Getting Away From The —Oval— Office

August 23, 2009 by Frank Gannon | Filed Under Nixon family, Pat Nixon, Presidents, Richard Nixon | 1 Comment 

Today’s Daily Beast offers a “Media Gallery” of Presidential vacations.

The slideshow includes TR’s 1909 post-presidential African safari.

HST vacationed aboard the presidential yacht USS Williamsburg, or at the Little White House in Key Biscayne — where he relaxed with First Lady Bess and daughter Margaret.

DDE decommissioned the Williamsburg and found relaxation in fishing —the Beast notes that “he’s reported to have gone on a veritable fishing tour across the U.S., hitting up streams and lakes in Florida, Rhode Island, Maine, South Dakota, Georgia, Maryland, and Colorado” — and hunting.

RN is represented by a 1956 family vacation to Disneyland.

The gratuitously snarky caption —

Ah, Richard Nixon’s innocent days. During a 1955 vacation in California, then-Vice President Nixon and his wife, Pat, took their two young daughters, Julie and Patricia, to Disneyland. Here, the family is shown leaving the Fantasyland castle; they reportedly spent the day sightseeing and enjoying the rides. During his presidency, when he wasn’t indulging his inner child, Nixon was known to escape to a compound he owned on Key Biscayne, off Miami—often referred to as his Florida White House.

— ignores the comparatively greater amount of time RN, PN, and the family spent at La Casa Pacifica in San Clemente.

Featured Articles — August 23, 2009

August 23, 2009 by Jonathan Movroydis | Filed Under Featured Articles | Leave a Comment 

Interesting Takes From Home And Abroad:

Could Afghanistan Become Obama’s Vietnam? By Peter Baker, The New York Times
President Obama had not even taken office before supporters were etching his likeness onto Mount Rushmore as another Abraham Lincoln or the second coming of Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Will Obama’s Statism Ever Retreat? By George Will, The Washington Post
As memories of the Cold War fade, like photographs bleached by sunlight, few remember the Brezhnev Doctrine. It was enunciated by Leonid Brezhnev in Warsaw in November 1968 as a retrospective justification for the Soviet-led invasion of Prague the previous August by Warsaw Pact forces to halt Czechoslovakia’s liberalization.

The Guns of August By Frank Rich, The New York Times
“IT is time to water the tree of liberty” said the sign carried by a gun-toting protester milling outside President Obama’s town-hall meeting in New Hampshire two weeks ago. The Thomas Jefferson quote that inspired this message, of course, said nothing about water: “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” That’s the beauty of a gun — you don’t have to spell out the “blood.”

The Angry White Liberal By Matthew Continetti, The Weekly Standard
We’ve spent the month of August talking about alleged right-wing rage, but it’s really time we started discussing the Angry White Liberal. When things aren’t going his way, the Angry White Liberal wails and gnashes his teeth, rends his garments, and hurls invective at the opposition. His rhetoric and prose is so heated, it’s gotten to the point where you need to put on oven mitts before opening the paper.

N.J. governor’s race a GOP ‘bellwether’ By Donald Lambro, The Washington Times
Republican candidates are showing new political strength in some states this year, but none seems more improbable than conservative Republican Christopher J. Christie’s big lead over embattled Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine’s bid for a second term in deep-blue New Jersey.

Gordon Brown in new storm over freed Lockerbie bomber By Gaby Hinsliff, The Observer
Gordon Brown faced fresh questions tonight after it emerged that he discussed with Colonel Gaddafi detailed conditions for the Lockerbie bomber’s return nearly six weeks ago, while senior Labour figures warned of an economic backlash from angry Americans “costing our country dear”.

All The Way The LBJ Way

August 22, 2009 by Frank Gannon | Filed Under American Politics, Congress, Domestic issues, Healthcare, Presidents, U.S. History | 4 Comments 

Up close and very, very personal: newly nominated Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas receives the “LBJ Treatment” in July 1965 in this classic photo by Yoichi Okamoto.

Over at the Daily Beast, former LBJ aide Tom Johnson addresses WWLBJD? —  how the 36th POTUS would have approached getting health care reform accomplished.

Mr. Johnson was a White House Fellow during the Johnson administration; after that he served as president and publisher of the Los Angeles Times and president of CNN.

