Out of the Paddocks

    
     The 2012 Presidential race has begun in earnest with the recent debate between prospective Republican candidates at a forum sponsored by CNN. The seriousness of the issues to be debated by candidates showing interest in being the chief executive officer of the most powerful country in the world is often obscured by the circus atmosphere and “horse race” descriptions provided by the media who look at the contest as a form of entertainment to be marketed. We are still nearly a year and and a half before electing the next President but in keeping with irritating recent tendencies to start the next presidential campaign almost immediately after the election of the current office holder, the process and players is already taking shape. The horse race analogy is superficial but does allow early characterization of the candidates in relation to each other. It is apparent that the early field of committed racers has been assembled, and is about to leave the paddocks. RAMPARTS is willing to take its first look at the competitors and size up their chances.

      The Reigning Champion– Barack Obama, the winner of the last race, leaves the paddock first as the presumptive democrat party candidate to take on all challengers. He will be well positioned with unqualified support from the main stream media, who see him as what a President should be like, a huge amount of campaign cash, and the cocky confidence of a man who has had an dazzlingly fast ride to the top almost obstacle free. This race horse, however formidable, will have to carry substantially more weight than desired on his back, with an objectively poor track record in the job – historically high unemployment, stratospheric deficits as a consequence of his failed stimulus policies, and an American population that senses a country hurdling toward has been status. Obviously the early favorite out of the paddock but expect to see the odds drop fast.

     The Best Pedigree– Mitt Romney has run for President before, has been Governor of Massachusetts, run a successful Olympics, has solid business credentials, looks the part of a champion, and is the son of former Governor of Michigan and 1968 presidential candidate George Romney. Romney has done what all front runners do. He has tried to avoid alienating anybody, worked to look inevitable, and positioned himself to be substantial. Unfortunately for him as with previous races, when the public has to decide if he has the stuff of champions I think they will look elsewhere. There is no there there to capture the public’s need for a winner that will best represent in their minds what a champion should be – fearless, passionate, tough in the mud, aggressive when challenged, powerful down the stretch, and immediately recognizable as a champion. Additionally he carries the dead weight of global warming advocacy and health care mandates into the race similar to Obama, without the charisma of the current champion to lighten his load. These horses almost never win, place, or even show. Ask Romney’s father George, John Glenn, Edmund Muskie, John Connally, or Nelson Rockefeller.

     The Speed Horse– Michelle Bachmann wowed the viewing audience of the debate with her unexpected eloquence, verve, and competitiveness. Horse race purists, however, were not surprised by the Minnesota congresswoman’s performance. She has been energy driven her entire life – a successful lawyer and the mother of five who has cared for 23 foster children. She has successfully taken on the mantle of the important tea party voting group, defining a form of constitutional purity that guarantees her strength in the primary battles. The questions to be answered as the race begins in earnest are evident in this competitor who comes from nowhere. How will the filly do shoulder to shoulder with the stronger horses? Will she be able to gallop to the lead and hold it? Will the length of the race, which is almost always about endurance, make her sprinting capacity inconsequential? A horse to watch, but don’t bet the farm.

     The Early Underdog(horse)– Herman Cain carries equal street cred with the tea party purists as Michelle Bachmann. He was an early tea party speaker who brought outsider excitement to his speeches and free enterprise credentials as former chairman of Godfather’s Pizza, Inc. In an election where, once again, the economy will likely be the dominant issue, Mr. Cain knows how jobs are created and businesses are built. This particular race horse, however, has never been in an actual race. Winning is almost always about understanding the race and its atmosphere. The hard working plow horse does not suddenly find itself comfortable with the skills necessary for racing. It is unlikely that Mr. Cain will find his footing when the challenge is not his own strength in pulling the load, but rather, pushing the field. Long shot. Definite long shot.

     The Contender– Tim Pawlenty is the race horse comprising any quality racing field. He has a strong record as a former steady governor of the state of Minnesota, worked hard to position himself as a broadly skilled candidate, showing the common touch, well developed ideas, competitive instincts, and an excellent team of support. A closer look, though, reveals some serious vulnerabilities. Pawlenty was an early advocate for carbon credits proposed at the height of global warming scam that almost enveloped the American economy- an absolute non-starter for objectivists and individual freedom advocates like myself. He was comfortable with the concept of health care mandates, almost as deadly, to any libertarian. He has changed his strategy, and apparently his mind, on these issues. Is he a race horse that under the challenge presented by the competition that will revert to old habits under stress? Additionally, although he has some speed, some strength, some endurance, some toughness, does he have enough of any to be in a position to finish at the end? Can he overcome the speed horse from his own state, Bachmann? The bettors will hedge their bets on this one and want to watch him on a few tracks before they put down their money. Likely middle of the pack.

     The Old Racehorse – Newt Gingrich will be 69 years old on election day. He certainly has been a champion in his day. A race warrior of past glories. He has never been short of ideas, good or bad, has lead his party in Congress as Speaker of the House, is a glib speaker, and has thick skin resistant to the competitor’s whip. The weaknesses though, abound, in this old steed. This horse hasn’t won a race in forever. Out of the paddock, he as already shown lousy instincts, skittishness, illucid ideas, and poor form. He will enter the gates a former champion, but won’t finish the race. A wasted bet, no matter what the odds.

     The International Entry – Former Utah Governor John Huntsman has not officially entered the race but is about to do so. He is the one entry with foreign policy experience having recently served as President Obama’s Ambassador to the People’s Republic of China.  Is it a plus in a year where the focus is so directed on domestic economic issues to ride a crafty race as the world savvy candidate?  Like foreign horses used to racing on grass, the muddy track of a U.S. primary process may be something very difficult for Huntsman to navigate, given his only other elective experience was in the state of Utah where the conservative republican vote is king.  Huntsman speaks fluent Mandarin, a skill that will be valuable in dealing with the emerging power of the twenty first century, China, but in American politics, his ability to “talk turkey” with the average voter will need to show itself.  Good looking horse out of the paddock, but can he really run to win?

     The Field Filler– A race requires race horses for perspective, and the 2012 Presidential race is no different. Rick Santorum is a solid conservative with relative eloquence and principled views. On previous racetracks, however, he has shown a rigidity and inflexibility that makes him unlikely to be in the final win, place, or show discussion. A former Senator of Pennsylvania, he proved unable to hold his own seat, and has struggled to avoid the “far right” tag that has been placed on him, and looks at this time to be “just another horse”.

