The Sounds of Jane Fonda's Silence

THE SCRAPBOOK never turns down a seat in the front row of history, and last week was no exception. There was a modest antiwar rally on the Mall in Washington--modest by Vietnam-era standards, that is, with about 10,000 people. But around lunchtime, when THE SCRAPBOOK arrived with reporter's pad in hand, the Mall was largely empty.

Of course, the Washington Post found the glass half-full, as it were. "Thousands Protest Bush Policy" screamed a front-page headline the next morning, while the story took delight in "a raucous and colorful multitude of protesters" who, "under a blue sky with a pale midday moon . . . danced, sang, shouted and chanted their opposition," and "came from across the country and across the activist spectrum, with a wide array of grievances."

There was the usual prose poem about winsome senior citizens taking the train down from New York, bearded veterans, "civil rights and community activist" Jesse Jackson, young couples with babies, smiling students, "children in tie-dyed shirts, grandmothers in flowered hats, kids with frizzy hair and muddy jeans," and assorted Hollywood leftists. All rather different in tone, as you might suspect, from coverage of the annual Right-to-Life march on Washington.

Our attention was drawn, however, to the appearance of none other than Jane Fonda on the speaker's platform. The Post was similarly intrigued, but seemed content--and curiously credulous--to view Miss Fonda entirely uncritically. The passive voice got a good workout in the Style section depiction of her. Describing a 1972 photograph of a helmeted Jane Fonda sitting happily atop a North Vietnamese antiaircraft gun--aimed at you-know-whose aircraft--the Post explained that this appalling spectacle "was viewed by many as sympathetic to North Vietnam."

Then there was her assertion "I haven't spoken at an antiwar rally in 34 years. Silence is no longer an option." Unlike the Post, which accepted this as gospel, and reported that Miss Fonda had been otherwise engaged in the intervening decades, THE SCRAPBOOK was struck by the precision of her memory. Thirty-four years would take us back to the winter of 1972-73, when she and actor Donald Sutherland, songbird Holly Near, and others were finishing the worldwide tour of their "F.T.A. [F-- the Army] Show"--"a satirical revue . . . [featuring] protest songs, anti-war humor . . . and agit-prop theater designed to increase awareness and spread resistance" (the New York Times)--on college campuses, at coffeehouses, and outside U.S. military bases here and in Japan, the Philippines, and Okinawa.

Indeed, THE SCRAPBOOK is just old enough to remember that, during those locust years when Jane Fonda (in the words of the Post) was "a workout maven, postfeminist arm candy for billionaire media magnate Ted Turner, a vocal Christian and an autobiographer," she was also, with second husband Tom Hayden in their spacious L.A. residence, host to a parade of strongmen from Nicaragua's Sandinista regime, as well as visiting officials of the Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front, the Communist guerrilla army seeking to destroy the democratically elected government of El Salvador.

Jane Fonda may not have spoken at rallies during that time, but silence was never an option when she could lend her voice to the enemies of her country.

His Dream Job?

Chris Matthews, the host of MSNBC's Hardball and the syndicated Chris Matthews Show, was in Vegas recently, among the judges at the 2007 Miss America pageant. (No, this is not a joke.) As a judge, Matthews took part in the question and answer session with pageant contestants. Your typical Miss America Q&A, we are told, involves banalities like "If you were Miss America, how would you combat global hunger?" and "How do you make every day special and unique?" That is not the approach Matthews took, according to a recent item in the D.C. Examiner. His line of questioning eschewed banality for absurdity. A small sample:

"Why can't [Oprah] find a guy?"

"Faulkner never used commas when he wrote. Why is that?"

In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, "why did Mississippi seem to do a better job" rebuilding than Louisiana?

Matthews, the Examiner continues, also asked Kate Michael, aka Miss District of Columbia, where Osama bin Laden is hiding. That portion of the Q&A never aired on television, but we can only imagine that Michael's initial reaction was a mixture of shock, befuddlement, and bemusement--which, come to think of it, is a lot like the reactions of many guests on Matthews's shows.

NY Times ♥ Iran

Wonder what prize the New York Times will win for that astonishing lead editorial in last Thursday's paper: "Bullying Iran"? In case you're trying to guess, the "bully" is George W. Bush. Complains the Times: "Mr. Bush is at it again, this time trying to bully Iran into stopping its meddling inside Iraq."

What the Times calls "meddling" is Iranian agents helping Iraqi insurgents kill American soldiers. What the Times calls "bullying" is Americans fighting back. We nominate the Times editorialists for the Robert Frost Prize in pathetic liberalism. Frost, of course, defined a liberal as someone so broadminded he won't take his own side in a fight.

Meanwhile, in other West 43rd Street developments, the Times is in favor of bullying its reporters, when they display dangerously deviationist views on the Great Bush Terror. Reporter Michael Gordon, the Times's chief military correspondent, appearing recently on the Charlie Rose show, let slip that he secretly hopes the war goes well for America: "As a purely personal view," said Gordon, "I think [the Bush surge is] worth it--one last effort for sure to try to get this right, because my personal view is we've never really tried to win. We've simply been managing our way to defeat. And I think that if it's done right, I think that there is the chance to accomplish something."

According to the paper's Washington bureau chief, Philip Taubman, Gordon "stepped over the line" and "went too far." Times readers can relax; dissent in the ranks has been quelled.

Turning Right

For that bookshelf groaning under the distinguished works of our contributors, we commend a new volume, Why I Turned Right: Leading Baby Boom Conservatives Chronicle Their Political Journeys, edited by Mary Eberstadt and featuring a number of names that will be familiar to readers. Among them are this magazine's deputy editor, Richard Starr, and contributing editors Joseph Bottum, Tod Lindberg, and P.J. O'Rourke.

The book has already been attacked as "facile" in the Chronicle of Higher Education (or, as we like to think of it, the National Enquirer of the faculty lounge). But the reviewer, though hostile, was a bit envious: "Almost without exception, each essay is lucid and articulate. Would it be possible to assemble a countercollection by leftists that would be equally limpid? Unlikely. . . . Compared to [your typical leftist scholar], much conservative writing has a deft, light touch." Believe the man.

Breindel Awards

Applications are invited for the Eric Breindel Award for Excellence in Journalism. The $20,000 prize is named for longtime New York Post editor and columnist (and WEEKLY STANDARD contributor) Eric Breindel, who died in 1998. It is presented each year to the columnist, editorialist, or reporter whose work best reflects the spirit of Breindel's too-short career: love of country, concern for the preservation and integrity of democratic institutions, and resistance to the evils of totalitarianism. Submissions are also welcome for the second annual $10,000 collegiate award for the undergraduate whose journalistic work best reflects the themes that animated Breindel's writing. For further information about both awards, contact Germaine Febles at 212-843-8031 or gfebles@rubenstein.com.