One of Lyndon B. Johnson’s closest aides explains how the whatever-it-takes Texan would have gotten a health care reform bill passed through sheer will. LBJ would:

• Have a list of every member of Congress on his desk.
• He would be on the telephone with members and their key staffers constantly: “Your president really needs your vote on this bill.”
• He would have a list of every special request every member wanted, from White House tours to appointments to federal jobs and commissions.
• He would make phone calls or have an in-person visit with every member individually or in a group — charts, graphs, coffee. They would get the Johnson Treatment as nobody else could give it.
• He would express a willingness to horse-trade with every member.
• He would keep a list of people who support each member financially. He would make a call to each to tell them to get the vote of that representative. (Arthur Krim, Lew Wasserman)
• He would have Billy Graham calling Baptists, Cardinal Cushing calling Catholics, Dr. King calling blacks, [Texas Congressman] Henry Gonzales calling Hispanics, Henry Ford and David Rockefeller calling Republicans.
• He would get Jack Valenti to call the Pope if it would help.
• He would have speeches written for members for the Congressional Record and hometown newspapers.
• He would use up the White House liquor having nightcaps with the leaders and key votes of BOTH parties.
• Each of them would take home cufflinks, watches, signed photos, and perhaps even a pledge to come raise money for their next reelection
• He would send gifts to children and grandchildren of members.
• He would walk around the South Lawn with reporters telling them why this was important to their own families.
• He would send every aide in the White House to see every member of the House and Senate. He would send me to see Senator Richard Russell and Rep. Carl Vinson because I am a Georgian.
• He would call Kay Graham, [CBS president] Frank Stanton, [NBC president] Robert Kintner, and the heads of every network.
• He would do newspaper, radio, and TV interviews. Especially with Merriman Smith, Hugh Sidey, Sid Davis, Forrest Boyd, Ray Scherer, Helen Thomas, Marianne Means, Walter Cronkite, Phil Potter, Bob Novak.
• He would go to pray at six different churches.

He would threaten, cajole, flirt, flatter, hug, and get the bill passed.

TNN Weekly Weekend Reward

August 22, 2009 by Frank Gannon | Filed Under Weekly Weekend Reward | Leave a Comment 

This weekend’s Reward is the Detroit Cobras.

In my humble, but well-nigh infallible, opinion (and, since it’s true, it ain’t bragging; truth to tell, it’s a real burden; but I digress), the Detroit Cobras rule.

Over the years this Motor City-based garage punk ’60s cover band has comprised a movable feast of back up artists behind vocalist Rachel Nagy and guitarist Mary Ramirez. What’s not to love about  the Detroit Cobras’ impeccable taste for underappreciated and undersung oldies rendered with an attitude that makes Ronnie Spector look restrained and Courtney Love seem demure?

Here’s their cover of Brice Coefield’s 1961 “Cha Cha Twist,” from their 1998 debut album Mink Rat or Rabbit.  The relatively obscure record was a spinoff of Hank Ballard’s  1959  B-side “Let’s Do The Twist,” which Chubby Checker’s 1960 cover turned into a Number One hit and a worldwide dance craze.

Relax and enjoy; after navigating 16-21 August 2009 you deserve it.

Featured Articles — August 22, 2009

August 22, 2009 by Jonathan Movroydis | Filed Under Featured Articles | Leave a Comment 

Interesting Takes From Home And Abroad:

Russia is obsessed with being recognized as a “Great Power.” By Richard Pipes, The Wall Street Journal
She has felt as one since the 17th century, after having conquered Siberia, but especially since her victory in World War II over Germany and the success in sending the first human into space. It costs nothing to defer to her claims to such exalted status, to show her respect, to listen to her wishes. From this point of view, the recent remarks about Russia by Vice President Joe Biden in an interview with this newspaper were both gratuitous and harmful.

We’re Not the Soviets in Afghanistan By Frederick W. Kagan, The Weekly Standard
Comparisons between our current efforts in Afghanistan and the Soviet intervention that led to the collapse of the USSR are natural and can be helpful, but only with great care. Below are a number of key points to keep in mind when thinking about the Soviet operations, especially when considering the size of the U.S. or international military footprint.

Death of a Salesman By Fred Barnes, The Weekly Standard
Between July 20 and July 30, President Obama was a busy man, barely out of the public eye while campaigning furiously for his health care initiative. He did four town hall events, spoke at two hospitals, delivered a radio address, was interviewed on two network TV news shows, and held a prime time press conference–all devoted to promoting his health care plan. On this issue as on no other, Obama personally took his case to the people.

A Blue Dog’s lament: ‘People are scared’ By Jonathan Martin, Politico
Rep Allen Boyd (D-Fla.) is a skilled politician who has pretty much seen it all — a Deep South Democrat who’s managed to dispatch all opponents in his conservative-leaning Panhandle district since winning election in 1996.

President Obama, don’t risk your base By Joan Walsh, Salon
Could it be? Is it possible that some of President Obama’s polling problems reflect his losing support with his liberal base? Two recent polls say exactly that.

RN And The Fight To End Poverty

August 21, 2009 by Jonathan Movroydis | Filed Under Domestic issues, Richard Nixon | 1 Comment 

Last week in his talk at the Nixon Foundation, former Clinton adviser Dick Morris explained that RN did more to alleviate poverty than most Presidents in the 20th Century with — among other items — the cost of living adjustment for Social Security.

TNN also noted last week that the expansion of healthcare coverage was also an issue that RN deeply cared about since he first entered the halls of Congress in 1947.

