Hell of a Week

–The Israelis cut off ties with Arafat. Finally. And the great thing is that the Bush administration has been solidly behind Israel for the past few weeks. George W. Bush is not like his father in this respect. And the reason is that he is an evangelical conservative. His instincts about the Middle East are informed by that worldview. There is nothing more insane in American politics than many Jews’ disdain for evangelicals. Here is a community that supports religion in general and values Jews in particular. Here is a community that fervently supports Israel. Here is a community than isn’t afraid to make moral judgments. When evangelicals see Israel giving the Palestinian Authority rifles and then see Palestinians using those rifles to kill Israelis, they know something evil is being perpetrated. They don’t reach for post-colonial theories to excuse the behavior. Bush’s support for Israel should cause many Jews to rethink their attitudes toward the religious right.

–Dick Armey announced his retirement. This sent Tom DeLay off on a characteristically swift and effective campaign to replace him. I’ve tried to imagine what it must feel like to be a Republican member of the House when Tom DeLay comes calling to ask for support. A series of thoughts must flash through your head. First: This guy DeLay has been the most effective whip in American history. Wouldn’t I like to see him remain at that job, rather than moving up to another one? Second: He’s terrible on TV. Being majority leader means being party spokesman. If the Republicans lose control of the House in the next election, he will be the chief party spokesman. Do I really want him to be the public face of House Republicans? Third: Ideologically, he’s a bit behind the times. George Bush has effectively recast the party’s image. This is, as George F. Will wrote, a Hamiltonian moment. But DeLay’s mind is still back in the 1995 “Leave Us Alone” brand of conservatism. Do I want to carry the 1995 ideology into the 2002 election?

All of this would incline me to vote against DeLay. But then I’d wonder: What would happen to me if DeLay found out I hadn’t supported him? He’d cut me off at the knees forevermore. Hence, DeLay would get my vote.

–Bush is close to scuttling the ABM Treaty. What’s odd about this is the number of people who judge foreign policy issues solely on the basis of whether an action is multilateral or unilateral. That’s like judging a pitcher on whether he is left-handed or right-handed. The crucial question is whether he gets people out. Similarly, in foreign affairs, the crucial questions are, what are the goals of our foreign policy and what is the best way to achieve them? But many Washington reporters make a fetish of multilateralism because they are incapable of thinking about substance and can only think about process. Others use the debate about the process of multilateralism because they don’t want to have an open debate about substance. They don’t want to come out and say that the United States is its own worst enemy and that the United States should fear its own assertiveness because its values are inappropriate for the rest of the world.

–John Ashcroft exposed an interesting rift. Some conservatives supported Ashcroft’s statement that those who exaggerated the dangers to American civil liberties were aiding the terrorists. These conservatives said: Ashcroft has been smeared by the left. He’s got to hit back. Others, including me, say, it’s true Ashcroft has been smeared by the left. But he can’t respond by declaring war on the entire Washington community. His statement was deliberately incendiary. He must have known it would steal all attention away from what was, on substantive grounds, a triumphant hearing before the Judiciary Committee. Not only was that statement tonally wrong for the nation’s top law enforcement officer–who should be trying to depoliticize the Justice Department after the Reno era–but it also offended people who might otherwise agree with you. You can’t be an effective attorney general if the people in your own department constantly leak against you, if the Washington Post editorial page–which is reasonable to intelligent on most matters–is offended by you, if the entire power structure regards you as James Watt, or if you develop a bunker mentality, “we happy few” against the world. Being in office is about governing the nation, not engaging in bumper sticker attempts to offend liberals.

David Brooks is a senior editor at The Weekly Standard.