Hillary vs. the Pentagon
When Senator Hillary Clinton sent a letter to the Pentagon requesting information on U.S. plans for a withdrawal from Iraq, Undersecretary of Defense Eric Edelman fired off a statement: "Premature and public discussion of the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq reinforces enemy propaganda that the United States will abandon its allies in Iraq, much as we are perceived to have done in Vietnam, Lebanon and Somalia."
Edelman was right, of course. Osama bin Laden has cited this pattern of American behavior in labeling the United States a "weak horse" that can be defeated by a committed army of jihadists. Those around Washington who have been waiting for the Bush administration to fight back against the steady stream of scurrilous political attacks from their opponents took heart in the response. (Did we mention Mrs. Clinton is running for president?) The collective response from conservatives: Finally.
Clinton, for her part, had the gall to label Edelman's response "a political attack." (Did we mention Mrs. Clinton is running for president?) Of course, what Edelman actually did was offer a substantive response to Clinton's political attack.
In any case, it was a great fight for the White House, as even members of Mrs. Clinton's own party returned from Iraq to report early progress from the surge. So what did the Bush administration do? Cave, as usual.
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates wrote to Clinton that he would be "pleased to work with you and the Senate Armed Services Committee to establish a process to keep you apprised of the conceptual thinking, factors, considerations, questions and objectives associated with drawdown planning." He added: "I truly regret that this important discussion went astray and I also regret any misunderstanding of intention."
Misunderstanding of intention? Mrs. Clinton's intention was clear. In the race for the Democratic political nomination, she must prove her antiwar bona fides to the far left of her party. Pressing the Pentagon to publicize planning for a withdrawal from Iraq helps her do that.
What Gates saw as an "important discussion," Dick Cheney correctly understood as a political attack. And last week, he responded.
"I agreed with the letter Eric Edelman wrote. I thought it was a good letter," Cheney said on Larry King Live. "When you get into the business of talking about operational planning by the Department of Defense, you don't share that as a general proposition until you're ready to actually go out and execute those orders, and then you might share it with the Congress at that point."
Late in the week, Clinton, who understands a good fight when she sees one, asked Bush to settle this dispute between his vice president and his Pentagon chief. It's a good suggestion.
Puff the Magic Kerry
THE SCRAPBOOK has taken a few swipes over the years at Robert "0-for-8" Shrum, the singularly unsuccessful Democratic campaign strategist, who worked for such legendary losers as McGovern '72, Kennedy '80, and Kerry '04. To be fair, it's hard to see anyone winning with some of the candidates he's been saddled with. Consider this anecdote from Shrum's dishy new book, No Excuses:
At an evening house party [in Iowa, January 2004], [Peter Yarrow] was performing "Puff the Magic Dragon" when Kerry, standing in the back of the room, mimed puffing on a joint. Most of the people there didn't see it--and neither did I; I'd retreated back to the bus to make some calls. When [press aide David] Wade stepped onto the bus and sat down next to me, he was beside himself as he recounted what had just happened. As we drove away, Kerry denied it. Wade said it was on tape. Kerry responded that, well, it was just a joke. Wade went to the back of the bus. We were lucky, he reported when he returned. It was late Saturday night, the camera crews didn't all have it, and most of the network imbeds didn't think it was a big deal. We were told later that a CBS crew got the tape to Washington in time for Face the Nation, but that Bob Schieffer's reaction was, Not on my program.
Of special note here is Kerry's adolescent denial until the aide says his pantomime was caught on tape. Plus we like CBS's news judgment; probably helps explain why Face the Nation blows away its rivals in the ratings each Sunday.
The Bonds Market
THE SCRAPBOOK is always on the lookout for solid analysis and trenchant social criticism and--well, thanks to the August 6 edition of Newsweek, were we ever lucky this week.
You see, we've been feeling a little ambivalent about Barry Bonds this summer as he closes in on Hank Aaron's home run record. In fact, some people we know are positively unhappy about Barry Bonds, and instead of applauding his achievement, have been lustily booing when he steps up to the plate!
To be honest, THE SCRAPBOOK was confused by all this until we opened up Newsweek, and there (on page 38) David Gates spelled it out for us:
What do we really hate when we boo Bonds? Wealth and privilege and cheating (they're becoming indistinguishable), defiance, getting above one's station--and also unapologetic excellence. That is, we hate ourselves: for our own furtive greed and evasions of fair play and for our very furtiveness, to which Bonds's arrogance is a rebuke.
But of course! The fact that Bonds is a low life, and a thoroughly unpleasant--not to say contemptible--human being who feasted on (illegal) steroids in middle age to enhance his physique artificially, and surpass Hank Aaron's stellar numbers by cheating, has nothing to do with it. Thanks to Newsweek, we now understand that we really hate ourselves and, in watching Barry Bonds flex his store-bought muscles, we are observing our own furtive greed and evasive defiance while resenting the unapologetic excellence of an athlete who rebukes our cheating evasions and privileged station while booing our indistinguishable wealth and arrogant fair play.
Why didn't we think of that?
Oops, They Did It Again
Parade magazine continues its proud tradition of timely reporting in its July 29 issue: A reader writes, "In June, Lindsay Lohan signed on for extended care at Promises, a luxury rehab center in Malibu. Isn't that really just an extended vacation?" Indeed. Five days earlier, the 21-year-old actress had a blood-alcohol level of 0.12 (well above the 0.08 limit), failed a field-sobriety test, and was charged by Santa Monica police with a DUI and possession of cocaine. Sounds like an extended vacation to us. Parade, on the other hand, says: "No. Lohan . . . seems committed to finally getting clean" and quotes Promises founder Richard Rogg: "The longer people stay, the better their chances. This is a very serious 12-step program. No one should be penalized for choosing to do the hard work of recovery in a luxurious setting."
Besides making Rogg look like an idiot, Parade then asks its readers, "Do you think celebs get the help they need in rehab? Tell us at Parade.com." Why not ask "Do you think O.J. Simpson will be found guilty?" Or maybe "Do you think the Red Sox will ever win a World Series?" Stay tuned until next week!