As President, RN signed signed the National Cancer Act in 1971 and in 1974 championed legislation that would have given more Americans access to private coverage.

The following campaign commercial from 1968 underscores his subsequent domestic agenda: to establish an America where a child can grow without the “nightmare of poverty, neglect, and despair.”

Sequence And Legitimacy

August 21, 2009 by Jonathan Movroydis | Filed Under Afghanistan, International Affairs, Nixon Center, The National Interest | Leave a Comment 

Afghan incumbent Hamid Karzai and his challenger Foreign Minister Abdullah Abdullah are each claiming victory in Thursday’s presidential elections. Turnout in the unstable country was disappointingly low, prompting The National Interest’s Nikolas Gvosdev to question the rationale of the current strategy of democracy promotion:

Another part of the “sequencing” debate when it comes to democratization: get leaders in place with electoral legitimacy first (and then with that legitimacy they gain control of the monopoly of force within the state)—or establish a clear command and control network and then concern yourself with how the commander in chief comes to power?

Cooper: The GOP Needs A New Nixon

August 21, 2009 by Jonathan Movroydis | Filed Under Republican Party, Richard Nixon | 1 Comment 

Charles Cooper — on his CBS blog — disagrees with Time’s Joe Klein that the GOP is dominated by knuckle-dragging nihilists, arguing instead that it is in fact leaderless.

It’s just a matter of time — Cooper contends — that Republicans find a leader like RN to re-center them:

Rather than a party of nihilists, the Republicans seem to be a party adrift in need of firm leader. Remember what the pundits were saying about the Republicans after the Goldwater debacle in 1964? Yet only four years later, Nixon was in the White House and a Republican majority was taking shape.

The Folly Of Blind Compassion

August 21, 2009 by David R. Stokes | Filed Under American Politics, History, Obama administration, Terrorism, U.S. History, War on Terror | 1 Comment 

Leon was a short, thin, 28-year old man. A self-described anarchist – a term that would translate today as terrorist – he determined to commit an act of murder. His target was the President of the United States.

Almost 100 years to the day before the 21st century faced the murderous terror of Sept. 11, 2001, Leon F. Czolgosz (pronounced: “Cholgosh”) waited his turn in a receiving line at the Temple of Music, part of the Pan-American Exhibition in Buffalo, New York. Everyone wanted to shake the hand of President William McKinley who had presided over a national economic recovery via a sturdy conservative approach.

A secret service agent locked eyes with Czolgosz briefly, but seeing nothing out of the ordinary he didn’t linger. Too bad, because when Leon found himself face to face with the president, McKinley reached out his right hand, which the would-be assassin batted away while bringing his own handkerchief-draped right hand up toward McKinley’s abdomen. He fired two shots from the .32 caliber Iver-Johnson “Safety Automatic” revolver he had purchased just two days before for $4.50.

President McKinley at first seemed to defy the assassin by appearing to survive, only to succumb to his wounds eight days following the shooting. The 25th President of the United States died on September 14, 1901. Czolgosz was swiftly arraigned and indicted. He was brought to trial on September 23rd – a proceeding that lasted a little more than eight hours from start to finish. Found guilty by a jury, he was sentenced to death by Judge Truman C. White three days later. There is some dispute as to whether or not the jurist added the perfunctory “May God have mercy on your soul” addendum.

That very day, as the nation’s newspapers carried news about the death penalty sentence for the presidential assassin, newsreels were released showing McKinley’s Canton, Ohio burial. It was all very real and very fresh in the minds of Americans.

Sometimes a rush to judgment is better than deferred injustice born of misguided compassion.

Czolgosz was the 50th criminal to sit in New York’s electric chair, doing so on October 29, 1901 – less than two months after his sordid act. His brother witnessed the execution and asked for the body – presumably on “compassionate grounds” – but was denied. As Leon Czolgosz was buried, jailers at the Auburn, New York facility poured liberal amounts of sulfuric acid on the body. The remains diffused into the prison-ground soil.

Sure there were some at the time who protested all of this, even suggesting that Czolgosz was a victim of social conditions. But empathy wasn’t the big debate-ending trump card back then. Even the new president, Theodore Roosevelt – a man who was actually known for his progressive leanings – denounced anarchism as “evil.” In his first message to Congress he described the anarchist as “a malefactor and nothing else. He is in no sense, in no shape or way, a ‘product of social conditions.’” He added that it was “no more an expression of ‘social discontent’ than picking pockets or wife-beating.”

Fast forward to our day and age and the ghastly sight of Abdelbeset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi being freed from prison in Scotland, with Scottish Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill citing compassionate grounds for the release and saying al Megrahi was “going home to die.” Never mind that the terrorist is responsible for the death of 270 people who died when the bomb he placed on Pan Am flight 103 exploded earlier than he planned over Lockerbie, Scotland in December of 1988.

