| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Peggy Noonan: how to deal with Chavez |
| 2006-09-22 |
| Wall Street Journal Edited to get to the money quotes. America has seen this before, seen Krushchev bang his shoe on the table and say "We will bury you." We grew up watching our flag being burned on TV. So it's tempting to think this is part of a meaningless continuum. But the temperature of the world is very high, and maybe we're not stuck in a continuum but barreling down a dark corridor. The problem with heated words now is that it's not the old world anymore. In the old world, incompetent governments dragged cannons through the mud to set up a ragged front. Now every nut and nation wants, has or is trying to develop nukes. Harsh words inspire the unstable. Coolants are needed. Here is an idea. Don't try to ignore Chavez, answer him. With the humility that comes with deep confidence, with facts, and with some humor, too. There is an opportunity for the Democratic Party. Some Democrats responded with spirited indignation the day after Chavez spoke. It was rousing. But Chavez's charges were grave, and he claimed America's abuses could be tracked back a century. If the Democrats seek to speak for America, why not start with a serious and textured response, one that isn't a political blast-back but a high-minded putting forward of facts? This would take guts, and farsightedness. Rebutting a wild-eyed man who says you can find redemption reading Noam Chomsky is a little too much like rebutting a part of your base. Which is why Rangel and Pelosi are being villified as traitors to the cause on the Angry Left websites even as we speak. Sad to say, but even most of the grownups in the Dem party (and there are some)are afraid of the moonbats and of Soros' millions. As for the administration, it is so in the habit of asserting, defending and repeating, it barely remembers how to persuade and appeal. It speaks starkly and carries a big stick. It feels so beleaguered on a daily basis, and so snakebit, that even its mildest players have taken refuge in gritting their teeth and tunneling on. They take comfort in this: They think Chavez helps them. See what we're up against? But that's not a response, it's a way not to respond. It doesn't help, because it doesn't even try to cool things down. Which is no good, because the temperature of the world is very high. |
| Posted by:Mike |
| #10 That's pretty easy. All of our gas stations appear to be Lukoil these days. |
| Posted by: J.D. Lux 2006-09-22 14:58 |
| #9 Everyone boycott Citgo. Spread the word. |
| Posted by: KBK 2006-09-22 14:55 |
| #8 AlanC Where can I find the text of Blair's speech. ? |
| Posted by: J.D. Lux 2006-09-22 14:06 |
| #7 Nope. No visas. The Venezuelans elected him. Now they can get to enjoy him up close and personal, just like we do from afar. Providing visas justs provides pressure release valve for pathological regimes, as has been done for years for Cuba and Mexico. |
| Posted by: ed 2006-09-22 13:44 |
| #6 NS I think you're wrong on the audience. His audience is not those undecided between him and Bush. His audience is all the other crazies. He's campaigning for the UNSC and leadership (replacing Castro) of the anti-American "non-aligned" movement. I agree that Bush's PR sucks. But, I would ask what Noonan thinks this will accomplish? I don't recall RR laughing off Qadaffi. Unless those bombs had jokes on them. I think that Tony Blair's latest about how the Euros and others better be careful or they'll get what they want and the US will retreat within and leave the rest of the world to their own devices. His point is that nothing good can come without the USA involved. That's the kind of talk we should be touting. |
| Posted by: AlanC 2006-09-22 11:35 |
| #5 Just the fact that this is written by Peggy Noonan points out what should have happened. One can just imagine old Reagan chuckling his way through a Noonan backhanded, beautiful putdown of Hugo. |
| Posted by: J.D. Lux 2006-09-22 10:21 |
| #4 Peggy's problem here is that she doesn't recognise that we are not the target of Chavez's rants. Peggy recognizes that and that the response should be made to the audience of the undecided. That is why she calls for an answer with humility, confidence, facts and humor. Her point that the administration responds only with unpersuasive defensiveness that only contributes to raising tempers is spot on. Bush's PR has been terrible. The only positive public images of Bush I can think of is him with NYFD firemen and the bull horn telling Osama & friends they'd be hearing from us and the Christmas in Baghdad. Cheney and Rumsfeld are Secretaries of War. The closest thing he's got is the brilliant but underexposed Tony Snow. And that's too little too late. But that's the kind of PR blitz that is needed 24/7 in multiple foreign venues. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-09-22 10:05 |
| #3 Too late, TC1087. There are so many FARC and now some Hezb'allah in Venezuela it would be difficult if not impossible to screen them out. |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-09-22 09:44 |
| #2 Peggy's problem here is that she doesn't recognise that we are not the target of Chavez's rants. We are only the subject matter. His audience thrives on this and the more we try and act like an adult the more he will rant. The gang leader doesn't gain in stature by allowing his opponents calm words to cool the situation. A gang leader gains in stature by constantly turning up the heat. Both Chavez and Dinnerjacket are trying to become the new gang leaders. |
| Posted by: AlanC 2006-09-22 09:21 |
| #1 So, how many applications have been submitted at the American Embassy in Carracas? Here's how you play the game. Have a sign like McDonald's outside the US Embassy. x thousand severed daily. Jam a big one into the tranzies and issue a big quota for Venezuelan applicants, pointing out that we support LEGAL immigration. These new one's aren't Mecha and will contrast nicely with those who parade with Mexican flags in our streets. And its not like exluding one nationality for another in this case could be labeled 'rascism'. |
| Posted by: Thereger Chosing1087 2006-09-22 09:03 |