Posted on 10/07/2004 10:25:48 PM PDT by Congressman Billybob
Before we get rolling on John Kerry’s commitment to a “global test” for American foreign policy, let’s take a look at the latest giant leap for mankind that took place over the Mojave Desert in California this week. The two events are related, in a curious way.
SpaceShipOne was an ugly duckling, designed by Burt Rutan for the precise purpose of winning the Ansari X Prize of $10 million. A generation from now, no one will remember the name of the prize, only the fact of the first private, entrepreneurial step into space. Just like no one today remembers the Orteig Prize of $25,000, 77 years ago. That was won by Charles Lindbergh when he flew solo across the Atlantic. (Remember him? He was in all the papers.)
Still, the respective prizes brought all people over the tipping point so that travel – across the Atlantic, or into space – would become reasonable, possible, and real. It was about ten years ago (give or take) that Ben Bova, Editor of Analog Science Fiction and Fact, wrote a series of technically accurate articles on the colonization of the Moon. He concluded, rightly, that it would be driven by high-end tourists, not government bureaucrats.
Half a century ago, my sainted mother thought the same thing. That was when she put herself on the waiting list with Pan American Airways, when they set up the list for tourists to the Moon. Well, both my mother and Pan Am are long gone now; but this week’s flight over the Mojave Desert shows that both were on the right track.
That harbinger achievement for mankind brings us to this week’s main subject, the reference by John Kerry to a “global test” for American foreign policy. Here is what he said, with some of his legendary loquaciousness removed: [Feel free to check the transcript; I don’t play Maureen Dowd games when using quotes.]
“No president ... has ever ceded, and nor would I, the right to preempt in any way necessary to protect the United States of America. But if ... you do it, ... [it must] pass... the global test where your countrymen ... understand fully why you're doing ... [it] and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons.”
The plain meaning of what John Kerry said is that he would give a veto power to other nations over defense decisions of the US President; query only which nations and how many of them would have that veto power.
Kerry was forced to explain such a “global test” of legitimacy. He attempted to defend that statement in Hampton, New Hampshire, when he said, “The test I was talking about is a test of legitimacy — not just in the globe, but elsewhere...” Kerry offered no explanation what that word “elsewhere” referred to. Does it mean we must not only kowtow to the French, but also to little green men from Mars when they turn up? Is Kerry even listening to what comes out of his own mouth?
There is an object lesson we all were told about in grade school which shows why Kerry’s “global test” is politically foolish, obtuse to the maximum in Kerry-style words. Let us begin with some words from the Declaration of Independence, adopted by the Congress on 2 July, 1776. (That is not a misprint. The vote took place on 2 July. The final document was not engrossed and ready for signature until the 4th.)
“IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.
“The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,
“When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness....”
Note what those who “mutually pledge[d] to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor” in the cause of American freedom did, and did NOT, say. A decent respect to the opinions of mankind required that we set forth what we were doing, and why we were doing it. However, that did NOT mean that the Framers of the United States were waiting for the agreement or approval of any other nation, much less of some indeterminate number of other nations, before we set out to win our freedom.
How can we be sure that is true? The answer comes from reading the history of our allies, or lack of allies, in the course of the American Revolution. In the beginning, 1776, we had no allies; all we had was ourselves. As Benjamin Franklin observed after the passage of the Declaration, “We must hang together, or surely we will hang separately.” There were several other nations in the world that would gain from a defeat handed to the British Army and Navy. But at the beginning, even with the best efforts of our able Ambassador, Ben Franklin, we had no official support from any other nation.
It was not until after the Battle of Saratoga, in 1777, when the Americans first defeated a British Army in pitched combat, that we gained a single ally. That Battle is worth remembering today. The bravery of General Benedict Arnold in attacking the center of General “Gentleman Johnny” Burgoyne carried the day. It made Arnold one of the greatest of American heroes, until he later turned his coat and became one of America’s greatest traitors. But it was Saratoga that brought us France as an ally.
And that brought us troops to join General Lafayette, and the French fleet which trapped the British in Yorktown in the final battle of the Revolution. Yes, there was a time when the French were not only sound allies of America, but they played an essential role in our victory and our freedom. But not at the beginning of our Revolution, and certainly not today.
From John Kerry’s incessant repetition of the phrase “going it alone” in Iraq, it is clear that his “global test” means obtaining the agreement of some indeterminate number of additional (unspecified) foreign nations. Thirty nations are signed up now, more than four times as many as during World War II. But be that as it may, Kerry’s global test means “more than just us.”
Apply that test to the founding of the United States of America. When we declared our independence we had exactly zero allies. We risked it all, and the very lives of many of our citizens and the lives of all the “traitors to the King” who signed that document. By Kerry’s test, we never should have taken such a rash and unsupported action.
Under the global test of waiting for some other nation – perhaps the French – to approve, we would be playing “God Save the Queen” before the upcoming World Series games. There are times when the United States must make a critical decision for itself and its citizens regardless of the opinions of other nations. Of course we should explain our action to others, and hope that they understand. But waiting for any approval from any other nation is, sometimes, dead wrong.
There are brief moments when John Kerry seems to have a grasp of this essential understanding that every President must possess. But more often, he goes on and on about cooperation with the (highly corrupt and incompetent) United Nations. He keeps suggesting additional allies like the French. He refers to our existing allies as the “coalition of the bribed and coerced.” Apparently he hasn’t been reading the papers lately on the bribery and coercion that Saddam Hussein applied in the “Oil for Food” swindle for about a decade. Many of our potential allies (in Kerry’s view) had places of “honor” on that list of bribery.
To use an old-fashioned word, John Kerry’s reference to a “global test” shows that he lacks the gumption – and the vision and historical understanding – to be President at a time of crisis. And wartime is definitely a time of crisis.
In 1776 and many times since, America has demonstrated the correct meaning of a “global test.” And it is the reverse of what it means in the hands of John Kerry. So if you attend any sporting events and sing the “Star-Spangled Banner,” take a moment to thank your lucky stars that Thomas Jefferson did not possess the Kerry point of view in 1776.
As the refrain in the Anthem says, we are “the land of the free and the home of the brave,” not the land of the politically correct and the home of the cautious.
To follow up on events of this week: Since my last column there have been two debates, between the Vice Presidential nominees, and between the Presidential ones. Not much need be said about those. Dick Cheney beat John Edwards like a rented mule. And George Bush held his own against John Kerry. Polls on Monday should bear out my conclusions.
Just a brief word about John Kerry’s latest mantra about “the wrong war, at the wrong place, at the wrong time:” It is, shall we say, “borrowed” from a man who really knew how to fight a war, and when not to fight. General Omar Bradley said it in 1951 to the US Senate on the subject of whether the Korean War should be widened into China, which was supporting North Korea and providing sanctuary for it.
In order to understand recent remarks by John Kerry, John Edwards, and Dan Rather (among others), an except from a book published in 1865 may come in handy. Witness this exchange from Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, by Lewis Carroll: “When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.” “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.” “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master — that’s all.”
- 30 -
About the Author: John Armor is a civil rights attorney who lives in the Blue Ridge Mountains of North Carolina. CongressmanBillybob@earthlink.net
- 30 -
Thanks for the new tagline.
Billybob
Now, if we could only get the government schools to start teaching such things as the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and genuine American History we might start making some quantum progress against subversive poseurs like Kerry who have infected the American landscape and discourse!
There was a teacher on the news tonight who is losing her job because she dared to post a photo of the president and White House, the Constitution, Declaration of Independence, etc. on her classroom walls. They said she was Teaching Politics. On the other hand, when Liberal teachers really DO teach politics NOTHING is done to stop it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.