Democrats “Going Native”

In politics, if you can’t win, you face two choices: 1) change the message, or 2) change the size of the arena. In 2004, Karl Rove kept Bush’s pro-life message, but changed the arena by bringing millions of evangelicals to the polls who hadn’t voted in 2000.

Democrats fear the “War on Terror” issue. It cost them the 2002 and 2004 elections, and might bite them again next year. So they change the message (it worked in 2006): “It’s not about ‘terror’ or Afghanistan, it’s about the stupid war in Iraq.” But Democrats have a fall-back position that moves the “War on Terror” to a larger arena—the world stage. Democrats embrace what Europeans think about Islamic extremism. Their tendency to look to Europe comes naturally. After all, if Western Europeans voted for president, Kerry [pictured] would have won in a landslide.

“Going native” is the pejorative hurled at U.S. diplomats who work so fully inside a foreign culture that their policy recommendations become those of the host country. Here’s how the latest Foreign Affairs Quarterly tome on fighting terrorism, by Philip Gordon of the liberal Brookings think tank, makes the European case for how to handle terrorism—“Don’t worry, most of all, don’t fight, because time will find a cure.” Gordon recommends the U.S.:

 not overreact to threats but instead . . . reestablish its moral authority and the appeal of its society, which have been so badly damaged in recent years.

 end the large U.S. combat presence in Iraq, which has become more of a recruiting device for al Qaeda than a useful tool in the war on terror.

 [recognize] Muslims themselves will turn against the extremists in their midst. . .If the United States is . . . patient, [Muslims] will . . . transform their world -- and ours.

Sure, Phil. That’ll take care of bin Laden.