Click on WORD or PDF below for full content
Michael Barone with a history lesson on the Berlin airlift.
Sixty years ago this month, the top story in campaign year 1948 was not the big poll lead of Republican nominee Thomas Dewey or the plight of President Harry Truman. It was the Berlin airlift. On June 23, the Soviets cut off land access to West Berlin. Gen. Lucius Clay, the military governor in Germany, called for sending convoys up the autobahns, but Allied troops were vastly outnumbered by the Red Army, and everyone feared it would overrun Western Europe unless the United States retaliated with the atomic bomb. Air Force generals said that there was no way planes could ferry the 8 million pounds of food and coal Berlin would need every day. Secretary of State George Marshall and Joint Chiefs Chairman Omar Bradley, two of America’s most respected generals, felt Berlin was indefensible and we should withdraw. One man disagreed. President Harry Truman, in one crucial meeting after another, said, We’re not leaving Berlin. …
David Warren thinks a free Canada will disappear, not with a bang, but with a whimper
George Will says civilization depends on beer.
… “The search for unpolluted drinking water is as old as civilization itself. As soon as there were mass human settlements, waterborne diseases like dysentery became a crucial population bottleneck. For much of human history, the solution to this chronic public-health issue was not purifying the water supply. The solution was to drink alcohol.”
Often the most pure fluid available was alcohol — in beer and, later, wine — which has antibacterial properties. Sure, alcohol has its hazards, but as Johnson breezily observes, “Dying of cirrhosis of the liver in your forties was better than dying of dysentery in your twenties.” Besides, alcohol, although it is a poison, and an addictive one, became, especially in beer, a driver of a species-strengthening selection process.
Johnson notes that historians interested in genetics believe that the roughly simultaneous emergence of urban living and the manufacturing of alcohol set the stage for a survival-of-the-fittest sorting-out among the people who abandoned the hunter-gatherer lifestyle and, literally and figuratively speaking, went to town.
To avoid dangerous water, people had to drink large quantities of, say, beer. But to digest that beer, individuals needed a genetic advantage that not everyone had — what Johnson describes as the body’s ability to respond to the intake of alcohol by increasing the production of particular enzymes called alcohol dehydrogenases. This ability is controlled by certain genes on chromosome four in human DNA, genes not evenly distributed to everyone. Those who lacked this trait could not, as the saying goes, “hold their liquor.” So, many died early and childless, either of alcohol’s toxicity or from waterborne diseases.
The gene pools of human settlements became progressively dominated by the survivors — by those genetically disposed to, well, drink beer. “Most of the world’s population today,” Johnson writes, “is made up of descendants of those early beer drinkers, and we have largely inherited their genetic tolerance for alcohol.” …
Jeff Jacoby points to the Dem hypocrisy of worshipping Kerry’s military service and then the systematic denigration of McCain’s.
… Given that effusive show of respect for military experience in 2004, you would think no Democrat this year could even contemplate disparaging John McCain’s far more extensive military career. The presumptive Republican nominee, after all, spent 22 years as a naval aviator; flew 23 combat missions over North Vietnam; earned numerous combat decorations, including the Silver Star and Legion of Merit; and demonstrated courage and self-sacrifice during five years as a prisoner of war in Hanoi.
Yet in recent months, one Democrat after another has gone out of his way to diminish or criticize McCain’s war record. A partial list:
In April, Senator Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia denounced McCain as insensitive – pointing, as evidence, to his military service. “McCain was a fighter pilot who dropped laser-guided missiles from 35,000 feet,” Rockefeller told the Charleston Gazette. “He was long gone when they hit. What happened when they get to the ground? He doesn’t know. You have to care about the lives of people. McCain never gets into those issues.”
Rockefeller later apologized, but a few days later, it was George McGovern’s turn. The former Democratic presidential nominee told an audience that he would like to say to McCain: “Neither of us is an expert on national defense. It’s true that you went to one of the service academies, but you were in the bottom of the class.” He added, tauntingly: “You were shot down early in the war and spent most of the time in prison. I flew 35 combat missions with a 10-man crew and brought them home safely every time.” …
Jim Geraghty at NRO’s Campaign Spot wonders why we’re not hearing about Obama’s June fundraising totals.
