THE WANDERER, AUGUST 12, 2004
JOSEPH SOBRAN'S
WASHINGTON WATCH
The Bullwinkle and Rocky Ticket
John Kerry failed to get the expected "bounce" in
the polls after the Democrats' convention, and it's
hardly inside stuff to say his campaign now has an aura
of doom. Everyone agreed that his acceptance speech was
one of his better oratorical efforts, yet nobody seems to
have found it inspiring. He talked about his "faith," but
gave no hint of what he has faith in; talked about his
military record, but didn't define his position on the
Iraq war; talked about his family (who in turn talked
movingly about his rescue of a drowning hamster); and
talked about his long political career hardly at all.
At the end of his speech, even the most attentive
listener would be hard put to say what he stands for. I
also read the text of the speech, and I still don't know.
This is Kerry's problem. He's less a candidate than
an abstraction. He has many variations, but no theme.
THE ECONOMIST, the intelligent British newsweekly, tried
to sum Kerry up in three pages, but while studying his
career respectfully, was as unable to define him as the
American press. If even those who have followed his
public life in detail can't say with certainty what he
stands for, it's no wonder the voters aren't sure. All we
know is that he has shown more concern for hamsters than
for human fetuses (though of course he is "personally
opposed" to abortion and will do all in his power to keep
it legal).
Kerry's campaign is almost entirely negative. Not
nasty negative; just negative in the way an absence is
negative. He won the Democratic nomination because he
wasn't Howard Dean; he is counting on winning the
presidency because he isn't George W. Bush. He is running
as an undefined alternative. This might work against a
Herbert Hoover during the Great Depression, but it won't
do against a president who, for all his flaws and
failures, has a strong, clear profile.
I myself think Bush has been a disastrous president,
but most of his disasters are time bombs -- the huge
deficits, for example -- whose effects won't touch most
voters before November. In fact, they are designed to
fall on people who don't vote yet. Or haven't even been
born yet. (Bush may want to protect the unborn, but he's
left some unpleasant surprises for them.)
A Hokey Refrain
After eight years of Bill Clinton, a born
politician, the Democrats are offering the sort of
candidate Clinton supplanted: another Michael Dukakis, a
Massachusetts liberal trying to escape the liberal label.
Kerry was in fact Dukakis's lieutenant governor, but he
has obviously learned nothing from his mentor's crushing
defeat by the elder Bush in 1988.
Kerry's strongest argument against Bush is that he's
not a real conservative. This would be an excellent theme
for a challenger in a Republican primary, but it's a
strange argument for a liberal Democrat to make, and
Kerry is hardly the man to make it. I can't recall any
president being denied re-election because of voter
indignation over deficits; Ronald Reagan ran up big
deficits too, and carried 49 states in 1984.
Clinton had the discernment to distance himself from
the likes of Sister Souljah, the raucous rapper, in 1992;
he gave the Democrats a new tone, oriented to the middle
class. But into the vacuum that is the Kerry campaign, at
the Democrats' convention, came a sort of underclass
renaissance, with Al Sharpton bellowing and various
rappers supplying the sound track music. The convention's
TV ratings were meager; maybe the viewers knew what to
expect. But higher ratings might have sealed Kerry's
fate.
Kerry also chose as his running mate the other
Democrat who wasn't Howard Dean, John Edwards. Maybe
Edwards provided a bit of charm back in an Iowa winter,
but it's lost on me. He reminds me of a cheerful cartoon
rodent; the ticket, come to think of it, looks a bit like
Bullwinkle and Rocky. His speech was eagerly awaited, but
he spoke to the country as if it were a huge backwoods
jury, descending to the hokey refrain, "Hope is on the
way!" with the delegates dutifully joining the chant.
Kerry picked it up in his own acceptance speech. It was
his nearest approach to a campaign theme.
An Evasive Strategy
The convention, like Kerry's campaign, strangely
avoided real discussion of the most obvious issue: the
War on Terror. It barely mentioned the Mideast. Kerry
made a passing swipe at Saudi influence on the Bush
administration (an echo of Michael Moore's film
FAHRENHEIT 9/11?); Edwards made an equally brief promise
to protect Israeli security. Otherwise, treatment of the
whole subject was oblique, though the party's prevalent
antiwar sentiment was clear enough.
The entire party is participating in Kerry's evasive
strategy. It's a liberal party, united chiefly by its
fanatical belief in the sacramental status of abortion;
but it wants to sound vaguely conservative at the same
time, at least until November 2.
This is an awkward position to be in, and Kerry,
like Dukakis, lacks the Clintonian touch, the charm and
finesse to disguise embarrassing contradictions while
sounding sincere. Clinton could address a crowd split
evenly between vegetarians and cannibals and get a
standing ovation at the end; both sides would be
convinced that at heart, he sympathized with them. But
Kerry can't find even an illusory common ground in a
country closely and sharply divided.
Bush at least speaks in decisive platitudes; Kerry
is said to have a better grasp of nuances, complications,
ambiguities, and the like. This may be fine for an IQ
test, but subtle distinctions don't win elections. The
2004 election pits a believer against a doubter. In 1952
and 1956 the Democrats served up an eloquent doubter,
Adlai Stevenson, against a war hero, Dwight Eisenhower;
Eisenhower ate him alive both times. Kerry and the
Democrats are portraying Kerry as a war hero too, but he
lacks Ike's stature as well as his famous smile. (Kerry's
smile looks as if it hurts his facial muscles, which seem
constructed to impart solemnity.)
Who, really, is John Kerry? That people are still
asking this question so late in the campaign is a bad
sign for the Democrats. All we really know is that
several of his fellow veterans and one hamster owe him
their lives.
+ + +
"A thing worth doing is worth doing badly,"
Chesterton said. Most Americans now agree that a thing
worth doing should be done (however badly) by the
government, observes SOBRAN'S. If you have not seen my
monthly newsletter yet, give my office a call at
800-513-5053 and request a free sample, or better yet,
subscribe for two years for just $85. New subscribers
get two gifts with their subscription. More details can
be found at the Subscription page of my website,
www.sobran.com.
Already a subscriber? Consider a gift subscription
for a priest, friend, or relative.
--- Joseph Sobran
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Read this column on-line at
"http://www.sobran.com/wanderer/w2004/w040812.shtml".
This column copyright (c) 2004 by THE WANDERER,
www.thewandererpress.com. Reprinted with permission.
This column may not be published in print or Internet
publications without express permission of THE WANDERER.
You may forward it to interested individuals if you use
this entire page, including the following disclaimer:
"THE WANDERER is available by subscription. Write
subscription@thewandererpress.com for information.
Subscription price: $50 per year; $30 for six months.
Checks can be sent to The WANDERER, 201 Ohio Street,
Dept. JS, St. Paul, MN 55107.
"SOBRAN'S and Joe Sobran's syndicated columns are
available by e-mail subscription. For details and
samples, see http://www.sobran.com/e-mail.shtml, write
PR@griffnews.com, or call 800-513-5053."
This page copyright (c) 2004 by THE VERE COMPANY.