Thursday, October 28, 2010
Muslims and Intolerance
Happily the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction . . . requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens in giving it on all occasions their effectual support.
— George Washington, Letter to the Jewish Congregation of Newport, Rhode Island
It’s the Muslims’ fault. They’re spoiling everything for the rest of us. That’s because they are bringing out the worst in us and it turns out there is a lot of worst for them to bring out.
It all came to mind when Juan Williams was fired by National Public Radio for saying on the Bill O’Reilly show on Fox News that if he gets on an airplane and sees people dressed in Muslim garb “I get worried. I get nervous.” I know lots of people who get nervous when they get on airplanes but it has nothing to do with what other people are wearing. It has to do with their own fear of flying. (Mr. Williams did go on to point out that he was not disparaging all Muslims and to disparage all Muslims for the actions of a few was like eschewing all Christians because of Timothy McVeigh.) Mr. Williams’ sartorial comments prompted an even dumber response. A more-than-ten year employee of National Public Radio, he got a phone call from his supervisor, Ellen Weiss, who said that his comments had been inappropriate and that he was being fired. She is a busy person and told him there was no reason to sit down face to face with him since nothing he could say would change the corporate mind. She did not know (although going to see the movie Up in the Air would have informed her) that when firing people, common courtesy suggests meeting with them in person even though nothing they will say will change the corporate mind. Those are not the only examples of how the Muslim presence in the country has brought out the worst in many of its denizens. There are more.
Consider the proposed construction of a mosque in Murfreesboro, Tennessee. In that town the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro is attempting to build new facilities to accommodate its expanding congregation. According to the Los Angeles Times it wants to build a 10,000 square foot center that would include a school, gym, pool and a house of worship. There would also be a pavilion and cemetery. The good citizens of Murfreesboro, putting their worst instincts on display for all to see, oppose the construction for, among other reasons, that “Islam is not a valid religion but instead a political cause to force the U.S. to adopt Muslim laws.” In order to add an exclamation point to the opponents’ arguments, in August some of the construction equipment at the site was set on fire and signs were posted in the area saying, “not welcome.” The approach of opponents to the Center may well resonate with African Americans who can remember only too well how their presence brought out the very worst in white citizens in many parts of the country. And then, as now, the worst was not only brought out in the ordinary citizen. It was brought out in religious leaders, defenders of minorities, public servants and those aspiring to be public servants as well. For examples we need only examine the reaction to the proposed Islamic Community Center near Ground Zero in New York City.
Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission came out against the project. The Anti-Defamation League that in theory is opposed to the worst in people said building the Center “in the shadow of the World Trade Center will cause some victims more pain-unnecessarily-and that is not right.” In a Twitter, Sarah Palin who might or might not like to be the next president, said that the proposed Center which she erroneously calls a mosque, stabs hearts (thus apparently releasing the malignancy in those hearts although she didn’t say that) and the Center’s proponents should not proceed with their plans.
Newt Gingrich, who, too, might like to be president some day soon, takes advantage of lots of opportunities, like divorcing his wives, to put his worst side on display. He compared those proposing the Islamic Center, whom he referred to as “radical Islamists,” to “Nazis.” He also said “There should be no mosque near Ground Zero in New York so long as there are no churches or synagogues in Saudi Arabia.” Rudy Giuliani, one-time New York City Mayor, confirming my thesis, pointed out that it is the Muslims’ fault that many Americans are behaving badly. He said the people [Muslims] wanting to build the center are “creating more division, more anger, more hatred” correctly putting the blame on them for bringing out the worst in us.
Muslims are, of course, not alone in bringing out the worst in us. Elections do so as well. That is a subject for another day.
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Arms and the World
The trumpet’s loud clangor
Excites us to arms.
— John Dryden, A Song for St. Cecilia’s Day
It is time for an update on arms sales and the economy and happily, the news in 2010 could not be better. Not about the economy but about arms sales of which the economy is an incidental beneficiary. It has been distressing for observers of such things to see how badly both the economy and arms sales have gone in the last couple of years.
According to a report by the Congressional Research Service, 2009 was not a good year for the United States and other countries that pride themselves on being arms suppliers. Although a decline in arms sales might be considered a harbinger of peace and thus be welcome by the few who count that as a laudable goal, it is in fact nothing more than an indication of a lousy economy since developing nations like buying arms and when they’re not buying, it’s not because they have become pacific but because of the economy.
To understand the hard times that hit the arms industry in 2009 a few numbers tell the tale. In 2009 the U.S. signed arms deals worth a dismal $22.6 billion compared with the much cheerier amount of $38.1 billion in 2008. According to the Congressional Research report, the value of all arms deliveries in 2009 was the lowest total for the entire 2002-2009 period measured in constant 2009 dollars. Although the report offers good news in that the United States continued to outstrip all other countries when it came to arms sales (Russia was in second place) it went from having a 60.4% market share in arms transfer agreements with developing nations in 2008 to a 38.5% market share in 2009. (Arms transfer agreements are not the same as deliveries but are one way of measuring how the business in the world of transferring arms from one country to another is measured. More detail on the two types of measurement is found in the Congressional Report.) The foregoing statistics demonstrate why September’s news was welcomed. It showed that in at least one sector of the economy, things are improving dramatically-the arms business.
