Positive Pause
Bob Tyrrell’s lecture on the overarching virtues of candidate
McCain was the single best-written argument I’ve read with respect
to voting for this guy (“Captain McCain,” TAS, July/August
2008). I am biased, I suppose. Tyrrell is one of those conservative
“warriors” I keep trying to locate. And at least a minor treasure.
He actually brings passion and logic to his convictions. I’ve met
the senator— and disliked him almost immediately; sometimes after
listening further to the fellow I wonder why I didn’t dislike him
sooner.
He strikes me as self-important, self-regarding, and
self-inflating. I believe him to be bitter and wrong far too often
on conservative issues, e.g., immigration, First Amendment. Well,
you know the drill. On the other hand, Tyrrell’s apologia does make
a case for double-clutching on an absolute refusal to vote for
McCain. McCain is a serious man. Senator Obama is as well, but in
the style of a preening, supercilious feline. He would, in concert
with a Reid Senate and Pelosi House, proceed to break this country.
If nothing else, Bob Tyrrell has given me cause to pause. This
election will count for something.
J.C. EATON
Chetek, Wisconsin
Something Borrowed
In the article, “What Will Rumsfeld Write?” (by Jed Babbin,
TAS, September 2008) the following is written: “The second
borrows a line from the great Toby Keith, converting ‘I wish I
didn’t know now what I didn’t know then’ from lyric to prose.”
Actually, it was Mr. Keith who borrowed that line. He penned his
song, “Wish I Didn’t Know,” to which the article refers, in 1994.
The line originally comes from the song “Against the Wind,” written
by Mr. Bob Seger. Mr. Seger wrote the song in 1980. Mr. Keith
aside, cheers on a great article!
THATCHER HALLOCK
St. Louis,
Missouri
Like Jed Babbin, I cannot wait for the Rumsfeld memoirs. Even
discounting Rumsfeld’s years serving Ford or his influence with
President Reagan, he is the one man who could probably fairly
describe what occurred with our military during the
post-Clinton/Bush era.
My biggest questions lay with the immediate aftermath of the
9/11 attacks up to his resignation in 2006. The Afghan campaign was
brilliant up to the Tora Bora operation; the Iraqi invasion was
anything but brilliant. Thus far there haven’t been any books
written “from the top” which discuss the many operational problems
both campaigns entailed. There was also the political aspect. Why
did the Army insist on a World War II-style invasion of Iraq when
the insurgency model in Afghanistan worked so well, and our
conventional military was just a shell of its Cold War strength?
How much backbiting occurred between the Department of Defense,
State Department, and the CIA? Was Rumsfeld forced to keep quiet
about the insurgencies both Syria and Iran supported against our
efforts in Iraq?
These are just a few brief questions I would love to have
answered. Rumsfeld is that rarity in our postmodern, Beltway-driven
politics: a brilliant civil servant. He also has honor. He took his
lumps and graciously retired when it was required of him to do so.
He retired with his reputation in tatters, taking most of the blame
for the series of bloody insurgencies that plagued Iraq from 2004
to 2006. Those Army field commanders and State Department officials
who were responsible for order in Iraq either were transferred or
retired with their reputations largely intact. Rumsfeld’s memoirs
should clear the air a bit.
JEROME KOCH
Indiana
Klein’s Prescription
This is an absolutely fantastic article on health care and the
free market (“Learning to Care About Health Care,” by Philip Klein,
TAS, July/August 2008). As with all things, less
government regulation and more privatization are the solutions.
Just study Galveston County’s private retirement plan, in lieu of
Social Security. As an employer, I benefit from providing health
care (pre-tax) for my employees, but not much. I would strongly
prefer for them to benefit on a personal level, as well as to
personally administer the plan. As you stated, conservatives need
to get their heads out of the sand. Thank you for the ammunition to
battle the growing liberal war cries.
JOHN HORNSBY
Houston, Texas
Under Investigation
In his highly enjoyable “Bill and Me at Georgetown” in the
September 2008 issue, the eminent Mr. Tyrrell wonders how “let the
researcher beware” would be translated into Latin. It is, very
simply, Caveat investigator. (The complementary noun for
investigation, or “looking into,” is investigati-o-onis and the
verb for “to look into or search after” is investigare.) Keep up
the good work.
(MOST REV.) LOUIS W. FALK
Clive,
Iowa
To the Naked Buckeye
I appreciated W. James Antle III’s piece on the Ohio Republican
Party (“What’s the Matter with Ohio?” TAS, June 2008),
particularly his concession at the end of the piece that 2006
Republican gubernatorial nominee J. Kenneth Blackwell, despite
striking all the right conservative notes, was swamped by his
opponent, Democrat Ted Strickland. I would direct Antle, and your
readers, to political scientist John Fenton’s 1960s book Midwest
Politics, which branded Ohio’s politics as “issueless.” Blackwell
ran an issues campaign: he talked about a constitutional amendment
that would have limited state spending growth— that is, before the
state’s sane moderate wing persuaded him to throw it out because it
was disastrously worded—and leasing the state turnpike. Strickland,
meanwhile, ran on a platform that supported grandma, apple pie, and
the American Way. Throw out the Democratic tidal wave in 2006;
Blackwell never would have won modern Ohio, which, as Fenton noted,
likes bland politicians who don’t rock the boat. Politicians who,
as legendary Ohio GOP chairman Ray Bliss put it, keep issues out of
campaigns. Despite sending two bedrock conservatives, John W.
Bricker and Robert Taft, to the Senate in the middle of the last
century, the leaders of the Ohio GOP since the 1960s have largely
been moderate. Four-term Gov. James A. Rhodes loved big bond
issues; George Voinovich and Mike DeWine, Ohio’s two recent GOP
senators, were decried as “RINOs”— Republicans In Name Only—by
their conservative detractors in Ohio.
Better a RINO in Ohio, because, here, “true conservative” is a
euphemism for “loser.”
KYLE KONDIK
Lakewood, Ohio
The Art of Clarity
Two things came to mind when I read “The Legacy of 1968” (Roger
Scruton, TAS, September 2008). First was a comment
made by a crusty old geologist who complimented me, in the late
1960s, on speaking lucidly. He went on to tell me he was unable to
carry on a meaningful conversation with his own son, who was about
20 years old at the time. Second is a list of words my brother
acquired on the University of Arizona campus, around 1966. A brief
instruction attached to the list stated all you had to do to sound
learned and intelligent was to make up sentences using words from
the different columns in the list (see table below). Here are two
examples:
1. We must use balanced, management options. 2. It had been
synchronized, so transitional hardware was not needed.
The great 20th-century philosopher Karl Popper was a big
proponent of clarity and a big opponent of obscurity. He stated,
“Clarity is an intellectual value in itself.” He went on to say
that the intellectual owes to his fellows his ideas presented as
clearly and modestly as he can. “The worst thing that intellectuals
can do—the cardinal sin— is to try to set themselves up as great
prophets vis-à-vis their fellow men and to impress them with
puzzling philosophies.”
SCOTT MANSFIELD
San Gabriel,
California
I knew there was a particular reason why I enjoy Roger Scruton’s
writings so much.
COL. ROBERT J. POWERS, USAF
(RET.)
Boston University CLA, X’50
Shreveport, Louisiana
