Going south: The decline of U.S. politics

Washington Times ^ | Tuesday, July 6, 2004 | Lyn Nofziger

[JohnHuang2]

The Washington Times
www.washingtontimes.com

---

Going south

By Lyn Nofziger
Published July 6, 2004

---

    FAT MAN FED UP: HOW AMERICAN POLITICS WENT BAD
    Jack W. Germond
    Random House, 224 pages
    
    Jack Germond is a fat man. But he makes up for it by being short. He is not Mr. Five-by-Five, though he comes close.
    More importantly, Mr. Germond is, or rather was, one of the nation's better political reporters and columnists. Although he is now what one might call semi-retired, he still dabbles in television, writes an occasional op-ed piece, and now and then a book. His first four books were co-authored with fellow columnist Jules Witcover.
    His first solo book was titled, appropriately, "Fat Man in a Middle Seat"; now he has followed it with "Fat Man Fed Up," a book consisting largely of anecdotes and laced with the sort of personal opinions and invective that would not ordinarily fit into a news story or even a political column. But Mr. Germond makes a number of valid points that have to do with today's politics and news media.
    And in the end he finally gets around to telling us why he is fed up. I think the reason is mainly -- although he may protest there's more to it -- that he liked the good old days better.
    "American politics has gone sour," he says. "We've made a series of mistakes in choosing our presidents." Who, Democrat or Republican, could argue with that assertion?
    The trouble is, the men Mr. Germond preferred either could not be elected or, like his hero Mario Cuomo, wouldn't run.
    Actually, that's just part of it. The book has a whole chapter at the end devoted to what's wrong with America -- its presidents, its politics and its news media. But you don't have to wait until then for a list of Mr. Germond's gripes. Cynicism abounds throughout. For instance, in Chapter 1 the author tells us, "There is no penalty for bad behavior in American politics. No one is paying attention."
    Mr. Germond's liberal prejudices are a mile wide and every bit as deep; since he makes no bones about his own liberalism and even confesses to atheism, it is not very surprising that he calls the first President Bush "an empty suit" and shows his contempt for any number of other Republicans.
    Unfortunately, some of his shots border on being cheap, such as: "I noticed that George W. Bush's daughters didn't volunteer to fight in Iraq."
    He also gives us the liberal take on the ending of the Cold War, telling us that "the radical policies of Mikhail Gorbachev" effectively led to the collapse of the Soviet Union. Ronald Reagan, apparently, was a mere bystander.
    Good reporter that Mr. Germond is, there are several spots in the book where it seems he relies on a faulty memory instead of files. Briefly -- and Mr. Germond to the contrary not withstanding: Drew Lewis was never governor of Pennsylvania; Christie Whitman was never a U.S. senator from New Jersey; the 1988 presidential campaign of George H.W. Bush was not responsible for the "infamous" Willie Horton TV spot. You could look them up.
    And yet in many ways, for people who are interested in politics or the news media, "Fat Man Fed Up" is a fun book, made more so by Mr. Germond's curmudgeonly approach.
    Among other things, he writes about "spinning" the results of debates, about the role of television versus that of newspapers and about liberals versus conservatives. He also dredges up some old political scandals, such as former Sen. Gary Hart's affair with Donna Rice aboard the good ship Monkeybusiness.
    And, delightfully, he points out the differences between his generation of reporters and today's generation. His generation -- and this is true -- sought out sources and spent their nights drinking booze and eating steaks and ribs with them, talking to them, never betraying them. Today's generation seeks out each other, drinks wine or designer water and eats fish. Unlike the Jack Germonds of the trade, "they tend to go to bed before closing time."
    On the subject of eating, Mr. Germond is not fat for nothing. Though he names R.W. (Johnny) Apple of the New York Times as the press' No. 1 gourmet, that is modesty speaking. I know from first-hand experience: If you're going anywhere in this country and you want the name of a good restaurant there, call Jack Germond. He knows.
    That expertise alone is enough to make one forgive or at least overlook his contempt, distrust and loathing of most things and persons -- with a few exceptions, of course -- conservative.
    If the author gets around to writing a third book, I hope it will be called "Fat Man Drinking and Dining" or maybe "Fat Man on a Bar Stool."
    
    Lyn Nofziger, a Washington writer, was a political adviser to President Reagan.
    
    
    
    
    

[goldstategop]

Fat Liberal Jounalist On A Bender.