Time may heal some wounds, but it also tends to play tricks on memory and good judgment. Blind justice is one thing; willfully blind compassion is quite another. Where is the compassion for the victims and their families in this matter?

We are witnessing the fruit – an extreme example, I know, but an example nonetheless – of what happens when empathy becomes a serious factor in the pursuit and practice of justice. Compassion that becomes myopic and gets lost in the distortions and nuances of the small, subjective picture, will not result in justice, but instead will often fly in it’s very face.

This so-called compassionate act by the Scottish government is very much an in-your-face offense against the families of those who died on that fateful flight, as well as the world at large. The man who was set free the other day had already received a boatload of compassion in the fact that there was no death penalty in the system where he was tried and convicted for his horrific deed.

The difference between the two scenarios I have written about here is time. When a wound is fresh, when an injustice or evil deed is recent, there is reactive vigilance. But as time goes on and life defaults to a measure of normality, issues become blurred and memories become faulty. Things cease to be as clear-cut.

So we find ourselves at a moment, when our nation is outraged – appropriately so – at the release of a terrorist, while at the same time we are moving away from any semblance of actual vigilance at breakneck speed.

Why should some in our government denounce the action of the Scots, when in a real sense they are declaring at nearly every turn that there is no war on terror, no war against jihad, and that we are in a narrow conflict with one small group of rascals. I find the finger pointing at Scotland by some of those in our midst who want to make life easier for the bad guys to be blatant hypocrisy and mere political expedience.

Frankly, what Scotland has done, as objectionable as it is – as unthinkable as it seems – is the fruit of the kind of thinking that demonizes Gitmo and suggests that we are not at war with a murderous ideology. Even though that ideology is, in fact, very much at war with us. Liberal notions in our nation about justice for those poor misunderstood Islamists are ascendant in our culture these days. How are they really any different from the mindset in Scotland?

In the 1957 film classic, Bridge On The River Kwai, the brilliant actor Alec Guinness plays a Colonel by the name of Nicholson. The Colonel eventually becomes preoccupied with the successful building of the bridge, at the expense of his better judgment and soldierly loyalty. He develops rapport with the enemy – rapport that clouds his better judgment.

In the end, he comes to his senses, uttering “what have I done?” and blows up the bridge he labored so diligently to create.

It seems that some in our national leadership today have allowed time and other considerations to dull their senses about danger and real threat. And they have been spending more time building a bridge – one that will be used with relish by our enemies when the time comes – than they have creating and maintaining our vigilance against a powerful and persistent enemy.

One would hope that seeing Abdelbeset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi climb the stairs Colonel Gaddafi’s airplane recently, en route to a hero’s welcome in Libya, would be enough to bring some of our leaders to a Alec Guiness-like “what have I done?” moment.

But I suspect it will take many more examples of jihadist hubris and western civilization’s gullibility to bring any possible change about. Of course, by then the bridge of peace and friendship we have been building to span the chasm between us and the Islamists will be under the enemy’s complete control.

Featured Articles — August 21, 2009

August 21, 2009 by Jonathan Movroydis | Filed Under Featured Articles | Leave a Comment 

Interesting Takes From Home And Abroad:

Pull the Plug on ObamaCare By Peggy Noonan, The Wall Street Journal
Looking back, this must have been the White House health-care strategy: Health care as a subject is extraordinarily sticky, messy and confusing. It’s inherently complicated, and it’s personal. There are land mines all over the place. Don’t make the mistake the Clintons made and create a plan that gets picked apart, shot down, and injures the standing of the president.

The Truth About Death Counseling By Charles Krauthammer, The Washington Post
Let’s see if we can have a reasoned discussion about end-of-life counseling. We might start by asking Sarah Palin to leave the room. I’ve got nothing against her. She’s a remarkable political talent. But there are no “death panels” in the Democratic health care bills, and to say that there are is to debase the debate.

Who should fill Kennedy’s seat? By Scot Lehigh, The Boston Globe
TED KENNEDY is right: Massachusetts needs two voices and two votes in the US Senate. On Tuesday, the state’s senior senator sent a letter to the legislative leadership and Governor Deval Patrick, asking that they revise the current law to allow for an interim Senate appointment during the special election to fill a vacant seat.

An Open Hand That Weakens Chávez By Edward Schumacher-Matos, The Washington Post
CARTAGENA, Colombia — Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez is a liar and a troublemaker. Congressmen and columnists can say this, but President Obama is correct not to do so, even though his critics want a tougher U.S. policy against the Venezuelan.

How Ahmadinejad Stole an Election — And How He Can Fix It By Mehdi Khalaji and Robert Pastor, Foreign Policy
In June, 40 million Iranians voted in their presidential election. The degree of tampering and fraud has made it impossible to determine the winner — and has heightened the need for reasonable changes to create free and fair elections.