     The Outsider – The winner of the the “fringe” position remains Ron Paul. A strict libertarian, who won’t change even when circumstances do, Paul reminds me of Eddie “”the Eagle” Edwards, Great Britain’s only Olympic ski jump competitor in history, who got to ski jump in the 1988 Olympics for his country, because there was essentially no one else in that non-ski country that wanted to. He jumped, and landed…and finished dead last. But he jumped when many told him not to, and somehow landed – so there was a chance that if every other competitor would fall down, he might have won. Ron Paul should be so lucky.

     The Heavyweights on the Sidelines– The field though feels incomplete. Several significant contenders remain on the sidelines that would immediately change the race dynamics. Sarah Palin is Michelle Bachmann on steroids, a former Vice Presidential candidate with celebrity status,  a star at any political event. She is the Momma Bear that has already withstood enormous insults, personal attacks, unending media taunts regarding her supposed “intellectual deficits”, and remained standing. She would no doubt be much more formidable than anyone is willing to admit, but does she really want to take on the lightning rod position, or be the financially successful sideline star that she is in spades? Ego is a funny thing- I wouldn’t bet against her. Governor Rick Perry of Texas is positioned to go and if he decides to enter, becomes the southern conservative candidate in the race, the electorally enviable position. Perry has talent, toughness, economic credibility, and a seriously attractive libertarian streak. He also would be the slotted “governor of Texas” candidate – is there room for another one of those to the voting public after George W. Bush? That alone is the likely reason that Perry has spent so much political capital distancing himself from the Bush legacy and the royal Bush family themselves. Former Governor Jed Bush of Florida has done it all and in any other time and place would be a front runner – but this is a democracy, not a monarchy- no matter the talent of this horse, it looks like he is destined to stay on grass tracks and out of the Triple Crown running. Former mayor of New York Giuliani is again interested; tough, smart, and outspoken, this formidable contender flopped in his previous run and may be simply too much damaged goods to be a factor this time. Lastly, there is the potential Superhorse, the two year old champion every Triple Crown fan is waiting for is waiting for, Paul Ryan of Wisconsin. He has smarts, talent, savvy, intellectual gravitas, debating skills, youth, looks, and common touch – the marks of a once in a generation race horse. One problem only – he doesn’t think it is yet his time. If the horse is willing to enter the starting gate, there is no chance to see how he races. This horse may turn out to be more Barbero than Secretariat, all the potential in the world, but frustratingly and maybe tragically missing his moment to shine.

     That’s your field out of the paddock. Its going to be a long race. Get to your seats, and prepare for the unexpected. RAMPARTS bet is is still with the champion, but for the country’s sake, our hopes and prayers are for a really special winner to emerge.

Don’t Know Nothin’ ‘Bout History

     The Wall Street Journal today interviews noted American author and historian David McCullough about Americans’ understanding of history and the pathetic state of our educational process in understanding our culture’s origin and evolution. Mr. McCullough, noted Pulitzer prize winner author of biographies of Harry Truman and John Adams, as well as exceptional books on the Brooklyn Bridge, the fateful year of the American Revolution 1776, young Theodore Roosevelt, and narrator of the epic Ken Burns documentary, the Civil War, laments our atrocious collective ignorance of our past.  He points to several trends in Americans’ educational process that are at the root of our historical knowledge deficits. 

     The first is the trend toward political correctness in our description of history, placing insignificant figures at absurdly equal positions of relative prominence to our giants of history, in order to exaggerate the impact of their views which fit a modern skewed version of events and their consequences.  The second is the domination of educating teachers on educational process rather than subjects, so that the average teacher is frequently teaching subjects they no little or nothing about.   The third is the teaching of “victim” history, where the effect of historical events on an”oppressed” group results in the loss of perspective and particularly chronological reference in understanding the outcomes.  Last, he laments painfully boring, poorly written, and stupefyingly politically correct history textbooks that remove all suspense, mystery, and lessons learned from the study of history.  McCullough acknowledges the knowledge deficit has been foisted upon young people by a generation that lost interest in the common story of the American experience and preferred their own version of events.

     The loss of history as a cornerstone to modern western educational process is having devastating effects on our national discourse, problem solving, and vetting of our leaders.  The election of a leader based on their appearance, smooth delivery, and their social “awareness” rather than their grasp of the elements of this free society that have led it to greatness is a direct outcome of the voter who votes patterns rather than depth of understanding of issues.  This has brought us judges who don’t uphold laws that have been crafted from debate and democratic process, but rather on whether the law “fits” their sense of value. It has created politicians that predicate their survival on pandering, rather than their recognition of principle.  Most importantly, it diminishes the historical struggle of our past fellow citizens to fight for and put things right, at great risk to themselves, when the outcome was not assured.  The old dictum that those who forget history, are condemned to repeat its mistakes, implys the modern generation has learned any history to forget.

     Mr. McCullough is among a cherished group of progressive thinkers who realize our historical deficit threatens our unique culture and prosperity.  Alas, there are none too few of the ilk of David McCulloughs , and far too many who see history as just another example of western civilization’s arrogance toward other cultures.

     The only hope is an old fashioned one. Find a good book on history or civics, and pass it on.  Its possible you might convince another that there is something to this wonderful story of ours after all.

Newt Augers In

     Newt Gingrich is currently a candidate for the Republican nomination to the presidency of the United States, but he has a much chance of gaining the nomination as Ron Paul, a candidate from the fringes of the fringe.  Michael Barone of National Review Online has a sage article lamenting the sad state of affairs Mr. Gingrich’s candidacy currently finds itself, and recalls the times when the Gingrich flame shone much more brightly.  The augering in of Newt’s campaign is not a process of bad luck, but rather enigmatic of Newt’s whole public life – full of grand ideas, potential, and ultimately self inflicted wounds.  Mr. Gingrich may be the only candidate currently soldiering on without a single candidacy staff member, as his entire team mutinied last week and left him for greener pastures. He may be the only person left who believes that the brilliance of his ideas will overwhelm any voter’s hesitancy about  the “Newt package” that promotes them.  But that’s typical of the pilot who augers in his plane, refusing to jump out of a hopelessly out of control aircraft in the innate belief that at the last second, he will regain control.  What appears clear to just about everybody but Newt, the jig is up, and his time as a defining force in American politics has come and gone.

