Newspaper Page Text
Wednesday, December 6,2023
FAYETTE VIEWS
A4 Fayette County News
Hitting Close
to Home
There are plenty of places to turn for the latest news.
Television, of course, offers plenty of options. There are
plenty of flavors to choose from. CNN or Fox News, MSNBC
or Newsmax, and NBC, CBS, or ABC, depending on your par
ticular taste.
There is also a full slate of local news broadcasts as well,
focused primarily on national and international news, but
also giving airtime to what’s happening in and around At
lanta - but mostly “in.”
You can also “read all about it” in
the newspapers. The big dog in town,
of course, is the Atlanta Journal-Con
stitution, which has been around for
more than 150 years.
(Worth mentioning: originally the
newspaper was known as The Weekly
Constitution. There was a typo on the
front page of the inaugural issue: “Go-
verment. ”
Also worth mentioning: the AJC
now boasts that its coverage is “credible, compelling, and
complete.”
I noticed it once on the front page. It was right next to a
partial - that is to say, incomplete - score from college foot
ball’s National Championship game in 2014.
Now, let’s get back on point.)
For a broader perspective of what’s going on in the world,
there are the New York Times and the Washington Post, as
well as any number of other big-city newspapers. But don’t
bother with any of them unless you have a lot of free time in
the morning for reading - and a really large cup of coffee in
front of you. They’re allegedly “credible, compelling, and
complete” as well, although no one I ever met has ever read
an entire issue of any of them to prove it one way or the other.
In this day and age, you can also get news on your smart
phone. Granted, they’re usually “big ticket items,” but I have
to admit they are delivered rather promptly. Plus, they don’t
take nearly as long to read as the coverage you’ll find in news
papers.
But if you really want to know what’s going on, as A1
Roker says, “in your neck of the woods, ’’there is no better
source of news than your local community newspaper.
After all:
•You’re not going to see on CNN that students from the
local high school will be dedicating a weekend of their time
to picking up trash on the streets in your neighborhood.
•You won’t find out in the AJC that several nurses from
See Ludwig, A6
SCOTT LUDWIG
Henry Kissinger:
Epitaph Revisited
It was 1968. The Vietnam war was raging. Democrats
(President Lyndon Johnson and Hubert Humphrey) were
wiping their bleary eyes, poring over details, strategies, but
more importantly, the political significance of prosecuting
the Paris Peace Accords to a favorable conclusion, i.e., ending
the war.
Meanwhile, Richard M. Nixon, amidst a gaggle of his
campaign staff, was feverishly search
ing for ideas to derail the Democrats’
“peace plank” agenda in Paris. It was
an election year and Nixon’s hat was
in the Presidential ring.
As was his terrible wont, often
fueled by a few sips of a beverage
Nixon kept secreted from Ms. Nixon,
coupled with an occasional Dilantin;
he became extremely impatient, to the
extent of becoming thuggish. Accord
ing to his biographer, Anthony
Summers, he was practically incoher
ent during the meeting.
Oftentimes Nixon would imagine that he was hated by
the Jews and used language against them that gave new
meaning to linguistic scatology. Nixon proposed a scenario
proffered by his National Security advisor, one Henry Kis
singer.
The plan was to employ a group of extremist and shady
intermediaries who would covertly approach the South Viet
namese rank and file and assure them that they should boy
cott the current administration’s peace plan using,
metaphorically the “carrot on the stick” device; namely, a
more sympathetic and accommodating plan under a Nixon
administration.
A better peace deal, so to speak.
The South Vietnamese, much like the American Indians
of yore, had an ignorant fascination with beads and other
shiny objects, and without any forethought, rejected the
Johnson/Humphrey Peace Plan. As an accusatory and dis
graceful aside, the covert operation in the fall of 1968 was
headed by Attorney General John Mitchell and Nixon’s Vice
President Spiro Agnew.
Irony is much too feeble a word to describe what the
South Vietnamese actually got from that rejection deal;
namely, four more years of a losing war, with attendant hu
miliation, which concluded on the same terms that were of
fered by Johnson/Humphrey in 1968.