A friendless Russia is held hostage to Putin’s vanity By Philip Stephens, Financial Times
The conventional story about Russia has been one of power reclaimed after the fall to chaos during the 1990s. Oil, gas and autocracy have restored it to the ranks of world powers. Some of the more hyperbolic commentary has gone so far to say that, along with China, Moscow has created an entirely new model to challenge western liberalism.

In Afghanistan, the Choice Is Ours By Richard Haas, The New York Times
SPEAKING on Monday to the Veterans of Foreign Wars in Phoenix, President Obama could not have been more definitive. “We must never forget,” he said of the conflict in Afghanistan. “This is not a war of choice. This is a war of necessity.”

If You’re Tired Of “Frost/Nixon”….

August 20, 2009 by Robert Nedelkoff | Filed Under Entertainment, Pat Nixon, Presidents, Richard Nixon | Leave a Comment 

….then the Orlando Sentinel has an article that may tickle your fancy – about Bill and Sue Wills, a Maryland team of husband-and-wife actors who, for years, have been presenting two-person shows in which they portray a President and First Lady. So far they’ve portrayed no less than 32 Presidential couples – from the famous ones, like FDR and Eleanor and Harry and Bess, to the lesser-known ones like the Fillmores and Pierces. This month, they’re touring as Richard and Pat Nixon. There’s a photo of them in makeup and costume. Be advised that Bill Wills looks something like Lyndon Johnson doing a Nixon impression (or maybe LBJ impersonating David Frye impersonating RN), and that Ms. Wills does not look much like Pat, though she seems to have a very slight resemblance to Betty Ford.

Ted Kennedy’s Plea

August 20, 2009 by Robert Nedelkoff | Filed Under American Politics, Barack Obama, Congress, Democratic Party, Election 2012, Healthcare, Presidents, Republican Party, Senate, U.S. History | 6 Comments 

The absence of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy last week from the funeral of his sister, Eunice Kennedy Shriver, followed by the death on Tuesday morning of columnist Robert Novak, who was diagnosed with brain cancer not long after the lawmaker fell ill from the same cause, has served to remind Americans that the lawmaker’s days, sadly, are numbered. Still, discussion of what is to follow after his passing, politically speaking, has been muted.

That was the case until this morning, when news came that the Senator had sent a message to Massachusetts legislators asking them to reconsider a change in the law they enacted in 2004. At that time, Kennedy’s colleague in the Senate, John Kerry, appeared to have a good chance of attaining the Oval Office. This raised the question of what would happen were he to leave his seat. It was thought by many Democratic bigwigs in the state that Gov. Mitt Romney would appoint a fellow Republican as Kerry’s replacement, if it came to that, to serve until a special election could be called.

Even though no Republican has been elected from the state to the Senate since Edward Brooke was re-elected in 1972, the idea of a member of the GOP joining Ted in the Senate for even a few months was so horrific a prospect to legislators at the Boston statehouse that they enacted a law removing the power to appoint Senators from the governor and specifying that in the event of a Senator’s death or resignation, his or her seat was to remain vacant until it could be filled in a special election within 145 to 160 days – that is, about five months. As for the time in between – well, better, obviously, that Massachusetts be represented by only one person in the world’s greatest deliberative body than that a Republican should take the other seat for an instant.

At the time, neither Kennedy nor Kerry raised any objections to this line of reasoning. But now the senior gentleman from Massachusetts has had second thoughts. His statement informed the Boston lawmakers that, given the likelihood of a razor-thin vote in the Senate regarding health-care legislation, it was imperative that Massachusetts have two members at hand to help decide the issue.

There’s certainly more to this than just health care, however. For fully fifty-six years – over one-fourth of the Senate’s history – one of the two Massachusetts seats has been occupied, with a two-year interruption, by one of two brothers. First, there was John F. Kennedy, from 1953 until he won the Presidency in 1960. He resigned his Senate seat on December 22 of that year, and five days later Benjamin Smith, his Harvard roomate, was appointed to replace him. Smith remained a Senator until Ted Kennedy turned thirty and thus became Constitutionally eligible to be elected. The younger Kennedy won a special election for the seat in November 1962, and immediately after Election Day Smith resigned and Ted took his place.

The start and end of Smith’s tenure were situations where the Kennedy clan felt comfortable with having a Governor make appointments to the Senate, and now Ted seeks to have this power restored to Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick. So far, the Senator hasn’t specified whether he has anyone in mind to replace him; his wife, Victoria, has let it be known that she does not plan to do so.

But it has been reported that Ted wishes to see another Kennedy reach the Senate, though so far it’s been a difficult wish to fulfill. Regular TNN readers will recall that at the end of last year, when President Obama chose Sen. Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, the Camelot clan attempted to stir up sentiment for Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg to take her place, resulting in a media frenzy of several weeks before Ms. Schlossberg took herself out of the running after a series of gaffes. A few months ago there was some talk of Robert Kennedy’s son Christopher, the president of Chicago’s Merchandise Mart, seeking the Senate seat formerly occupied by Obama, since its present occupant, appointee Roland Burris, has said he will not seek election. But more recently it’s been reported that Christopher Kennedy is eyeing the Illinois governorship.