On September 14 we learned that the Obama administration was hoping to sell our good friends in Saudi Arabia a large number of weapons for $60 billion. Under the hoped-for agreement the Saudis would get 84 new F-15 fighter jets, 70 upgraded F-15s, 70 Apache helicopters, 75 Black Hawks and 36 Little Birds. (A Little Bird is formally known as an AH-6J Little Bird and is a light attack helicopter.) The great news for the economy is that not only is this reportedly the biggest arms sales in U.S. history but the purchase will have a positive direct and indirect effect on 77,000 jobs in 44 states, some, but not all of them, new jobs. That is wonderful news for those in the affected industries and the economy, if less good for those hoping for world peace. Since the Saudis are our good friends, however, the sale does not affect world peace one way or the other since they would surely not use the weapons in any way detrimental to our best interests. (Selling $60 billion to our Saudi friends is not the same as selling stinger missiles in 1988 to our then friends, Osama bin Laden and his followers, who were fighting the Russians in Afghanistan who were there fighting the Afghans, in more or less the same kind of a battle in which we are now engaged. The Russians stayed in Afghanistan almost 10 years before deciding it was a hopeless task and went home. We have a few months to go before we match their record.)
The good news is not limited to this particular deal that will take place over several years. The senior Defense Department Official who anonymously described the sales outlined above (because the deal isn’t yet finalized and if a name were attached to the announcement it would make it seem more final than it now is although it’s been reported all over the world even though the announcer was anonymous) also said the Saudis might be getting naval and ballistic missile-defense weapons systems that could be worth tens of billions of dollars more.
Happy though this news, it’s not done until it’s done. The sales of all these systems will be stretched out over 5 to 10 years and there will be many renegotiations before all the arms have been delivered. That does not, however, take away from the fact that this is the best news arms sellers and the U.S. economy have had in a long time. It’s too bad the news is not nearly as good for world peace. One can’t have everything.
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
A New Newt?
Hypocrisy is the homage vice pays to virtue.
François, duc de La Rochefoucauld (1613–1680)
— Maxim 218
It brought to mind days of old and the Newt Gingrich of old. It’s because of its name: Pledge to America. That sounds almost like Newt Gingrich’s 1994 Contract With America.
In a brilliant tactical move, the announcement of the Republican Pledge to America was not made by a bunch of politicians in a room in the capitol in Washington D.C. Instead it was made in a hardware store in Sterling Virginia by a bunch of politicians from Washington D.C. who had taken paid time off from work to make the 40 mile drive to the hardware store so as to avoid reminding people that the Pledge to America was being made by the same politicians who work in Washington D.C. everyday except when they’re on recess. And that brings us to Newt Gingrich, a man so busy reinventing himself he barely has time to get dressed in the morning.To appreciate the new Newt it’s necessary to recall the old Newt. (The old Newt I am recalling is not the Newt who ditched his second wife whom he acquired while still married to his first wife, in favor of his third wife, whom he acquired while still married to his second wife but made it all alright by converting to Catholicism where all his sins were forgiven.) I am referring to Newt the Mouth.
Back in 1990 Newt controlled GOPAC, a Republican group that was devoted to defeating Democrats who were running for public office. Among its many activities was compiling a list of the most effective words to use when blasting one’s political opponents. The list was mailed out to Republican candidates. It suggested that candidates refer to their opponents as “sick, pathetic, liberal, incompetent, tax spending traitors.” And to themselves as: “humane visionary, confident, candid, hard-working reformer[s].” The mailing that accompanied the list said that candidates are often heard to say: “I wish I could speak like Newt.” Knowing the magical 133 words to describe one’s opponents was a big step in the right direction.
Following the 1994 Republican victory, Newt came up with some new words. He described the Clintons as “counterculture McGoverniks” and said the folks in the administration were a bunch of left-wing elitists. Shortly thereafter he embellished his comments saying that 25 percent of the left wing elitists had been drug users within the preceding three or four years. He also came out in favor of more orphanages in the District of Columbia saying that in 1994, 800 babies had been disposed of in dumpsters in the District. (He was only off by 796, 4 babies having been found in dumpsters that year.) In response to criticism for his wildly bizarre and hyperbolic comments, he said that he would have to “close down that part of my personality or I’ve got to be more careful, more specific, about what I say. . . . I don’t think you should ever pick a fight, if it’s avoidable.”
Newt has forgotten his promise of 1994. The summer of 2010 gave birth to his new book, modestly called “To Save America.” In the book he says that the current administration’s “secular-socialist machine represents as great a threat to America as Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union once did.” On September 11 2010 he subscribed to the views expressed by Dinesh D’Souza in an article that appeared in Forbes. The article was an outrageous and mindless attack on the present president, but one in which the new Newt took great delight.
Following up on Dinesh’s tirade, Newt said that the president may follow a “Kenyan, anti-colonial” worldview. He said that Dinesh’s trashing of Obama provided the “most profound insight I have read in the last six years about Barack Obama.” Newt went on to say that the president “is a person who is fundamentally out of touch with how the world works, who happened to have played a wonderful con, as a result of which he is now president. I think he worked very hard at being a person who is normal, reasonable, moderate, bipartisan, transparent, accommodating –none of which was true. . . . He was authentically dishonest.”
At least one of Newt’s wives would tell us that Newt is a man who “played a wonderful con” in connection with his marriages and is “authentically dishonest.” According to a story in Esquire in September, prior to dissolving his marriage to Second Wife Marianne because of an affair he was having with Soon To Be Third Wife Callista Bisek, he returned from Erie Pennsylvania where he’d given a speech on family values. He and Marianne were talking and she asked him: “How do you give that speech and do what you’re doing? “It doesn’t matter what I do,” he replied. “People need to hear what I have to say. There’s no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn’t matter what I live.” Actions, he believes, do not speak louder than words. Time will tell if he’s right.