Jewish World Review August 15, 2001/26 Menachem-Av, 5761

MUGGER

MUGGER
JWR's Pundits
World Editorial
Cartoon Showcase

Mallard Fillmore

Michael Barone
Mona Charen
Linda Chavez
Ann Coulter
Greg Crosby
Larry Elder
Don Feder
Suzanne Fields
Paul Greenberg
Bob Greene
Betsy Hart
Nat Hentoff
David Horowitz
Marianne Jennings
Michael Kelly
Mort Kondracke
Ch. Krauthammer
Lawrence Kudlow
Dr. Laura
John Leo
David Limbaugh
Michelle Malkin
Chris Matthews
Michael Medved
MUGGER
Kathleen Parker
Wes Pruden
Sam Schulman
Amity Shlaes
Tony Snow
Thomas Sowell
Cal Thomas
Jonathan S. Tobin
Ben Wattenberg
George Will
Bruce Williams
Walter Williams
Mort Zuckerman

Consumer Reports

Last train to Crawford


http://www.jewishworldreview.com -- THE NEW YORK TIMES inadvertently described the tumultuous political climate in Washington today with a pair of recent editorials on stem cell research.

On Aug. 10, physicians Gail Collins and Howell Raines ran a hasty comment-"President Bush Waffles"-that was remarkable, even by Times standards, for its relentless antipathy directed at George W. Bush. Unlike the vast majority of what Dan Rather calls the "better newspapers," the Times refused to acknowledge that, no matter what side of the debate you're on, Bush spent considerable time before reaching a decision to allow only existing cell lines for federally funded exploration. The summary of this editorial: "Disappointed Americans who had hoped for a more courageous conclusion may wind up wondering if his real concern was a perpetual fear of offending the Republican Party's right-wing base."

This smear transcends mere partisanship. Obviously, Bush's chief strategist Karl Rove calculated the political fallout before his boss' Aug. 9 televised address, but there's only so much you can do when dealt a pair of threes. In fact, the most ardent pro-life advocates were not shy in their criticism of the President. Bush's first foray on this issue-which will be revisited within a year-was a victory for the genomics/scientific community, yet kept in mind the most extreme religious (mostly Catholic) voices.

The Times implies that Bush tossed off this extraordinary decision in between chopping down brush at his Texas ranch, but that's a cynical and agenda-dictated view. In reality, Bush is moving his "red state" base very slowly toward the inevitable acceptance of revolutionary science (controlling the evolution of all living things), action that requires nimble thinking.

Frankly, I'd have preferred it if Bush had adopted Sen. Bill Frist's slightly broader outline, but unlike most of the pundits who've commented on stem cell research, I don't pretend to be an instant expert on the subject. (For example, does anyone recall Richard Cohen, George Will or Anna Quindlen even raising this ethical dilemma during last fall's campaign?)

As Charles Krauthammer pointed out in a brilliant Weekly Standard essay (Aug. 20 issue), the insistence of diehard activists that this research will lead to the rapid disappearance of myriad diseases borders on the hysterical. Quoting a number of Democrats who spoke out in favor of an embryonic cloning bill-which the House decisively rejected-Krauthammer wrote: "The claim that cloning, and the stem cells it might produce, is on the verge of bringing a cure to your sick father with Alzheimer's or your debilitated mother with Parkinson's is a scandal. It is a cruel deception perpetrated by cynical scientists and ignorant politicians. [Notably, Florida's Peter Deutch and California's Zoe Lofgren, two of the House's most irresponsible members.] Its purpose is clear: to exploit the desperation of the sick to garner political support for ethically problematic biotechnology."

But Sunday's Times edict, "William Jefferson Bush," despite the pejorative headline, was actually pretty interesting. People forget that after Clinton's frenzy of liberal activity in the first two years of his administration-the successful tax hike and failed healthcare boondoggle-his legislative accomplishments during the remainder of his tenure were negligible. (With the exception of welfare reform, which was forced upon him by a Republican Congress.) After Clinton's reelection in '96, the news generated by the Oval Office was mostly about financial scandals and the President's imaginative use of cigars. His foreign policy achievements, promoted by the elite media at the time as Nobel Prize-worthy, have now disintegrated, notably in Northern Ireland and the Mideast.

Morris: Doing what he
does second-best

Unlike the earlier editorial, the Times on the second go-round decided that like Clinton, the current president is a "skilled triangulator" who is "the master of the bipartisan photo opportunity." On Aug. 13, a Wall Street Journal editorial alluded to this blatant deception: "On the politics, Mr. Bush's speech has already had a calming effect on the debate. The usual suspects-Dick Morris and some in the press corps-chalked it all up to 'triangulation' and a Bush move to the political center. But this merely reveals the shallowness of thinking in the Beltway, especially among the Clinton crowd."

MAD DASCHLE FOR THE NOMINATION?
You won't hear this from the spin-mad media or Democratic presidential hopefuls who're acting as if it's the summer of 2002 instead of 2001, but Bush's first seven months in office have been unusually ambitious, with a combination of wins and losses. The tax cut goes in the plus column, as do the growing acceptance of missile defense; the House votes on ANWR (helped by Big Labor, the surprise of the season) and HMO "reform"; the still-evolving overhaul of immigration policy; and the refusal to be boxed in by spineless European heads of state on the bogus Kyoto accord. Social Security partial-privatization (like, one hopes, a flat tax) is on the horizon; the speed of its success will depend on the midterm elections and economy, but there's no turning back the clock on an idea that should've been adopted 20 years ago.

On the other side of the ledger, Bush was outfoxed on education-he should've been firm on vouchers-and his nascent administration bungled penny-ante environmental issues that needn't have rallied Hollywood millionaires, NAACP-exploited citizens and the typical brigade of idealistic college students and arrested-development academics.

Bush's opposition, led by the stuck-in-time cabal of the Times, Tom Daschle and Dick Gephardt, is furiously attempting to derail the President's agenda. Monday's lead editorial in the Times began with this distortion of reality: "Americans concerned about the direction of President Bush's foreign policy are looking to the Senate for relief... No foreign war now inflames domestic politics. But the Bush administration's haste to erect a missile shield before the technology is perfected, its shortsighted hostility to important international treaties and its scorn for the environment threaten to undermine American influence and damage relations with Russia, China and European allies."

Observant readers know this is a sham: Not only has Bush improved relations with Russia, but Europe's leaders, particularly Britain's Tony Blair, are coming to the realization that a self-assured America is the free world's most potent weapon. As for China, Bush hasn't been aggressive enough in condemning that brutal and tyrannical regime. I suppose the Times thinks the U.S. ought to hand over a dozen of its citizens to face kangaroo trials in Beijing and maybe renounce our support of Taiwan in order to curry favor.

In a speech last Thursday in Washington, Senate Majority Leader Daschle-just a day after bear-hugging the disgraced Jesse Jackson at a Rainbow/ PUSH Coalition conference-said, "Instead of asserting our leadership, we are abdicating itŠ Instead of shaping international agreements to serve our interests, we have removed ourselves from a position to shape them at all."

Think Daschle's running for president?


JWR contributor "Mugger" -- aka Russ Smith -- is the editor-in-chief and CEO of New York Press (www.nypress.com). Send your comments to him by clicking here.

MUGGER Archives

© 2001, Russ Smith