Tuesday, December 19, 2006

The Teddy Awards

I don't like Joe Klein. His Teddy (Theodore Roosevelt) Awards pretty much prove my reasoning for that dislike.
"It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again...who spends himself in a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly ..."

Another year gone. Time again for this column—which was named after the Theodore Roosevelt quotation cited above—to take note of some of the people who performed honorably as winners and losers in the public arena. This was not a terrific year for elected officials; only one is mentioned in this column, and he lost his race. Happily, the public arena is not limited to elected U.S. politicians. There were others who made their mark in 2006.

Kofi Annan's 10 years at the United Nations were not a "triumph of high achievement," but the Secretary-General was a force for civility throughout. His work—and the efforts of the U.N. inspection teams—in the months leading up to the Iraq war deserves special mention. The U.N.'s search for weapons of mass destruction was rigorous and accurate: there were no weapons to be found. Annan quietly understood that an American invasion would be a disaster. He suffered physically and mentally over his failure to prevent the war. After the invasion, he experienced a mild nervous collapse. For a time, he actually lost his voice. For his pains, he was subjected to a chorus of know-nothing blatherings by U.S. critics who blamed him—inaccurately—for the U.N.'s oil-for-food scandal and ridiculed him for his failure to bring the rest of the world into line behind an incomprehensible series of U.S. foreign policy errors. He, more than any other public figure this year, embodies Teddy Roosevelt's definition of "the man in the arena."
Great quote, too bad it's coming from a dolt like Klein. I suppose his hero worship of Annan should be no surprise. The know-nothings that blamed Annan for the corruption in the UN can't possibly have any points in their derision over a Secretary-General who over saw one of the most corrupt and useless UN's in all history. Annan deserves the derision thrown his way. His refusal to allow outside auditing of the UN and specifically on the oil-for-food CF is astounding. The additional issues with corruption related to UN forces raping in Africa, along with other allegations of UN officials on their party tours during national disasters have raised the observant persons ire to an all time high. Should I even mention the complete lack of any use for the "peace keeping" UN forces that do nothing except hide in their conclaves. If the President of the US is ultimately responsible for the actions of soldiers in situations like Abu-Gharaib, shouldn't Annan be held to the same standard? Or is this the usual do as I say not as I do politics.
Al Gore's documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, was nothing new to those who have listened to the former Vice President's inspired ranting about global warming for the past quarter-century. But it was time for that message to be delivered clearly, cleverly, with renewed urgency to a new audience. Gore's reinvigoration was a reminder that he has been prescient on a great many issues. He was one of the few Democrats to vote, correctly, in favor of the first Gulf War. He was one of the few Democrats to argue, correctly, on Sept. 23, 2002, that Bush's pre-emptive invasion of Iraq would be a serious mistake. Now Gore seems liberated, less awkward than he has ever before appeared in public and eager to propose more inconvenient truths—like the need for a tax on fossil fuels. I don't know if he's running for President. Probably not. But he should.
Ah yes. Al "the internet" Gore. His movie didn't even try to bring a reasonable telling of the issue of global warming to the table. The hyped screeching of Doom persists in his flavor of environmentalism. The thought of a fossil fuel tax is still astounding that it finds any traction with anyone that isn't a complete idiot. Klein loves the thought of course. Let's not forget that taxing the fossil fuels won't help anyone that is dependent on them and certainly won't hurt the big fuel providers in their profits. The end users will be punished, and you think the present cries for help from the old and poor to pay for heating oil is bad now, wait till the tax man puts the clamp on their heating oil or electricity. Is he running for president? Sure, and making Hillary look like a more reasonable candidate every day. Wonder if he's figured out who he is yet.

I'll skip Jim Leach as being a big yawn and not even in the arena of what could be an award.
Last summer Lieut. General David Petraeus invited me out to visit the U.S. Army Combined Arms Center at Fort Leavenworth, Kans. Every U.S. Army major spends a midcareer year going to school there. Most of these officers are headed to Iraq or Afghanistan, and the curriculum has been revised to include intensive language courses in Arabic and Pashtu, the history and culture of Islam, a hefty dose of counterinsurgency strategy and tactics, plus the standard military disciplines. I came away inspired and infuriated: if only the Bush Administration—and the public—took the mission as seriously as the Army does! What a shame that we've inserted these fine people into such a mess.
Petraeus deserves this mention. Sadly Klein decides to make an asinine statement about Bush not caring which is to spin Klein's own distorted reality as our own. Shame to insert soldiers into a conflict that must succeed? Rubbish. The causation of the war is now completely irrelevant, no matter the howling of the anti-war parties. Success in Iraq can help change the course of the Middle-East and stabilize the region to the point where it could become a partner in the the world economy rather then a continuing threat. But to understand that Klein would need to step back from the petty whining of the anti-war crowd and understand that we are in the stream of events and the soldiers are one of the primary oars to completing this successfully.

Who would I have voted for? Rumsfeld for one. He did a very good job fighting a war and updating the US military in a theater where the services resisted extremely to change, and the monday morning quarterbacks constantly second guessed every action taken. The vilification of Rumsfeld was astounding for its complete lack of perspective. The constant bitching about how the Armed Services were used has always astounded me, for it is the yelping of those who don't understand that war is a fluid event and the enemy changes. Could things have gone better, yep, but I'm betting those that yell the loudest about him would have done far worse. Not that I expect many to agree with me on that one.

How about John Bolton? With the extreme vitriol thrown at him, he did an astoundingly effective job at the UN. Most of his critics even admitted that. But jackass' like Lincoln Chafee blocked his nomination and with the change of party control in the Senate, there is no reason to think that he would ever get in for political reasons alone.

I wonder if Klein understands that Theodore Roosevelt was a Republican?

2 comments:

Skeptic said...

Thanks for your coherent criticism of Joe Klein's laughably off-the-mark appropriation of "greatness" and (horrors) Teddy Roosevelt.

TR is STILL rolling in grave over naming Annan, Gore, and Leach (who?).

You chose not to comment on Leach, who gets an "award" for declining to authorize attack ads in his unsuccessful re-election bid for congress in Iowa.

This may be ethical or noble, but certainly not great.

(TR might call it "stupid"?)

I don't know about the others because I was so fed up with Klein's nonsense that I stopped reading.

Thanks Again

Jim Susky

Skeptic said...

Thanks for your coherent criticism of Joe Klein's laughably off-the-mark appropriation of "greatness" and (horrors) Teddy Roosevelt.

TR is STILL rolling in grave over naming Annan, Gore, and Leach (who?).

You chose not to comment on Leach, who gets an "award" for declining to authorize attack ads in his unsuccessful re-election bid for congress in Iowa.

This may be ethical or noble, but certainly not great.

(TR might call it "stupid"?)

I don't know about the others because I was so fed up with Klein's nonsense that I stopped reading.

Thanks Again

Jim Susky