So speculation, after the Senator’s announcement, has started to focus on former Rep. Joseph Kennedy II, his nephew, as his replacement. The younger Kennedy’s career in the House was not especially distinguished and in a contested election, were he not the incumbent, he’d probably find it an uphill battle, not least because of his ham-handed annulment of his first marriage in the early 1990s. But being appointed to the Senate would give him something of an edge when the special election came around.

But even if Joseph II makes it into the Senate, I wouldn’t bet on his seeking a second full term. By 2012, when Ted Kennedy’s term would have expired, he’ll be sixty, and, even in Massachusetts, the electorate probably prefers its Kennedys to be young and charismatic. And, by that time, four or five of the great-grandchildren of Old Joe and Rose Kennedy will be out of law school and ready for high office. (At the present time, only one member of this generation is over thirty – Robert Kennedy’s granddaughter Meaghan Townsend, a yoga instructor in Los Angeles. And just seven or eight are old enough to join their cousin Patrick Kennedy in the House.) In any event, during the next year or so we’ll find out if Camelot is vanishing into the mists of memory or is ready to begin another chapter – assuming the voters want it.

Is It Just Me…

August 20, 2009 by Frank Gannon | Filed Under American Politics, International Affairs, Is It Just Me..., Terrorism | 1 Comment 

…or is there something unseemly and worrying about American foreign relations —much less with terrorists—  however desirable the result, apparently now being conducted by former presidents on “personal missions,”

and/or by American politicians traveling in their capacity as Chairman of a Senate subcommittee,

and/or  Governors?

Richardson mum as North Korean delegates depart NM

Is some Mayor now on the tarmac headed towards Tehran to plead for the three hapless hikers?

I Just Flew In From District Court, And Boy….

August 20, 2009 by Robert Nedelkoff | Filed Under American Politics, Comedy, Hillary Clinton | Leave a Comment 

From 1993 until 2001, few figures were more prominent among the critics of the Administration then in charge than Larry Klayman, the founder of Judicial Watch, who, during those years, launched eighteen civil suits against the Clinton White House, and was often to be found on Fox News during its early years, speaking of litigation to come.

After the 42nd President and his spouse moved to Westchester County, however, less was heard from the Florida-based attorney. He made some waves early in 2003 when, perhaps in the spirit of bipartisanship, he joined the Sierra Club in a suit against Vice President Cheney, seeking the release of documents concerning energy policy. But soon afterward he left the organization he’d founded to launch an unsuccessful campaign for the Senate in Florida. In the six years since, he’s turned up in the news occasionally – in 2006 when he sued Judicial Watch charging mismanagement on the part of his successors, and earlier this year when it was reported that his new book, having been lost in the shuffle at HarperCollins after the departure of Judith Regan who’d acquired it, was to be issued by a smaller Florida press.

But this morning’s Washington Times reports that Klayman has just undertaken an entirely new career – as a stand-up comedian, currently performing at the Funky Buddha Lounge in Boca Raton. The competition in this field in South Florida is pretty stiff – ranging from veterans of the circuit like Dave Attell and Greg Giraldo to, well, really old comics like Jack Carter and London Lee. But it is true that Mort Sahl is seen in West Palm Beach and St. Petersburg and Orlando less often since he started doing things like teaching at Claremont McKenna College. So there seems to be an opening for Klayman to try his hand at political humor.

The lawyer-turned-humorist informed the Times’s Jennifer Harper that he thinks of his new enterprise as being in the tradition of his 1990s work: “I have not given up as ‘freedom fighter, but with the Obama/Clinton crowd in power it’s better to laugh than cry. Besides, the Clintons always tried to portray my lawsuits as a joke.” He promises to take his act to LA and New York if things go well in Florida. Wonder if there’s a chance that he’ll show up at the next Comedy Central Roast.

Scotland’s Shame

August 20, 2009 by Frank Gannon | Filed Under International Affairs, Terrorism | 1 Comment 

The fragile terminally ill Lockerbie terrorist leaves Scotland:

And, apparently revived by the heated hand towels and excellent  in flight service aboard his chartered jet, arrives already improved in Libya:

An editorial —”Whose Justice?”— in today’s London Times sets out a sordid story with no heroes and more than just one terminally ill* villain:

It reads like a script treatment. A notorious prisoner is terminally ill with prostate cancer. The decision about whether or not he ought to be released, a decision with grave implications for British foreign policy, is sitting on the desk of the elusive Scottish Justice Minister. The elite of American foreign policy is imploring that the prisoner be kept behind bars. There are even walk-on parts for royalty. The Duke of York discusses the case with Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, whose son “bumped into” Lord Mandelson, the Business Secretary, on a yacht in Corfu.

