Howard Dean continues to strike me as probably the Dem. candidate most dangerous to the President in next year’s election. Unlike the other Dem hopefuls, Dean recognizes that he cannot win the presidency with only the Dem’s traditional constituencies. So he’s going after a number of traditional Republican constitutencies as well. Last week I stated that one of these would be the Libertarian vote. I’m not the only conservative to make this prediction. In fact, I’ve mostly been following the lead of my friend and fellow Enter Stage Right writer James Antle.
Last night I happened to catch one of Howard Dean’s ads on the television. He appeared to attack the President over the Patriot Act and the tightening of civil liberties. Dean was obviously aiming for the Libertarian vote by exploiting their discontent with the Bush administration. James Antle does an excellent job discussing the current troubled relationship between conservatives and Libertarians in this week’s American Conservative.
That being said, at a time when we’re making serious inroads into traditional Dem constituencies, what does the President need to do to protect his own? (Admittedly, if Dean were pro-life I would not be asking this question.) First, I think the President must continue to remain firm on abortion and other life issues. As a politician, W’s main strength is his character. This is why I generally trust W, even if I don’t always agree with his decisions. Secondly, I think W needs to dump his neo-con international policy wonks and put forward a good exit strategy for Iraq. Thirdly, I think he should ease up a little on the Patriot Act as well as the Drug War. This will go a long way toward blocking Dean from making further inroads into the Libertarian vote.
Month: November 2003
“Love Actually,” actually not loved
In this cynical, hardened world, it’s kind of refreshing to see a movie that presents the most dreadful clichés without a hint of apology. A man proposes marriage to a woman with whom he has never held a conversation — and she accepts, and the band conveniently behind her starts to play. Another man falls in love with a subordinate because she’s cute and vulnerable, but they have absolutely nothing in common.
“Love Actually” has these tired motifs, and so many more. I kept expecting the filmmakers to wink at the audience, letting us know that they know we’ve seen this a thousand times. No wink was forthcoming. Either they didn’t know they were recycling these plot points — an improbability — or they didn’t care.
The cast includes all living, non-retired British film stars. A half-dozen plots are packed into this two-hour movie, and since many reviewers have commented on the hanging plot threads, unnecessary characters, and phony “love stories” that would never work in real life, I won’t repeat it.
“Actually” is more proof that we are reverting to the pre-Shakespearean mode of storytelling where writers needn’t provide any psychological motives for their characters. In “Erin Brockovich,” we never learn why the Evil Corporation is poisoning the population of a small California town. They are a corporation, they are big, ergo evil. Similarly, in “Actually,” the script juxtaposes several men and several women together. Like positive and negative ions, they are attracted to each other and they bond. No explanation necessary.
(Thankfully, they spared us the gay subplot that is becoming de rigeur these days. That’s the only thing for which the scriptwriter needs to be thanked.)
It might even lead to dancing
Oh, the spirit of worldly compromise has reached Wheaton College in Illinois, that former bastion of Evangelical wholesomeness: they’re not only allowing students to dance off-campus, they’re letting them perform those bodily gyrations in the gymnasium of the college itself.
They probably got the idea from the late but still active radio preacher J. Vernon McGee, whose words expose him, I suppose, as a dreadful liberal:
There are lots of other preferences that are often stated as laws …
Some have said that those who dance are catering to lust. Now, I would agree that I’ve seen some dancing that seemed to be doing just that … but we must not say that all dancing is that way. We must not forget that many people danced for joy before the Lord.
First you let your faculty dance with their spouses at weddings off-campus, and then it’s Katie bar the door.
Still think Saddam wasn’t a terrorist?
The Weekly Standard has an article detailing the link between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. Why this hasn’t received more coverage this weekend, I do not understand — it’s not even on the Drudge Report — but it certainly merits attention.
The information is based on an extremely detailed, careful memo from an undersecretary of defense to the heads of the Senate Intelligence Committee (including Sen. Rockefeller (D-Dogpatch), the inspiration for the Foghorn Leghorn cartoon character.) It details the extensive contact that Saddam and Osama had, and alludes to the strong possibility that they collaborated on the U.S.S. Cole attack.
The article sticks to the topic, not even mentioning the indisputable fact that Saddam sponsored the Palestinian suicide-murder bombings, and carried out terrorist attacks on his neighbors, particularly Iran, through groups he funded and/or founded.
Perhaps Sens. Rockefeller and Kennedy will stop their geriatric rages against the “misleading” Bush administration. Ha, ha! Sorry! Just a little Sunday afternoon humor.
The spiritual powerhouse of central New Hampshire
Congratulations to Immaculate Heart of Mary parish in Concord, NH, which is going to have the bishop over to bless its new perpetual adoration chapel Sunday:
The St. Pio eucharistic chapel is intended to welcome Catholics throughout the Concord deanery. It’s not very big (just the right end of the house), but it’s still something beautiful for God.
I was at the parish today for a workshop on identifying one’s gifts and callings for lay apostolate, presented by a Dominican-sponsored lay formation outfit called the “Catherine of Siena Institute”. I recommend it.
I think I have a charism for insolence, but that wasn’t on the list.