared, “The ultimate decision is: Is this tics. Surely they groan at every one of Kate Michelman’s
somebody who is qualified? Is this somebody who you fits of fake rage. Surely they know that all this hyperventi-
believe is ethical and will work hard? And I think John, lating threatens to undo one of Bill Clinton’s unquestioned
you know, can pass that test.” Ashcroft has had similar accomplishments. Clinton modernized the image of the
support from Democrats ranging from Russell Feingold to Democratic party so that it appealed to mainstream Ameri-
Dianne Feinstein to Robert Torricelli. cans. But parts of the party are in the process of rejecting
The Democratic senators know that most of the the implant. The question is when modern Democrats are
charges against Ashcroft are untrue. He didn’t oppose the finally going to speak out against the race baiting and the
confirmation of Judge Ronnie White because he was black, slander. The confirmation hearings would be a useful place
but because in a few amazing decisions, White seemed to start.
unwilling to defend the rights of the victims of crime. —David Brooks, for the Editors
ez
mir
a
R
el
a
h
Mic
8 / THEWEEKLYSTANDARD JANUARY15, 2001
Iss. 17/Jan. 15 log 4/24/01 4:29 PM Page 2
stood by its man with the devotion
What Clinton Did
of so many Chicago aldermen. Clin-
ton plucked his renomination with-
out opposition, almost without criti-
to the Left
cism, and held the Democratic party
and its sympathizers in the press vir-
tually unanimously behind him
through the deadliest political storm
He tamed them—but their animal spirits may be
since Watergate.
returning. BY DAVID FRUM Now obviously liberals gained
things from the Clinton presidency:
an unyielding defense of abortion
“Naderites comfort themselves with the notion that Al Gore will win anyway and that a
and racial preferences, an expansion
Green Party vote will push him to the left. And here is where they make their biggest
of some social welfare provisions,
error of all. For how did Clinton and his administration come by their achievements? By
and a grand new health care under-
the skin of their teeth. Clinton never won 50 percent of the popular vote and was always
taking—the Children’s Health
politically vulnerable because of it .”
Insurance Program (or CHIP),
—Paul Berman, The New Republic, Sept. 18, 2000.
which encourages states to offer
“Let’s pretend it’s the day after the election, and the votes are in. Bush got 49 percent, Medicaid to all under-18s—that may
Gore got 46 percent, and Nader hit the 5-percent jackpot (not gonna happen). Do you someday mature into the large
really believe the Democrats are going to smack their foreheads and say, ‘Oh, my God,
domestic program that otherwise
let’s move to the left and snap up that 5 percent!’ Don’t be an idiot. The Dems will look at
eluded Clinton. On the whole,
the numbers and say, ‘Let’s move to the right and try to peel some of that 49 percent off
though, Clinton was to liberalism
Bush.’ If Gore loses the election by less than the percentage Ralph picks up, we’ll all be
what Nixon was to conservatism: a
watching the Dems run right, not left.”
leader who demanded much from
—Dan Savage, The Stranger, Oct. 19, 2000.
his supporters and delivered little.
Ralph Nader is “under the naive impression that [a Bush victory] will heighten social Like Nixon, Clinton was able to
contradictions and lead to what he has called ‘a progressive convulsion’—that is, the hold his supporters in part because
worse, the better. This is sectarianism of a familiar sort in the century just past—a sectari- he so enraged their enemies. It’s
anism that has reaped nothing but political catastrophe.” hard to avoid feeling that a leader is
—from an open letter signed by, among others, Benjamin Barber, Todd Gitlin, Toni
on your side when he makes the
Morrison, Gloria Steinem, Michael Walzer, and Sean Wilentz, Salon, Nov. 6, 2000.
folks on the other side go purple in
“Careful studies have never been able to identify the so-called silent progressive majority the face. Like Nixon, too, Clinton
—the Nader voters who otherwise wouldn’t make it to the polls.” benefited from his political weak-
—Eric Alterman, The Nation, Nov. 13, 2000. ness. Democrats feared to pressure
Clinton to move leftwards lest they
BILL CLINTON did something competition, or that welfare is a fun- erode his shaky political position.
that neither Richard Nixon damental constitutional right—all Likewise, Gore’s core supporters
nor Ronald Reagan ever man- things that Democrats did believe in didn’t like it when he criticized the
aged: He convinced the American the 35 years up to 1992. entertainment industry or elevated
left that the United States is a con- In years gone by, Democratic pres- debt-elimination to first place among
servative country. idents who defied liberal orthodoxy his economic priorities or cam-
For eight years, Clinton steered in this way provoked insurrection on paigned in Florida’s white neighbor-
his party in a rightward direction. their left: Harry Truman had his hoods rather than its minority dis-
Maybe he didn’t begin intending to Henry Wallace, Lyndon Johnson had tricts. But what could they do about
steer that way. Certainly he didn’t his Eugene McCarthy, and Jimmy it? George W. Bush and his terrify-
steer that way all the time. Still and Carter had his Ted Kennedy. Yet ing henchmen—Ken Starr, Jesse
all, you’d have to search pretty hard even as Clinton inked free-trade Helms, Newt Gingrich, Tom DeLay
to find an important national Demo- pacts with Mexico, surrendered to —were pounding on the doors. If
crat who today believes that the fed- welfare reform, increased the num- they broke in, children all over the
eral government should regulate oil ber of federal death-penalty offenses, United States would have to chew
prices or allocate capital to startup signed the Defense of Marriage Act, tobacco and go to school barefoot, as
industries, or that domestic industry acceded to the Republican capital- they do in Texas. It was more urgent
should be protected from foreign gains tax cut—despite a slew of poli- to keep that crew out than to get all
cies almost calculated to give liberals fussy about whom one was letting in.
David Frum is a contributing editor to THE heartburn—the political and intel- This feeling of weakness on the
WEEKLYSTANDARD. lectual left side of the spectrum left explains something otherwise
10 / THEWEEKLYSTANDARD JANUARY15, 2001