The case of Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi, the man convicted of the Lockerbie bomb, just gets curiouser and curiouser. On Tuesday, al-Megrahi dropped his appeal against conviction, which removed an obstacle to a transfer home. The way is now clear for him to be returned although he could only qualify for the prisoner-transfer agreement that was negotiated by Tony Blair and Colonel Gaddafi if the Crown drops its attempt to extend his sentence. There is no case for release on compassionate grounds and yet, out of this strange concatenation of events, there is a sense that, as the Dodo said: “Everybody has won and all must have prizes.”

Alex Salmond, the Scottish Nationalist leader, spies a great opportunity. To be able to defy the demands of the world’s only superpower — what better exhibition could there be of Scotland’s independent standing as a nation? The letter that Mr Salmond has received on this topic, from some high-ranking American senators, including Ted Kennedy and John Kerry, serves his purpose perfectly. So do the strongly disapproving statements from the former presidential candidate John McCain and Hillary Clinton, the Secretary of State, who said that releasing al-Megrahi would be “absolutely wrong”. In everything he says and does Mr Salmond is relishing the fact that this is a decision for Scotland.

The uncharacteristically undiplomatic language deployed by Mrs Clinton also smacked of saying the right thing at full volume in the knowledge that the decision had already been taken. The Secretary of State could not conceivably have said anything else. Of the 270 people killed on PanAm Flight 103 twenty years ago, 189 were American. There is no questioning the guilt of al-Megrahi in America. But surely a serious attempt at diplomatic persuasion would have gone through private channels? If any such process were in train, these proclamations would surely scupper it. The Americans are saying the right thing but is this the best way of actually getting it?

For Colonel Gaddafi, the return of al-Megrahi will be seen as a triumph. From his decision, in 2003, to give up his weapons programme, the Libyan leader has sought to throw off pariah status, a transformation all but completed when he was invited to address the General Assembly of the United Nations. The return of Libya to the table of nations has some important benefits to Britain and the US. Libya has helped to curb the flow of illegal migrants to Europe; it has taken a strong stand against Islamist extremism; and it has opened up its energy industries to Western investment. And thereby hangs a problem. Any future deals will now carry the suspicion that the way was cleared by a deal over Lockerbie.

It is unlikely that this salutary state of affairs all round has been co-ordinated. That said, Mr Salmond’s words are rich in irony: “There will be no consideration of international power politics or anything else. It will be taken on the evidence in the interest of justice.” But the international agreement that stipulates alMegrahi should serve his term in Scotland ought to stand. It would not be too cynical to suggest that all interests have, in fact, been served with one specific exception: the interest of justice.

*Reading the medical report that led to al Megrahi’s release leaves a layman less than convinced that, while unquestionably terminal and undoubtedly in a bad way, he may not actually be knocking at death’s door within the three month time frame required by the compassion regs. There is a link to the relevant “Progress Section” of the report here under “Multimedia.”

A Reset On Foreign Policy

August 20, 2009 by Jonathan Movroydis | Filed Under Barack Obama, Nixon Center, The National Interest | Leave a Comment 

Over at The National Interest, Nixon Center President Dimitri Simes argues that President Obama’s disproportionate focus on healthcare is costing his foreign policy:

Indeed, the administration is not responsible for the difficulty it has encountered in engaging Iran, where the clerical regime is torn apart by post-election infighting. Still, Iran continues to march toward nuclear-weapons capability and, as Obama has said himself, the clock is ticking. If engagement with Tehran does not deliver by early fall, Washington will have to change course and proceed with highly punitive sanctions. And if sanctions do not bring results, no option is off the table, including a military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities. But with growing skepticism in Moscow about the seriousness of Obama’s “reset” policy, meaningful Russian cooperation on Iran is increasingly unlikely, and the lack of progress on the Arab-Israeli dispute would assure that a military strike against Iran would create massive indignation in the Muslim world. With the Maliki government in Iraq already demonstrating pro-Iranian sympathies and, according the latest Gallup poll, 59 percent of Pakistanis believing that the greatest threat to their country comes from the United States, it doesn’t require excessive imagination to contemplate how an American attack on Iran could explode the whole region, greatly complicating U.S. tasks in both Iraq and Afghanistan and potentially bringing the price of oil to several hundred dollars a barrel. If that happens, Mr. Obama will have to forget about his costly health-care plans and, probably, accept that he would be a one-term president.

Neglecting necessary foreign-policy decisions in the name of optional domestic priorities would make these very goals totally unattainable.

A New Foreign Policy

August 20, 2009 by Jonathan Movroydis | Filed Under Richard Nixon | 1 Comment 

Also from the 1972 campaign, this commercial illustrates RN’s successful new approach to the Cold War, emphasizing rapproachement rather than containment and confrontation:

Featured Articles — August 20, 2009

August 20, 2009 by Jonathan Movroydis | Filed Under Featured Articles | Leave a Comment 

Interesting Takes From Home And Abroad:

In Government We Trust? By Daniel Henninger, The Wall Street Journal
To explain why the Obama health-care proposal pitched the nation’s politicians into town-hall hell, we would like to call to the stand an expert on how things in life can sometimes go wrong-Mr. Billy Joel.