[driftless]

Although Jack Germond may be a lovable curmudgeon, he is not the most accurate predictor of events. I used to watch the McGoofy Bunch as Mike Royko used to call the show, and they did a survey one time to see who had the most accurate predictions of future political events. Of all the "pundits" on the show, Germond had the worst record.

[wasp69]

I wonder if this liberal jackass even bothered to say anything about Mr. Polotics-of-personal-destruction himself: Billdo Clintoon? I suspect this "five by five" commie blames it all on Republicans. I'll probably never know since I will probably never read his book.

[Renaldo]

It's always amusing to see the great lengths liberals go to in order to credit anyone but those who deserve it, if those who really deserve it just happens to be conservatives. Gorbachev ended the Cold War? Wow, I didn't know that. And politics heading South? In my view that's only positive.

On another note; should FR really use clearly doctored images, like the one of Daschle saying the pledge with is left hand? (I see it on this page now, but I guess those fundraiser images change automatically) I mean, there can be no shortage of unaltered pictures of liberals in embarrasing situations, so even if it's meant to be funny, distorting images like that could lead to credibility problems.

http://www.snopes.com/photos/daschle.asp

[hang 'em]

like his hero Mario Cuomo,

Anybody with a brain stopped reading there.

Hey Jack, Here's soome of Jesse Jackson's salad dressing... SPPPPTTTTTHHHHHHTTTTTT.......

Enjoy, A-Hoe

[virgil]

I think it shows that the real problem is not our politics, it's the media that has gone sour. It's shit.

[x]

Germond has no class. To spend week after week, year after year on McLaughlin's show and then trash the program after he left as though he were somehow above it all was base and tacky. Assuming that McLaughlin isn't a total louse, Germond has to be one.

It doesn't reflect so well on the show that they kept Germond around so long when he put so little effort into it, either, though I suppose his cynicism could be entertaining and he was a competent foil to set off some of the better panelists. Maybe it's in the nature of big-time pundits to be obnoxious, self-centered loudmouths, but Germond really pushed the envelope.

[Torie]

Germond's intellectual capital was rather thinner than his girth by a mile. His book with some other non-entity that I had to read in college was an embarrassment. As my liberal poly sci professor noted, it was a profoundly silly and vapid book. He much preferred the Emerging Republican Majority, that actually had some interesting beef in it.

[x]

Germond's intellectual capital was rather thinner than his girth by a mile.

He's on Tim Russert's "Meet the Press" today with David Broder and William F. Buckley. A strange pairing: two Yodas and Jabba the Hutt.

Germond has an abrasive, choleric temperament. He's cynical and dismissive of ideas he disagrees with, but doesn't subject his own ideas, assumptions and reactions to the same scrutiny. If he did, he'd come across better. From thinking that "they" -- the other side -- always lie, he came to think that his instinctive reactions were always true, and that's death for a columnist.

Germond is a loudmouth and a prima donna as many opinionists are, but pretending to be different and above it all was something he couldn't get away with and shouldn't be allowed to. As with a lot of cynics, his skewering of other people's sacred cows can sometimes provoke a smile. It's the smarmy self-righteousness that he so often shows about his own assumptions that's most repellent.

[Askel5]

Germond has an abrasive, choleric temperament. He's cynical and dismissive of ideas he disagrees with, but doesn't subject his own ideas, assumptions and reactions to the same scrutiny. If he did, he'd come across better. From thinking that "they" -- the other side -- always lie, he came to think that his instinctive reactions were always true, and that's death for a columnist.

Germond is a loudmouth and a prima donna as many opinionists are, but pretending to be different and above it all was something he couldn't get away with and shouldn't be allowed to. As with a lot of cynics, his skewering of other people's sacred cows can sometimes provoke a smile. It's the smarmy self-righteousness that he so often shows about his own assumptions that's most repellent.

Wait! I'm not a columnist ... Schwew, that was close.

[nunya bidness]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: there's a fine line between cynicism and insight. And these days that line is getting thinner.

As the rift in the right grows in inches, the rift on the left grows in feet. But to disabuse the left is to wade in to a pool a mile wide and an inch deep. And most of the water is fetid and rank.

Not that it bothers the dog that much but then again, he never cared for politics.

[Askel5]

We all could learn a lot from him, I think.

(I suspect he too is of a mind wimmen should be liberated from The Vote so as to devote themselves to more important things ... foregoing the screeds for scratching his belly. =)