     A trip down memory road to a much younger version of Gingrich revealed all the talents of an intellectual dervish.  He came into American politics in 1978 and flew in the face of the treasured myth of American media that conservatives were stupid and neanderthalish, and therefore not to be taken seriously in matters of governmental philosophy.  Winning a seat prior to the Reagan revolution was no small feat for a conservative, but Gingrich was an unabashed southern conservative Republican when the terms southern, conservative, and democrat were synonymous.  He set about immediately to build the disheveled and dysfunctional republican backbenchers into a force, to the the dismay of party leadership who long felt that the demographics of the country were such that they could never again hope to be a majority party in the House of Representatives and therefore should simply work toward the best possible relationship with the eternally dominant Democrats.  Gingrich would have none of it, and discovered a heretofore unknown weapon, the first television broadcasts from the House floor broadcast on C-SPAN.  Standing alone on the floor at night Gingrich spoke to no one but the camera, initiating a blistering and continuous attack on Democrat leadership and a creative and intellectually diverse lecture on the America’s problems, proposing in-depth solutions.  Both Republican and Democratic leadership hoped and assumed no one was watching, but a steadily growing number of people were, and the rest of the backbenchers began to frame their arguments in similar fashion. 

      To the horror of leadership, Gingrich opened his sights on the House Speaker himself, Jim Wright, regarding Wright’s classic back room shenanigans to use a book deal for a ghost written biography to circumvent campaign finance laws and a secondary assault on the House Post Office and Bank  for similar kickbacks to congressmen.  To the amazement of the Republicans, Gingrich the general proved brilliant and victorious, taking down the reigning Speaker, and exposing the soft underbelly of a  House made moribund over 40 years of consecutive democrat rule.  Young conservatives like Judd Gregg, John Kasich, Connie Mack, and Dick Armey began to work with Newt to present an alternative based on ideas and intellectual honesty, and by 1994, the American population was primed to listen to the alternative to a government  without limit or direction.  Gingrich devised the revolutionary Contract with America, a ten step agreement with the American people to say what they would do, and do what they would say, if elected.  In a stunning electoral outcome, Gingrich led a second Republican revolution and took the House of Representatives for the first time in 42 years. The Outlaw had become amazingly Speaker of the House, and for a time Speaker Gingrich, so different than the shallow political hacks before him,  amazed the country by passing every one of the planks in the Contract, leading eventually to welfare reform, and serious legislation regarding term limits, electoral reform, congressional ethics, and a balanced budget.  For a year or more, Gingrich stood at the zenith of American political royalty, becoming the only speaker in history to have given a nationally televised policy speech, and so outshining the President, that President Clinton had to declare that he was still “relevant” to a Gingrich enraptured press, and declare in a State of the Union address that the “era of Big Government was over”.

     Gingrich’s fall came upon his own outsized ego, and  assuming his political skills and likeability were a match to those of the crafty Arkansan in the White House. Gingrich’s ultimate prize was to achieve a balanced budget, and he cornered the president into accepting a balanced budget through cuts or experience and unheard of  shut down of government.  Sounds eerily familiar to the present circumstances.  Clinton recognized he could achieve the veneer of both a fiscally responsible executive and make Gingrich appear heartless at the same time, and the  shutdown backfired. Clinton got to take credit for the subsequent years of progressively balanced budgets, built on Republican budgetary discipline and a republican inspired Capital Gains Tax cut,  and bask in the progressive attack on Gingrich from all comers for his authoritarian style, ethical vulnerabilities, and frankly loose cannon of a mouth.  The result of the Gingrich years, electoral reform, welfare reform, freezing of governmental growth, capital gains tax cuts, budgetary surpluses, and tough but fair crime laws. For all that, check mate and match to the president with worse personal ethics, but better likeability and much more acutely honed personal political skills.  By 1997, Gingrich was vulnerable, a victim of his own party’s mutiny against him for his authoritarian ways and ethical lapses, led by John Boehner, the current Speaker of the House, and Bill Paxson of New York.  By 1998, the weakened Gingrich had lost his Speaker role, and determined not to run again for Congress.  The bright light that had changed American political direction so profoundly was left to teach college courses and plot a comeback someday.

     The someday was this year, with his decision to run for President, but Gingrich proved his pulse on the voter was no longer precise, and his habit of throwing fireballs at windmills just as out of control as ever.  A ridiculous attack on Paul Ryan, the modern day intellectual version of Gingrich in the width and breath of his ideas, was petty and ill considered, and left him back tracking on the very weekend of his announcement.  His additional decision to have his current wife act as his chief of staff left the professionals in his campaign aghast, and soon left Newt without a campaign staff.  His current ideas seem scattered and disorganized, and worse, dated.

     Gingrich is in my mind done as a political figure, but his contribution to the storied period of time when the Congress showed itself to be fiscally responsible in the 1990’s to the great benefit of America, is a shining example of what is possible if you combine intelligence, energy, and vision to the framework  allowed by our founding fathers – for a brief time, the best and most creative governmental function in history.  Newt, sorry you had to find out how we have moved on, but for what you brought to the table before and the table you helped set, is now just waiting for the right chef to feed a country hungry for real, workable leadership.  It just won’t be you, compadre.

Falklands Redux

      The founding Charter of the United Nations in 1945 contained in its first article the right of self determination of a people declaring “all peoples have a right to self determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status, and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.” The assumption might be, if you were to absorb the direct interpretation of such lofty language and principle, that a self contained set of lonely islands inhabited by 3000 people, recognizing their inability to provide for the overarching themes of government, such as the capacity for a currency and means of defense, would have such a right of self determination, and the capacity to choose their government of administration. Furthermore, if 99% of the stated inhabitants were absolutely committed to one common future, it would seem rational that the international arbiters of the Charter would make strong efforts to see the people achieve their goals of peaceful co-existence under the flag of their choice.

      No such luck, when it comes to the Falkland Islands.