Call For a Doctor, Mr. President By David Ignatius, The Washington Post
Reading the transcripts of President Obama’s “town hall meetings” this month on heath care reform is painful. He’s preaching the right gospel, but the parishioners are getting restless. The harder he tries to sell his program, the louder and angrier the debate gets — and the more the general public tunes out the politicians.

The Path to Republican Revival By Peter Wehner and Michael Gerson, Commentary
At some point about five years ago, America became a “One-Party Country”—and the party in question was the GOP. Such, at least, was the conclusion of Los Angeles Times reporters Tom Hamburger and Peter Wallsten in the book they wrote under that title following the 2004 presidential election.

‘Closing in on Rove’ By Karl Rove, The Wall Street Journal
For more than two years, House Judiciary Committee Democrats and the New York Times editorial board have argued that I personally arranged for Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman to be prosecuted in 2004 for corruption and ordered the removal of eight U.S. attorneys in 2006 for failing to investigate Democrats. The Washington Post editorial board also echoed this last charge.

Novak Was Tough as Nails, Kind as They Come By Margaret Carlson, Bloomberg
For the first few of my 12 years appearing every Saturday on CNN’s “The Capital Gang” with Bob Novak, I was afraid of him. He was fearsome grandfather, Mother Superior and the policeman in my rear-view mirror all rolled into one.

For A Long Range Future With China

August 19, 2009 by Jonathan Movroydis | Filed Under China, Nixon Administration figures | Leave a Comment 

Henry Kissinger — writing at the Washington Post today — says that the current economic downturn and the ongoing trade imbalance has put a strain on U.S.-China relations.

But HAK also says that we must resist Cold War tendencies in order to forge a more constructive relationship ahead:

A cooperative definition of a long-range future will not be easy. Historically, China and America have been hegemonic powers able to set their own agendas essentially unilaterally. They are not accustomed to close alliances or consultative procedures restricting their freedom of action on the basis of equality. When they have been in alliances, they have tended to take for granted that the mantle of leadership belongs to them and exhibited a degree of dominance not conceivable in the emerging Sino-American partnership.

To make this effort work, American leaders must resist the siren call of a containment policy drawn from the Cold War playbook. China must guard against a policy aimed at reducing alleged American hegemonic designs and the temptation to create an Asian bloc to that end. America and China should not repeat the process that, a century ago, moved Britain and Germany from friendship to a confrontation that drained both societies in a global war. The ultimate victims of such an evolution would be global issues, such as energy, the environment, nuclear proliferation and climate change, which will require a common vision of the future.

At the other extreme, some argue that the United States and China should constitute themselves into a G-2. A tacit Sino-American global governing body, however, is not in the interest of either country or the world. Countries that feel excluded might drift into rigid nationalism at the precise moment that requires a universal perspective.

America’s great contribution in the 1950s was to take the lead in developing a set of institutions by which the Atlantic region could deal with unprecedented upheavals. A region hitherto riven by national rivalries found mechanisms to institutionalize a common destiny. Even though not all of these measures worked equally well, the end result was a far more benign world order.

The 21st century requires an institutional structure appropriate for its time. The nations bordering the Pacific have a stronger sense of national identity than did the European countries emerging from the Second World War. They must not slide into a 21st-century version of classic balance-of-power politics. It would be especially pernicious if opposing blocs were to form on each side of the Pacific. While the center of gravity of international affairs shifts to Asia, and America finds a new role distinct from hegemony yet compatible with leadership, we need a vision of a Pacific structure based on close cooperation between America and China but also broad enough to enable other countries bordering the Pacific to fulfill their aspirations.

Don Hewitt   1922-2009

August 19, 2009 by Jonathan Movroydis | Filed Under In Memoriam | 1 Comment 

Legendary CBS News producer Don Hewitt is pictured center, between JFK and RN.

CBS newsman Don Hewitt died today at his home in Bridgehampton, NY after a long battle with pancreatic cancer. He was 86.

According to the AP, Hewitt joined CBS News “in television’s infancy in 1948,” helping to revolutionize Presidential politics when he produced the Kennedy-Nixon debates in 1960, the first ever nationally televised debates. He later went on to produce the popular Sunday show 60 minutes.

A clip of the first of the famous debates –which 80 million people viewed — is below.

Update: 12:25 (pst): Courtesy of reader Tom Van Oosterom, here is another photo of JFK and RN taken with Don Hewitt.

Years later, Don Hewitt talked about the affair and revealed that the debate “turned on makeup.” RN — he contended — won on substance.

“Should a presidential debate turn on makeup?” Hewitt asked. “No, but this one did:”

« Previous Page — Next Page »