John Kass of ChiTrib says the left is squealing over Obama’s flips.
… Obama used them to crush the Clintons, but now the left is finally realizing it’s been betrayed, on issue after issue, with Obama changing his positions in order to defeat a tired and disillusioned Republican Party in November.
They’re at the dance now and he’s the one with the keys and he’s the only ride they’ve got. And they don’t like it.
He has flip-flopped again and again, on campaign finance, on government eavesdropping of overseas phone calls, on gun control and even Iraq. Future President Obama now says he’ll listen to his generals about when to withdraw. He didn’t say he’d listen to the commissars of the blogosphere.
And his cheerleaders are beginning to realize that Obama may not be the Arthurian knight in shining armor, that he may not be Mr. Tumnus, the gentle forest faun of our presidential politics. Months after his inauguration, after he makes Billy Daley the secretary of the treasury and Michael Daley the secretary of zoning and promotes Patrick Fitzgerald to become the attorney general of Mars, the political left may figure out that Obama is a Chicago politician.
“Only an idiot would think or hope that a politician going through the crucible of a presidential campaign could hold fast to every position, steer clear of the stumbling blocks of nuance and never make a mistake,” wrote Bob Herbert in The New York Times. “But Barack Obama went out of his way to create the impression that he was a new kind of political leader—more honest, less cynical and less relentlessly calculating than most. . . . Obama is not just tacking gently toward the center. He’s lurching right when it suits him, and he’s zigging with the kind of reckless abandon that’s guaranteed to cause disillusion, if not whiplash.”
This panic of the left—particularly among many political media types—is profoundly instructive to foreigners seeking to understand American character. The American media elite chose to portray Obama as some kind of knight in armor. They’re analysts. Yet they were desperate to believe in a political fairy tale from Chicago. …
Debra Saunders writes on Obama, McCain and the wiretapping bill.
Hey, it’s politics. In the primary, when Barack Obama wanted to connect with his party’s disaffected left, he said that he would support a filibuster to stop a reauthorization of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act if it granted retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies that had cooperated with the federal government after the 9/11 attacks.
Now Obama has those voters in the bag. So he is reaching out to the majority of Americans who want aggressive international surveillance to prevent another terrorist attack.
And the average voter certainly isn’t going to lose sleep if the price of that security is that the ACLU does not have carte blanche to sue AT&T for cooperating with the government.
Wednesday, Obama was one of 69 senators who voted for the FISA bill that provided retroactive immunity to the telecoms. …
Abe Greenwald with a good take on this week’s New Yorker cover.
Obama doesn’t like the New Yorker cover. American Thinker thinks he ought to “man up.”
A long, yet unsatisfyingly incomplete article in the current issue of The New Yorker about Barack Obama’s Chicago roots, lauding him for many things that might be considered non-laudable, was a passing curiosity in the blogosphere yesterday. We here at AT blogged about it, pointing out that Mr. Lizza had actually uncovered some things that weren’t too flattering about the candidate.
But the piece went from a passing curiosity to a full blown campaign typhoon when the cover of the issue was released. It showed Obama in a turban doing the fist bump with his wife who is dressed up as some kind of revolutionary. An American flag burns in the fireplace of the Oval Ofice:
One look at this and the Obama campaign hit the roof. …
Now for a couple of less than flattering views of Jesse Helms. Juan Williams is first.
… To be sure, for Helms the essence of North Carolina values was keeping taxes low, and fighting against big government. That is a great message. It won him a base of support.
But that base was rural working-class voters and white suburban male voters. He rallied this base by letting everyone know he disliked Chapel Hill intellectuals — the kind of people who protested for equal rights for blacks and challenged U.S. involvement in Vietnam. He showed no compassion for gays coming out of the closet and women who wanted abortion rights; instead choosing to make them demons threatening family values. And he made blunt use of racial politics.
The most infamous example was in his 1990 Senate campaign against Harvey Gantt, the former mayor of Charlotte and a black man. Helms ran an ad that showed white hands crumpling a rejection letter while a voice announced: “You needed that job. And you were best qualified. But they had to give it to a minority.” …
Hitchens is next with, “Farewell to a Provincial Redneck.”