   The Falkland Islands, a collection of two main and 776 lesser islands 250 miles off the coast of the southern tip of Argentina, have found themselves increasingly isolated in their efforts to retain their British ties and thoroughly British way of life. An uninhabitated cluster of islands first landed by the British explorer Captain John Strong in 1690 by accident, the islands for the next 150 years were under the continual tug of multiple nations and influences until coming under permanent British control as a formal colony in 1841. This included a brief period of several attempts at Argentinian colonization from 1828 to 1833. The restoration of British sovereignty has continued unabated from 1833 until the present and its continuance is the overwhelming desire of the local inhabitants, who want no part of would-be overlords from the surrounding neighborhood.
      The issue of sovereignty suddenly became a hot one in 1982 when Argentina declared it would enforce its rule over the inhabitants, invading the islands, and the inhabitants called to Britain to provide their defense. In the short but bloody conflict known as the Falklands War in Britain and the War of the Malvinas in Argentina, nearly a thousand soldiers lost their lives, and Britain rested control back from the Argentinians. The islanders on multiple occasions have noted their overwhelming support for the outcome, and are as proudly British as the girls from Cornwall and the boys from Bristol.
      The world we live in however has always struggled to do the right thing, particularly in international bodies, where the politics of power and convenience have often raised an ugly flag. The latest is the Organization of American States were Argentina has found common cause with such supporters of individual rights as Daniel Ortega of Nicaragua and Hugo Chavez of Venezuela. In a direct challenge to Great Britain and a threat to the people of the Falklands, a Declaration has put forth describing the Falklands under the Argentina label “Malvinas” and demanding that Great Britian and Argentina immediately enter into direct negotiations as to the “Malvinas” future sovereignity. The desires of the actual inhabitants of the islands – not an issue for clarification. The issue has becoming particularly acute lately with the identification of the Falklands as a potential source of vast oil deposits lying outside Argentina’s official 200 mile continental shelf claim. The impoverished government of Argentina would love to get their hands on the Falklander’s bounty, whether the locals wish their help or not.

     Great Britain obviously has absolutely no interest in discussing the future of part of their commonwealth with a government that has a tenuous claim to any postion regarding the islands and one they defeated in a war. For the British at least, they have been always able to count on the backing of their closest ally, the United States of America – until now. The Obama administration, in another of its recent schizophrenic policy efforts to side with tyrants and ignore free will and determination, has signed on to the declaration. Britain, who has backed the United States time and time again as allies and spilled the blood of her sons in defense of United States national interests, is understandably miffed at Obama’s fair weather bonds of friendship. President Obama, in another calculated effort to side with those issues the United States traditionally opposed on the basis of freedom and democracy, has once again thrown its principles under the bus, in hopes of gaining “street cred” with those states that could care less as to common interests with the US. This nieve policy continues unabated despite one calamity and mis-step after another. The British are rapidly learning what others have found out in Poland, the Czech Republic, and on the streets of Tehran and Cairo. This President’s support will be a mile away and an inch deep at most. The Falklands are just one more step in the destruction of a framework of trust built up over many years, that in issues of freedom, rights, and social responsibility, the United States would always be in your corner. That, my friends, is one painful introduction to our modern reality- with this particular President, you are going to be on your own.

People We Should Know #14 – Thomas Sowell

     The battle of ideas between those who believe that circumstances overwhelmingly influence outcome and those who believe that free will can address any circumstance has been the dominant intellectual conflict of western civilization.  In the United States, the conflict was  the test of the revolution and the founders subsequently put together a code of understanding known as the Constitution to limit the capacity of any one interpretation of circumstance from suppressing the individual’s  free will to determine one’s outcome.  Alexis de Touqueville, a french noble visiting the United States in 1831 was amazed to see what had transpired in the few decades since the codification of the Constitution.  He noted the intense religiosity that had at one time consumed Europe lived in the US in an apparent comfortable position with secular free will, that inequalities both economic and societal were transient and interchangeable, and that the individual’s free will to determine his future secured an interest in his society that made it vigorous, democratic, and prosperous.  The collection of observations were published as Democracy in America, and has become one of the most clarifying windows of the American experience that has ever been articulated.  With the twentieth century juxtaposing spectacular wealth and prosperity for so many and persistent poverty and societal conflict for those “left out”, the argument as to what is the best vision for a mature society to secure the greatest good has evidenced itself in titanic intellectual struggles over public welfare, education, economy, war, and individual rights versus responsibilities.  One of the most articulate interpreters of this debate, and one of the foremost thinkers of our time, is Dr. Thomas Sowell.  His clear and consistent rationale for a just society through the ordered expression of free will is a must for any defender of the Ramparts and an extremely worthy position as one of Rampart’s People We Should Know.

     Thomas Sowell was born in rural North Carolina in 1930 in relative poverty at the time of a segregated South.  His mother, a maid with four children, had to deal with the death of Thomas’s father before he was even born, but he had the societal advantage of a matriarchal extended family that pulled together as an aunt and her two grown daughters adopted and raised Thomas.  From such poverty and difficult circumstances, Thomas found a path to self enlightenment.  The family moved to Harlem, where Thomas got the chance to go to high school out of a family where sixth grade had been the previously highest educational achievement.  He had to drop out of the last year of high school due to familial financial difficulties and took various odd jobs to support himself and the family. He eventually was drafted into the Marines during the Korean war, served in a photography unit, and upon conclusion of his service, entered night classes at  Howard University despite lacking a high school diploma. Excellent recommendations from professors and high college entrance exam scores led to him being accepted at Harvard where he graduated magna cum laude in in Economics in 1958, advanced to a Masters at Columbia, and a PhD in Economics from the University of Chicago in 1968.  For the next 40 years,  Dr. Sowell , through his lectures and writing, one of the foremost thinkers of libertarian thought in the world.  In an upbringing and educational path that presaged yet mirrored Barrack Obama, Dr. Sowell came out of the experiences with almost the precisely opposite understanding of the world and our place in it.  He and a group of other black conservative thinkers such as Shelby Steele have helped frame the arguments that are the foundation of conservative thought and defense of freedom that are the centerpiece of any conservative, young or old, today.

     In a far ranging interview with Peter Robinson of the Hoover Foundation, Dr. Sowell discusses his masterpiece of libertarian thought, Conflict of Visions,that outlines the fundamental philosophical conflict of the idea of constrained and unconstrained views of man and his role in his own destiny that are the center of political conflict.  His description of Barrack Obama as the poster-child for unconstrained political vision, given just prior to his election, has become a prophetic and spot on analysis of this current President and the elitist version of the world he and the current left represents.  Watch the whole discussion, and enjoy an old fashioned skill being progressively lost, the articulate framing of an argument, the measured defense, and consistent reliance on evidence.  Its a tour de force that our President will find hard to duplicate on a teleprompter.

