David Brooks goes all "Chamberlain!" on the Spanish electorate. It's strange to read Brooks -- I keep expecting him to make sense, and he never quite does. In last year's Jocks vs. Geeks take on SUVs in the Wall Street Journal, Brooks offered to reduce all environmental and safety concerns about the suberabundance of sport utes to "You nerds are just jealous." Of course, it was probably an attempt at humor: but attempting to find the signs of intentional comedy in a Brooks piece is hard work and gives me a headache (the opposite case: finding the signs of intentional comedy in a Maureen Dowd op-ed is no problem, but trying to make yourself laugh will make your stomach hurt).
This time, he's offering us the New York Post's style of conservative scolding. Did the Spanish people willfully elect the Socialists in a disgraceful attempt to placate Al Queda after the Madrid bombing? After insisting with super-sincerity that he is "resisting that conclusion," he manfully admits that he doesn't know jack about Spanish politics and therefore what really swung the vote away from the incumbent Conservatives, who had been ahead in the polls. Yet such ignorance is no obstacle to the seeker of truth here: "But I do know that reversing course in the wake of a terrorist attack is inexcusable. I don't care what the policy is. You do not give terrorists the chance to think that their methods work. You do not give them the chance to celebrate victories."
Now, Dave may be confused about the difference between an administration and the nation as a whole. (Bush partisans in this country seem to have that problem.) If that's the case, then any change of administration would be a "change of course" and therefore a mistake. When terrorism strikes, everyone should get in line, stay with the program, and re-elect the sitting administration just to teach the terrorists a lesson. That's consistent enough. But if he's not, he apparently wants to have his credible-journalist cake and eat it too: the only people in the electorate who didn't "stay the course" (that is, vote for whom they were going to before the attacks) were the very swing voters whom Brooks admits he doesn't know anything about. So, what caused their "swing" (their "reversing of course") is the very issue -- the thing that would tell us whether they were upright in the face of terror or desperately waving una bandera blanca*. But Brooks clearly means that it was in the end "inexcusable" to elect the Socialists, because the terrorists will then believe their methods will work. Which means that it doesn't matter WHAT the motivations of the swing voters were -- they were wrong in any case! Appeasers-by-default!
As long as we're talking about Brooks, there's a brand-new issue of Harper's in which Thomas Frank takes an axe to the rotten rhetorico-ideological edifice that is the Red States/Blue States myth. It isn't online, yet. The whole damned issue, however, is worth the price of purchase.
*Scott, as always, is charged with checking my Spanish vocabulary.
Posted by BT at March 16, 2004 11:49 PMUh, did you just say utes?
:)
Indeed. I felt bad about it, too. I think I picked it up in Brooks's article...
Posted by: BT on March 17, 2004 09:08 AMno need--you do catch the "My Cousin Vinny" reference though, right?
Posted by: torridjoe on March 17, 2004 12:27 PMHow long does it take to cook an average grit?
Posted by: teenidol on March 17, 2004 03:07 PM'Utes' - we'll make an Aussie out of you yet, Mister Wombat.
The Spanish election analyses of all these punditos who hadn't even known it was happening until 72 hours beforehand serve one useful purpose, at least. They give their readers an indication of just how much considered thought goes into their columns.
Can't wait for later this year, when Brookes et al chide Australia for forgetting Bali when our own tedious opportunist gets the flick.
Posted by: Rory on March 18, 2004 04:09 AMbut, Rory, doesn't "ute" mean "pick-up truck" more or less here (down under) whereas Bill was talking about "4wd's" which means "SUVs" when he said "ute" (but then again perhaps I'm confused which english I'm speaking now). And I didn't get the My Cousin Vinny reference either.
Posted by: art on March 18, 2004 09:09 PMStart the quiz now! It's Friday and I'm online! OK, it is Thursday for you--start the quiz in 3 hours! I'll check back.
Posted by: art on March 18, 2004 09:10 PMWhile "una bandera blanca" does translate literally to "a white flag," idiomatically it means "a used condom," and waving one is just the sort of cultural insensitivity that gives gringos a bad name. Try to stay in New York, where that kind of stuff is tolerated, if not outright encouraged, eh Mr. Wombat?
Posted by: Scott on March 19, 2004 09:17 AMAll right then, Sr. Smarty Pants, what would you wave if you were an Iberian variant of the Cheese-Eating Surrender-Monkey?
Posted by: BT on March 19, 2004 09:22 AMAnd no, I never saw "My Cousin Vinny"...
Posted by: BT on March 19, 2004 09:23 AMQuiz will be up around 10:30, btw -- have a meeting...
Posted by: BT on March 19, 2004 09:30 AMSince this is the thread of many topics:
In "My Cousin Vinny" the Joe Pesce character (Vinny no less) says in a thick Brooklyn drawl "The two youths" which sounds like "The two yutes" to the southern judge played by Fred Gwynne. The judge does not understand what he said, questioning what "yutes" are.
Later, during witness testimony, Vinny has a series of exchanges about the preparation of grits.
Incidentally, Laurie Anderson has a funny story about grits and not being able to communicate. A Brit goes to a diner in the south and sees "grits" on the menu. He asks the waitress "What are grits?" She replies "A buck fifty." He asks empathetically, "No, really, what *are* grits." She impatiently responds "A dollar fifty." He resigns "Yes, I'll take the grits."
Full disclosure: Living in Virginia most of my life, I never had grits until I was out of college.
Art, you're right, a ute is a pick-up. I charge David Brooks with crimes against Australian English. (Bill gets off with a caution and a sly tousle of the hair, thanks to his long-standing efforts to spread the name of a favourite Australian mammal.)
Posted by: Rory on March 19, 2004 01:18 PMThank heavens there's no one here to hold me accountable for my crimes against la lengua de Cervantes.
Posted by: Scott on March 19, 2004 02:55 PMTe has atrevido a ofender la augusta lengua de mi patria: ¡Defiéndete, canalla!
Posted by: Cervantes on March 19, 2004 03:37 PM¡El gulp!
Posted by: Scott on March 21, 2004 08:46 AM(For thems what don't read Spanish, I should note that Cervantes says I'm doing a great job, and I thank him in a traditional fashion, appropriate to his culture and century.)
Posted by: Scott on March 22, 2004 09:04 AM"not seen My Cousin Vinny." And you call yourself a cultural icon, BT? You are aware it is an Academy Award winning film, right? (No, amazingly enough I am not kidding you.)
Are you living in Oz, Stuke? Blow me down! Or better still, pick me up!
Si, bueno!
torridjoe = Bunster