William Kristol backs war on terror in Winston-Salem
2/8/06
Yesterday, I joined over 200 people in attending the luncheon speech of William Kristol sponsored in Winston-Salem by the John Locke Foundation. I happily paid the $50 cover to see a real live neo-conservative in action.
I sat at a front row table with one open setting just two two tables from the center table where Mr. Kristol was seated. A brief chat with the seven I shared lunch with revealed that they were fans of Rush Limbaugh. I know this was a limited sampling, but I suspect that it was representative of the majority of the crowd.
John Hood, president of JLF gave an admirable introduction of his organization and William Kristol. He did mention that JLF is looking to add the Triad as another satellite of their Raleigh based operation that has recently created a presence in Charlotte and other cities like Wilmington. He also noted that there would be a question and answer period at the end of Mr. Kristol's remarks to allow the audience to interact with him.
For myself personally, I got as much out of Mr. Kristol's remarks as I do listening to Rush Limbaugh when trapped in a car with no alternative talk radio stations within antenna range. I suppose the key point of his speech was (shock), "since 9/11 we are in a new era." The gist of this new era is that we are now in a war with terrorism. There were at least a few in the room that recognized that a war on a concept (like poverty, racism, drug abuse, etc) of course never ends. Perpetual war until the forces behind President Bush conquer the entire planet, or collapse under their own repressive weight, is what Kristol might more of honestly said.
During his remarks, Mr. Kristol did mention he had called Congresswoman Virginia Foxx whose district he was speaking in to get her advice on what the hot issues were among her constituency. He said they had agreed that Winston-Salem was not the best place for him to flaunt the recent graduation of his daughter from Duke University or what outcome he was looking for in the UNC-Duke game that night. It was in the first question from the crowd that we found out what Congresswoman Foxx seriously advised though.
Mr. Kristol was still smiling from his Limbaugh like monologue when a well spoken middle aged woman approached the microphone and introduced her question, "I have been a longtime supporter of President Bush and have agreed with 95% of his positions. I can't understand him however on his response is to our illegal immigration problem. How would you advise President Bush to clearly address this issue?"
Mr. Kristol quickly confessed that Virginia Foxx had told him that "immigration" was the issue he should expect to find to be foremost in the minds of people in her district. I suspect "illegal immigration" was the term Congresswoman Foxx actually used. But Mr. Kristol, who is "conflicted" on this issue avoided employing the word "illegal" throughout his response, which did not include an answer to the woman's question. He suggested that people in Virginia (meaning the ones he lives with around Washington I suspect) did not think immigration was as serious of a problem as people in North Carolina may see it.
Kristol fared no better on the second question from a well suited gentleman who came up to the microphone immediately in front of my chair, "Could you comment on yesterday's Wall Street Journal article which discussed neo-conservatives losing their influence in the Bush White House?" Kristol with his big Cheshire cat like smile politely averred that "neo-conservative" in his book simply means, "new conservative". He did add that as his father like to say, "neo-conservatives are liberals who have become educated." The balance of his response however again failed to address the question.
As I began to stand to get the next question from the microphone in front of me, Kristol properly turned back to the first microphone to take the next question in turn. Unfortunately, he lead his acknowledgement of the on deck inquisitor by stating, "Yes, ma'am. We'll make this the last question." It was getting close to 2:00pm on a meal that began at noon, but I was left wondering if perhaps Mr. Kristol had feared a set up. I was debating on asking one of two possible questions: Would we see him back at the Academy Awards next year? Or, following up to the first question he failed to answer, "What part of the President's plan to grant amnesty and erase our borders with Canada and Mexico ala the EU was unclear to him or anyone else in the room.
Kristol was happy to field the final question regarding the potential for a Clinton-Rice race in 2008. He noted that's what people at Foxx News and the Weekly Standard were hoping for as that contest would sell the most magazines and air time.
In the afterglow, I had the opportunity to introduce myself to Mr. Kristol as "the enemy," but like his joke earlier in his remarks that he once voted for a communist by mistake, I wanted to be able to tell friends years from now that I had once shaken hands with "William Kristol." He chuckled rather nervously as he read the John Birch Society logo on my business card. I moved on to let him address the next person in the reception line -- who just happened to be one of 2004's 5th district congressional primary losers Ed Broyhill.
With the approximate 2:00 pm finish sending most of the 200 people to the exits quickly, it was rather easy to approach John Hood of JLF for a brief chat. I opened by asking him if the JLF was going neo-con on us. He knew I was only half joking so he respectfully and rightfully asked me to provide my definition of the term first. I said my definition covered conservatives who pursued an interventionist foreign policy. I would have gone further to add, particularly with Mr. Kristol in the room, that my accurate definition also included that true neo-cons where really neo-Trotskyists who had replaced duty to spread "perpetual revolution" with a duty to spread "democracy."
The first part of my definition was sufficient for John though. He was resolute in answering that he has always been hawkish in using military force, when necessary, to topple governments...but only if TWO conditions are met: The government is a threat to the United States AND the government can be replaced with less oppressive one -- I took it in context to mean a more libertarian/free-market leaning one. So, if we would benot only be taking out an enemy but also allowing people to establish a new government that is less burdensome than the one we eliminated. World politics is not part of JLF's mission, and I am in diametric disagreement with John's position, but give him credit for honestly and concisely stating where he draws the line on this important issue.
Sidebars:
While I was talking to John William Kristol had to interject and pull him away briefly to handle some technicalities of wrapping up and departing. I turned away towards another discussion, but my compatriot I was with swears he overheard Kristol saying something about, "John Birch Society....fear mongers." If so, good for Mr. Kristol. A major objective of my attending his talk was to let him know we're still out there warning against him and his ilk.
Next JLF event is this Friday night: Winston Churchill III on "Confronting the challenge of Islamic Fundamentalism."