Six Minutes, and the Rising Sun Becomes A Setting Sun

      The Pacific Ocean covers 64 million square miles, almost a third of the earth’ s total surface area, and is larger than all the land masses combined.  The modern tools of satellites, global positioning, and jet flight have made it seem conquerable, but it was not so long ago, when it was the gigantic blanket of mystery from which brief stunning events based only on courage, instinctual reckoning, and luck were brought forth from its fathomless impenetrability.  The first was the Sunday morning surprise attack on Pearl Harbor by the Imperial Japanese Navy on December 7th, 1941, achieving a devastating blow to the American Pacific Fleet through a coordinated complex plan delivered over thousands of miles of ocean to ruthless perfection.  The second occurred 69 years ago today on June 4th, when on the tiny atoll of Midway in the northern Pacific, a more spectacular, random, incredible triumph that spun the destiny of World War II on its heels occurred in only six fateful minutes.  The tremendous tidal surges of history that comprised the twentieth century were focused in a black hole like compression of time and place and from the other end of that brief interval was fashioned an alternate universe.

     The incredible story of Midway is tightly woven into prose by America’s military historian, Samuel Eliot Morison, in his book “The Two Ocean War“. Readers of the RAMPARTS will recognize Morison as the author of my favorite Christopher Columbus narrator as Morison sailed the seas about which he wrote. Similarly Morison as a Lieutenant Commander in the US Navy in War World II, functioning as a Naval historian, had intimate access to the the American naval commanders of the conflict known as Midway.
     The battle of Midway was positioned to determine the winner of the Pacific War. The Japanese, having rendered the American battleships useless at Pearl Harbor, intended to do the same to the American carrier fleet, the remaining Pacific long arm left to the United States. The plan was part of the denial of any part of the Pacific to American military access at a time when re-fueling was a mainstay of diesel powered carriers. The taking of Midway and the Aleutian Islands of Alaska in the wake of America being at its weakest would lay an impenetrable “ribbon defense” across the Pacific that would make Hawaii indefensible and the west coast of America the front lines. The brilliant Japanese strategic admiral Yamamoto saw this as the means of taking America out of the Pacific war and Japan in the position of absolute lord of the Pacific and East Asia. Recognizing the period of numbers superiority he was living in in the post-Pearl Harbor world, he intended to bring overwhelming force to bear to assure success. He brought forward Japan’s four finest aircraft carriers and 158 other ships of war, and placed the forward spear in the hands of his most trusted Admiral Nagumo, the veteran of the Pearl Harbor victory. His American counterpart, Admiral Chester Nimitz, could scrounge up only 76 ships, of which a third were tired up in the secondary threat to Alaska and unavailable. Even more devastating to Nimitz was that he had available for defense at most 2 carriers, the Hornet and the Enterprise, as the Yorktown had been severely damaged in the sea batttle of the Coral Sea only a few weeks earlier and was heading for Pearl for repairs. Pitching a perfect battle would be insufficient as the strike capacity of four carriers would easily overwhelm those of two and the American fleet would be a ghost. Only one possible outcome offered even the slightest whisper of success, if by some miracle, Nimitz could achieve the surprise at Midway, that Yamamoto achieved at Pearl.
     The miracle was the eccentric team of code breakers located at Pearl Harbor lead by Naval Commander Joseph Rochefort intercepting Japanese radio traffic and splicing together sufficient information gleaned from intercepts to suggest that the time was early June and the main strike target Midway. The identifiable information of the intercepts was barely 10% of the total volume – imagine gleaning the meaning of a paragraph where only one word out of ten of a sentence is deciphered. Nimitz had little choice but to take a chance on the intelligence information and try to achieve surprise, or simply sit back and assure annihilation. That he was not about to do. He put together carrier strike force headed by Rear Admiral Raymond Spruance, an unlikely substitute for his usuall lead, the ill Admiral Halsey, who suggested the non-aviator Spruance for the job, a sacrilege, as carriers were felt to be able to be managed effectively only by those with flight-deck experience. His warrior wingman would be Rear Admiral Fletcher of the Yorktown, the carrier achieving 90 days of repairs in 48 hours at Pearl, and immediately setting sail for Midway.

     Nimitz took the spotty information regarding Japanese intentions and ran with it. In a moment of brilliance he positioned his two carriers northeast of Midway, out of reach of Nagumo’s search planes and therefore blind to him at a time before satellites, while Nimitz could try to search for Nagumo’s fleet approaching from the southeast from planes taking off from Midway. The surprise would have to be pulled off, yet Nimitz had no illusions about the Japanese superiority in numbers and quality of equipment and hoped only to at least bloody their nose.

     On the early morning of June 4th, 1942, the awesome Japanese attack force unraveled a blistering attack on Midway Island. Over a hundred planes were involved in the first wave designed to eliminate the Midway airfields preventing an air defense from the threatening the invasion force as they closed in for the kill. As destiny began to unravel, Midway aviators put up enough of a fight to prevent demolition of the runway and the returning air squadron recommended another wave. Nagumo assuming the threat was land based only, began to arm his reserve air squadron positioned to defend against any sea based attack into a force with bombs instead of torpedoes appropriate for the second wave. He was in the midst of rearming when he was stunned with the report from one of his search planes that a ten ship strike force with carrier had been spotted, which was the lagging Yorktown coming from Pearl Harbor. Nagumo took fifteen fateful minutes to discern what this new information might mean, and decided to reverse the order for the second wave, and rather launch the squadron rearmed with torpedoes in search of the carrier. Fate struck a fateful chime; as the rearming process was re-initiated an American air squadron discovered the Japanese in the open ocean, and attempted a suicidal charge into the teeth of the Japanese defenses. 44 dive bombers and fighters flew in; 36 to their immediate deaths, and no hits on the Japanese ships.

