Wednesday, September 02, 2009

Suits from central casting

Excerpted From VIN SUPRYNOWICZ: “His [Ted Kennedy] monument stands all around us

"I was raised a New England Democrat. Far from hating the Kennedys, I suppose I almost worshiped them. I wish John and Bobby had not been killed. Though you would have had to be deaf not to hear older New Englanders note that the family money had come from crime (bootlegging, specifically); that JFK's multiple adulteries (including with Sam Giancana's Mafia moll, Judith Campbell Exner -- in the White House!), creating so much cover-up work for the press and the Secret Service, so disrespectful of the lovely mother of his young children, only echoed his father's famous affair with Hollywood actress Gloria Swanson; that he was asking for trouble when he asked the unions and the mob to help him steal the presidency by rigging the returns in Illinois and West Virginia -- and then turned his back on them, actually siccing his younger brother Bobby on them like an attack dog, as soon as he got elected.

Republicans fail by losing the presidency when they do the sensible thing: nominating old Washington hands like Bob Dole, a perfectly decent fellow who knew the ropes and probably would have made a competent if uninspiring administrator. A "go-along" kind of guy with unarticulated (if any) economic principles who never stood in the path of the profligacies of Ted Kennedy and his ilk, Bob Dole was no hero of mine.

But Democrats do something far more interesting. Democrats fail -- not incrementally but massively, disastrously -- by winning the presidency, which they do by nominating virile younger men in whom Americans see the image of the brave, handsome, smooth-talking, dapper guy they wish they were.

John F. Kennedy was woefully unprepared to be president. His lack of experience and his health problems, so obligingly covered up by a press corps that loved him -- Addison's disease, colitis and back problems so severe he had to wear a brace, possibly caused by his decades-long steroid treatments, while all we got to see was touch football on the beach -- left him woefully inadequate in his summit meetings with Khrushchev in Vienna. Khrushchev read the callow young president as a playboy dilettante and decided he could get away with deploying missiles to Cuba, bringing the world to the brink of war.
Did Kennedy "bravely stand him down," as we were all taught? Kennedy agreed to pull our own missiles out of Turkey. (We're told "they were obsolete, anyway." We won the battle of Guadalcancal with stuff that was more obsolete.) Khrushchev won ... in the short run, which is all the victory a socialist can ever hope for, given that their underlying philosophy will always breed poverty and disaster in the end.

Bill Clinton was of the same mold but worse -- a greedy crook with his hand always out for a check (whether it be a corporation looking for a contract in Little Rock, or the Chinese military seeking our satellite and missile technology), but nonetheless a big, handsome teddy bear of a foul-mouthed multiple adulterer, if not (as I believe) something closer to a serial rapist.

And now the Democrats have given us Barack Obama, a handsome, dapper, smooth-talking, virile younger president who is -- hard as it is to believe -- vastly less qualified for the presidency than John F. Kennedy.

He has no idea he has taken an oath to protect a Constitution that promises us a government of sharply limited powers. (Where in that Constitution does he find any authority for federal bureaucrats to manage auto companies? To meddle in medicine or insurance?) He has no experience commanding even the small military units once officered by JFK or Jimmy Carter -- let alone the mighty administrative experience in matters of life and death once shouldered by Washington, Jackson, Eisenhower.

He has never worked in, let alone managed, a small business that had to meet payroll by selling actual merchandise to actual customers. (At least Harry Truman once sold shirts.) He is the perfect creature of the arrogant leftist academy -- actually believing in the magic power of rhetoric to alter reality, seeing no need to test out such theories on some little hamburger or yogurt stand before attempting to micro-manage the largest economy in the world.

For six months, Barack Obama has had it all his way, with a populace virtually hypnotized into allowing him to advance a far-left agenda learned at the knees of his mother's communist friends, aided by such powerful and privileged yet philosophically hollow allies as Ted Kennedy."

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

It's quite a stretch, taking seriously any critique of other Presidents from a W supporter.

"I'll be long gone before some smart person ever figures out what happened inside this Oval Office." GWB May 12, 2008

Norma said...

Which part of his essay troubles you--the style over substance that the Democrats choose? That Obama is even less experienced than JFK? That Clinton was a serial philanderer? Or that Harry Truman who ran a clothing store was probably a better president, smarter and better prepared than the 3 of them together.

Anonymous said...

If it were truly an essay about style over substance, rather than a political hit piece. It wouldn't have left out that empty suit...George W. Bush.

On reflection, maybe Vin left Bush out because he possessed neither style nor substance.

Norma said...

No matter what is said about Obama, you can only think B-U-S-H. Get over it. Your guy won! Time to look at his failures. You remind me of Rush who bored the world with his Clinton stories long after he should have moved on.

Anonymous said...

I can understand your desire to forget about B-U-S-H. After all, you are one of the people who elected him once.

Norma said...

I have been quite generous with my criticism of Bush. But I digress. This is all about your failings.

Anonymous said...

History will probably write the last chapter on both and find them both "empty suits" as is the popular phrase.I am not ready to write off Obama at this point. I wish for more spine,WE WON! Trying to bring the Repubs around is futrile. Just do it!

Norma said...

We'll see. Bush declared victory too soon and Obama says he's not interested in victory. He's bad mouthed his country every chance he gets, and Bush sounded a bit like a cheerleader. If the historian is Cuban, or Libyan, or a student of Saul Alinsky maybe Obama will get high marks. Otherwise, I'd bet on Bush. But as I wrote in one of my poems, the victor owns the archives, so who will know?