     At 1022 am on the morning of June 4th, 1942, Admiral Nagumo looked up and saw clear skies, a complete Japanese victory. He could now concentrate on landing his residual Midway attack force and re-arm the fighters in search of what he assumed was a single carrier. He had only 100 seconds to revel in his illusion. At 1024 am , with four carrier decks covered with rearming planes and live ammunition, and the security umbrella of protective fighters now at sea level from the recent attack of the Americans, 37 dive bombers of the USS carrier Enterprise found their four targets defenseless and positioned in a box for squadron takeoff, and screamed down from the skies with the merciless thrust of the killer shark on the unaware seal. Bomb after bomb found their target, and in five minutes the proud Akagi, Kaga, and Soryu were flaming hulks uncontrollably exploding from on deck ordinance. In six minutes, the forward spear of the mighty Imperial Navy had been decapitated, and with the crushing loss, the war itself. The fourth carrier Koryu avoided her fate only until 1700 hours when a residual feeding frenzy of American planes found her and sunk the her, the fourth carrier, as well.

     Yamamoto in the space of minutes, had lost his entire carrier group, over 250 planes, most of their pilots, and 220 officers and men. The scope of the defeat in perspective was dramatically more devastating than Pearl Harbor. The Americans lost the Yorktown, but the sacrifice of several hundred brave airman, completely turned the war on its head. The final defeat for Japan in an ever diminishing ocean against an ever stronger opponent was preodained from that moment. The myth that totalitarian regimes produced men of steel while democracies produced soft self interested soldiers was forever put to rest at Midway and the eventual triumph of the free thinking individual was codified. Only four events of World War Two comfortably stand as pivotable moments upon which history turns. The three others are Stalingrad, D-Day, and the Atomic Bomb on Hiroshima. The fourth, Midway, stands alone as occurring against the most indescribeable odds, and should be remembered for what men with their backs against the wall can do, when they put their minds and free will up for ransom.

Sad Lessons from the Land of the Rising Sun

     The recent devastation created by the earthquake and subsequent tsunami, and its effect on the  already battered economy and self esteem of Japan is hard to watch.  The damage will take years to unravel, and the rapidly aging population may simply lack the energy and will to see through to the end the immense effort required to restore the foundations of a flourishing economy.  The damage created by the natural disaster was severe, but certainly not the index blow.  Japan has been under several decades of misdirected investment and Keynesian philosophy that left it wide open to the final blow of that cascading wave of water.   A clear example of what not to do to a vibrant economic process is present for all to see, but the current caretakers of the American economy seem to have paid the lessons no heed and, in an unconscionable way appear determined to repeat Japan’s mis-steps on an ever more massive scale.

      The troubles for Japan in the late 1980’s were set into motion at the very point at which the Japanese economic miracle was being heralded as an unstoppable force and the successor to post world war America’s place as the world’s pre-eminent world economic power.  Article after article heralded Japan’s example as one America would do best to emulate or face has been status.  This was smart capitalism, with government support of fledgling industries, cradle to grave guarantees to the worker who gave his life long loyalties to his company, and teamwork and equal credit and reward instead of entrepreneurial incentive and unequal outcomes.  The Japanese behemoth had become the second largest economy in the world, and was rapidly closing on the largest, with a combination of creative industrial efficiencies and the outsourcing of mundane work and production to the little Asian Tigers of Korea, Thailand, Malaysia, and even China.  The United States with its reliance on individual work ethic, nasty competition, market self corrections, and unequal reward seemed terribly outdated.

     The parallels with cresting Japan of 1990 and our own current direction is ominously similar.  The problem began with the bursting of a grossly over inflated real estate bubble in Japan, and the intolerable strain on the banking industry leading to bank default under the pressures of abandoned or intolerable loans.  The result was a deep recession which brought the government to fore in its presumed role as Japan’s guarantor of success.  The political elites in Japan determined the way out of the crisis was a sustained enormous stimulus, with the heaviest injection into Japan’s infrastructure – roads, bridges, planes, and trains.  Japan’s debt rapidly ballooned as “investments” progressively lost their targeted appearance and politicians eager to please their constituents provided the funds for airports with no passengers, bridges with no traffic, trains with no economic basis, and roads to nowhere.  The Japanese government dumped over 2 trillion dollars between 1991 and 1995 on government targeting projects with little rationalization for their need or their success.  The result to the Japanese economic recovery of that enormous public investment – just about nothing.  The hidden result was the majority of investment went to rural areas and local construction companies, with almost no connectivity to product, and an inverse effect on private enterprise by driving out private investors.  It seemed the government proved absolutely incapable of “predicting” economic winners, settling for political rather than economic considerations.  The result of all the spending? An incredible debt accumulation 180% of Japan’s gross domestic product and a two decade stagnation of the economic miracle, with an economic growth of only 3% of GDP over the twenty years of 1991-2010 compared to 444% growth from the previous twenty years of 1971-1990. 

     A fascinating article, in of all places the New York Times, was published in 2009 was written by Martin Fackler at the time the Obama stimulus was put forth, reviewing the history of the Japanese experience, and mentioning the republican party’s concern that utilizing governmental stimulus rather than unshackiling private enterprise could lead to similar results.  The warning was telling – over 3.6 trillion dollars of debt spending stimulus to deal with the presumed crisis of a mortgage bubble over the last two and one half years has resulted in net job losses, cascading debt, targeted investment in non-market supported industries, and stagnant economic recovery with the risk of a double dip recession looming.  The reaction of the government and Keynesian supporters such as Paul Krugman ?  The stimulus may not have been “large enough”, trains and windmills will save the day, and taxing the rich appropriately will pay for the burgeoning investments. A close look at the tax totality puts the premise to shame.

     History tells us that mistakes are repeated, not by ignorance of the past, but in willful disregard of the lessons learned. Once again a mighty economy is being progressively brought to its knees by a government that thinks it knows better, and can be fairer than natural forces in correcting inequities. It is embarrassing that intellectuals continue to fall for this loser of an economic philosophy that has done more damage to the average individual than any army of vicious capitalist roaders. The public is slow to understand, but understand they must. Leaders that recognize human nature, not those who rail against it, are a priceless value, that continues to be under-appreciated. It seems it takes a village to wreck what every individual in the village struggled so hard to build. Pick your leaders carefully in the coming months, or we will soon have the chance to look up in a few years and wonder what the tsunami was that hit us.

Memorial Day and the Iron Brigade

    

      At one of the dioramas at the Wisconsin’s Veteran’s Museum in Madison, Wisconsin,  stoic, tensed young men in black hats await orders to resist another surge of massed, charging Confederate soldiers in the hellish chaos of battle later referred to as The Cornfield at Antietam in 1862.  They are young men comprised primarily of Wisconsin farmers and city laborers from the 2nd, 6th, and 7th Infantry Regiments and a similar group of men from the 19th Indiana, and later, 24th Michigan.  They know what is about to befall them, and they are braced for what will surely test them to their core.  The officer to the right is about to give the order to fire; a fallen comrade is at their feet to the left and will no longer respond.  There is no doubt to the observer how these men will face their trial of fire, as they were already known by Antietam as a ferocious group of defenders that opponents preferred not to engage.  They were recognized by their army 1858 issue Hardee black hats, that stood in contrast to the more contained kepis worn by other union infantry soldiers.  They were known as the Iron Brigade of the West, and formed the steel backbone of union efforts from Bull Run to Appomattox through the entire breadth of the war.  They are memorialized today, because these young farmers and laborers from the then new state of Wisconsin, in a war known for horrific sacrifice, sustained the greatest number of casualties by percentage of any maintained brigade in the war between the states.  At Gettysburg alone the brigade lost 62%, or 1153 out of 1885 men, the 2nd Wisconsin 77%, the 24th Michigan an astounding 80%.  What brought these unique men together to willfully sacrifice, and continually replenish their catastrophic losses with more of their sons and brothers, again and again, until victory’s relief at Appomattox, is the special calling of all who remembered on this special day of memory for the fallen, Memorial Day.

     The call up in 1861 by President Lincoln for 75,000 90 day volunteers was especially perceived in the West.  The new states of Iowa (1846), Wisconsin (1848), and Minnesota (1858) sought to show their commitment to the Union they had just joined and the importance they felt to the cause of free men.  Governor Randall in Wisconsin had no trouble getting together volunteers.  The regular Army of the United States in 1860 was a minuscule force of which over half the officers took allegiance to the their southern states over their union oath.  Therefore, an officer was essentially any man, other men were willing to follow.  A prominent man could be a Captain if he could support the needs of 80 to 100 men under him, and get them to elect him Captain. A regiment consisted of ten companies and elected a Colonel, two regiments comprised a battalion, and four regiments constituted a brigade, led by a Brigadier General. The approximate 4000 men of the Wisconsin volunteers that started the war were initially led by Rufus King from Milwaukee, a part owner of the Milwaukee Sentinel and Gazette newspaper, appointed by Governor Randall to shepard the men into a fighting force.  King had been a graduate of West Point in the 1830’s, and considered one of the state’s few men with any military experience, though it had been decades since he had resigned his commission.  The training commenced at what would later be known as Camp Randall in Madison , the Brigade’s first action was with  the Army of Virginia at the second Bull Run in August of 1862.  General Rufus King, struggling with epilepsy, would not see battle, and was replaced by a succession of Generals that would obtain acclaim as leaders of this steadily more famous group, including Generals Gibbon, Meredith, Bragg, and Kellog. After Bull Run it was transferred into General Joseph Hooker’s First Corps, where it would enter Antietam in September, 1862, as First Brigade, First Division, First Corps,  a position it would proudly hold until the end of the war.

     At Antietam, the southern commanders would experience the first real northern intransigence of the war as exemplified by the rock hard fighting displayed by the Wisconsin Brigade in the hell of the Cornfield in the single most casualty inflicted day in American military history.  Stonewall Jackson wanted to know who it was in “those damned black hats” that proved impenetrable;  the Union commander McClellan, surmised “they must be made of iron” and the Iron Brigade’s reputation was born.  From Antietam, to Fredericksburg and Chancellorsville, Gettysburg and Overland, Richmond-Petersburg,and finally Appomattox, the black hats absorbed punishing blow after blow, yet unlike so many other regiments that disintegrated from the pressure of replenishing after onslaughts, continued to exist as a cornerstone of the Union infantry attack.

     The battle at Gettysburg with its astounding losses of 70% casualty of the brigade secured its reputation for all time.  General John Reynolds, desperate to attain the high ground on the first day of Gettysburg, until the bulk of the Union Army could arrive, sent the the Iron Brigade into the teeth of overwhelming numbers of Confederates entering the town from the north.  The brigade repulsed the southerner’s attempts at achieving tactical advantage, and managed to decimate the Brigade of General Archer, capturing him and hundreds of other southern soldiers.  The respite proved just enough to allow General Meade to secure the round tops at the gates of Gettysburg and force General Lee to impale himself upon the superior ground and ultimately lose the pivotal battle of the war.  A single black hat, lanced with a bullet through its crown, (photo removed at request of museum) represents the courage, and sacrifice of that epic performance.

     The cemeteries of Wisconsin are full of aging monuments to the over 12,000 fallen heroes of the brigade of young Wisconsin boys of that apocalyptic conflict, the names, and memories, progressively worn away by wind and time.  These were young men, the sons of immigrants and immigrants themselves, that wanted to prove their worth to the nation as a whole, and were willing to sacrifice all for the ideal of the American dream.  On this Memorial Day, the trumpets call out their mournful reveille for young men , from across the state, that wanted everyone to know they were an equal and essential part of the American Experience.  There is no measure for personal sacrifice, no capacity to fully understand, what could drive such people to continue to defy the overwhelming odds, and serve, until the job was done, and the cause was secured.  To all on this Memorial Day, thanks and prayers.  On Wisconsin.

A Moveable Feast

     

          As part of a recent wonderful dinner with family and friends, the topic of Woody Allen’s new movie Midnight in Paris came up.  As an aside, I appreciate greatly the conversations that revolve around my family dinners.  They have always been the birthplace of wonderful memories and unique conversations that abound out of the great trough of creative experiences that has been our life cinema; the food, the wine, the places, and the people.  And so it was with this dinner.  Woody Allen has put forth a movie of time travel that interjects Owen Wilson into 1920’s Paris where he meets Hemingway and other characters of 1920’s Paris so artfully described in  Hemingway’s A Moveable FeastPutting aside Woody Allen’s need as an avowed modern liberal to somehow imply that the modern ugly American is a Republican Tea Party zealot, the movie is described as interposing the creative impulse of young Americans in Paris of the 1920’s that is the stuff of legend.
       Ernest Hemingway died in 1961, and his memoir, A Moveable Feastwas published posthumously in 1964, edited by his widow and forth wife, Mary Hemingway. Hemingway discovered in the late 1950’s a collection of notebooks he had left in a trunk at the Hotel Ritz in Paris. They were vignettes from the young Hemingway describing his experiences in Paris in the 1920’s with his first wife Hadley and their interactions with fellow expatriates Gertrude Stein, James Joyce, F. Scott and Zelda Fitzgerald, and Ezra Pound. Hemingway crafted the memories into a book that was approaching a final draft when he died, and his publisher and wife determined to put it forward as one his published novels.
       The Paris of the 1920’s comes exuberantly alive in Hemingway’s novel. The description of the ancient narrow streets, the local characters, the food, the vibrant cafe nightlife, and the innate quality of life of post-war Paris are brought to us with the vivid clarity of a master painter. Hemingway recognized more importantly that his memories were not so much of 1920’s Paris as they were a memoir on youth, where 5 dollars a day brought fantastic experiences, struggling to make something of oneself an exciting adventure not a stressful burden, and a youthful power and vitality that layered each youthful interaction with a kaleidoscopic, vibrant palette. Hemingway acknowledged that time had cleansed the mundane and negative out of his projection of the time, stating “if the reader prefers, this book may be regarded as fiction.”
      Paris of the 1920s and 1930s is a kind of life that exists for us even though there are very few of us remaining that actually lived and experienced it. It is life exemplary, full of quality, adventure, civility, and living for the moment, that most of us can only dream of. Did it ever exist? Was it created by people like Hemingway and Fitzgerald to bring weight to their lifes in the eyes of others, to reflect back on their lives like they were characters in a movie?  Whether Hemingway found the truth of life by writng as he termed “truthful sentences“, or describing life as he would have preferred to have lived it, he has provided for us a missal on how life should be lived, all things considered, asserting life’s journey is forever to be savoured with each wonderful moment, great and small.
      I am going to go to Woody Allen’s movie, and I bet I will enjoy it, what ever the snarky little side messages. It will undoubtedly lead me , for probably the tenth time in my life, to break out and read one more time Hemingway’s little gem of a book, and acknowledge again how life lived,  is A Moveable Feast.

The Baton Is Passed

     Michael White of the London Telegraph noted a momentous occasion this week as one of the scions of classical music finally stepped down after fifty years and turned his magnificent creation formally over to a new generation.  Though ensemble and chamber orchestra certainly pre-dated him, Sir Neville Marriner has become inexorably linked with the musical format through his creation and development of the Academy of St. Martin in the Fields.  The ensemble first performed in 1959, associating itself with the magnificent church built in 1726 on Trafalgar Square in London.  The structure of the group initially of the group was in the classic form of a chamber orchestra as a leaderless ensemble, with Sir Neville as its lead violinist.  Sir Neville’s mission was a specific one; to bring connection to the musical public of the works of so many composers that had found themselves swallowed in time by the classical and romantic behemoths of the 19th and twenthcentury in classical performance.  The provision of larger and larger orchestras to achieve the sonic sound requirements of symphony had biased the listener against the timbre and intimate context of ensemble playing, and had as a result, committed to the “dustbin” of history many tremendous works of music by composers who had been giants in their own time.  It is the unique achievement of Sir Neville and the St Martin in the Fields ensemble that the rebirth of great composers such as Telemann, Albinoni, Vivaldi, Boccherini, and Purcell, as well as the greater appreciation of the known giants George Frediric Handel and Johann Sebastian Bach, are synonymous with St Martin’s recorded performances.

     Baroque and classical musical style loosely fit the diverse musical creations of European composers from 1600 to 1800 and reflect the ornate architectural style and the dominant position of both religious life and monarchical administration dominating Europe at that time.  The music was performed most commonly in the venues of the church service or for the benefit of the royal court; public performances were not focus of the composers, whose livelihood was derived almost purely from benefactors, not ticket sales.  The period instruments, and the venues were intimate, the musical creation mathematical, precise, and introspective.  Yet, as Marriner helped the world rediscover, some off the most beautiful melodies and sonic poems were present in these compositions.  Sir Neville did not attempt to recreate the precise sound of the time on period instruments, but rather to uncover the beautiful encased musical expressions using modern instruments and performers in a fashion the modern audience could relate to and understand.   The return to rotation of such lyrical and elevating compositions as Albinoni’s Adagio in G Minor, Handel’s Water Music, Vivaldi’s Four Seasons, and Bach’s Brandenberg Concertos were made approachable by St Martin’s revitalized treatments, and became permanently linked to their performances. Having changed the public’s capacity for smaller ensemble and string orchestra play, Marriner expanded St Martin’s personality to many new territories over the years, additionally branding such diverse composers such as Mozart, Beethoven, Tchaikovsky, and Bartok, the modern English composers such as Vaughn Williams and Britten, and format additions with wind instruments and soloists, to the St. Martin style.  St. Martin’s became the sought after deliverer of some of  the most recognizable movie scores of the past decades, producing massively popular recordings for Amadeus, English Patient, and Titanic.  Sir Neville and St. Martin’s eventually compiled a massive discography of over 500 recordings, and no musical collection is considered complete without multiple St. Martin interpretations of the entire expanse of musical expression over the last 4oo years.

     In 197o, Sir Neville Marriner left the player’s chair and assumed the conducting role of  St Martin in the Fields, creating the most identifiable music musical ensemble sound in modern recording over the past 40 years.  At age 87, he has determined the health of this prestigious group needs a new leader not an old icon, and has turned the baton over to Joshua Bell, the American musical prodigy now solo artist from Indiana, who has the challenge of maintaining this ensemble’s reputation as the leading chamber orchestra in the world.  It is no small task for Bell, given his roots in orchestral solo performance, to maintain the traditions and sound that have made Sir Neville’s little group one of the most recognizable classical music performers on  today’s musical stage.  The latest trend in chamber performance is a return to period instruments and original scores that St Martin’s evolved away from so many years ago.  It will be Bell’s obligation to remind the world why Marriner moved away from those devices on creating the modern chamber sound.  Its no longer about appealing to church leaders and amusing royalty, its about celebrating the magnificence of the music to the shared pleasure of us all.

http://youtu.be/pZ7hR_b0TIE