Moreover, during the intervening four more years of war,
some 20,492 American soldiers died, along with an esti
mated number of Vietnamese regular (86,101) and other
“enemies,” including civilians (475,609). The U.S. Senate
subcommittee’s estimate on the death toll was much
grimmer; namely, three million civilians were killed, injured,
or rendered homeless.
Kissinger, yielding to his insatiable thirst for political
prestige in the area of foreign policy, added more misery to
the war by unconstitutionally bypassing Congressional ap
proval and directing the invasion of Cambodia and Laos
without a whit of care on the impact this illegal incursion had
on Indochinese society.
Of course, Kissinger was the beneficiary of this covert ac-
A Manchin Third-Party Run - Disastrous for Democracy
There will be two major candidates in
November 2024 - Biden and Trump.
One of them will win, period. A moderate
or progressive third-party candidate will
simply help Trump get elected.
Some moderate Democrats want the
party to be more aggressive concerning
immigration and budgetary items. In
fact, the party has not been nearly as ag
gressive as it should be regarding balanc
ing the budget and controlling the entry
of undocumented people into the coun
try. These voters wish there were a
choice for them that would accomplish
these goals.
For them, Joe Manchin fills the bill.
If Manchin runs for President as a
third-party candidate, he will get the vote
of many of these people. In swing states,
this could very well mean that enough
votes are drained from Biden to give
Trump a clear win. I personally wish
Biden would be a stronger advocate for
fiscal sanity and controlled immigration.
However, a Manchin run will just
help Trump to win. And that would be a
disaster for democracy.
On the flip side, there’s a frequently
stated philosophical position on left-
wing social media sites: “Trump and
Biden are both tools of the corporate elite
controlling this nation. Therefore, I’m
writing in a third-party candidate like
Cornell West... or not voting at all.”
These naive social media activists call
both men racists, polluters, war
mongers, and misogynists. However,
there’s a clear difference in the positions
of these two men on numerous issues.
For example, Biden fully supports
the ACA (Obamacare). He also advocates
lowering the age for Medicare to 60
rather than 65. Trump attempted to do
away with the ACA. If Trump had suc
ceeded, it would have forced tens of mil
lions of people off medical insurance.
For another contrast, look at climate
change and pollution. Biden philosophi
cally believes in many aspects of the
Green New Deal
proposals rolled
out by progres
sives, although
he does not agree
to implement all
of them, due to
expense. And he
knows that cli
mate change is
manmade and is
causing an exis
tential environ
mental crisis.
Trump, on the other hand, thinks
there’s no climate change problem at all.
He wants to bring back coal, open public
lands to drilling, and do away with all
those pesky environmental regulations
keeping pollutants out of the air and
water.
Biden has a long history of public
service. And sometimes he has made
mistakes. Did he treat Anita Hill poorly
and let Clarence Thomas off the hook?
Yes - and I disagreed with him at the
time. But that was a long time ago.
Trump has done the opposite for the
last 50 years, embracing both white su
premacy and misogyny. His views and
actions have been racist going back to the
1970s, when the Trump organization was
sued for discrimination in housing prac
tices, settled, and then sued again for not
following the terms of the settlement.
Trump also took out a full-page
newspaper ad pushing for the maximum
punishment for five young black men ac
cused of raping a woman in Central Park.
Even after DNA evidence conclusively
proved that they had not done it, Trump
never admitted he was at fault.
And then, there are the numerous
racist things he has said and done since
- stating Obama was Kenyan and not a
citizen, accepting the endorsement of
racists like David Duke and conspiracy
nuts, and failing to understand the dif
ference between the white supremacists
in Charlottesville and the good people
protesting against them.
Further, Trump views women as
property and playthings. He has been
married three times and has had affairs
during each of his marriages. His posi
tion on abortion is extreme, saying,
“There has to be some form of punish
ment.” To emphasize his commitment,
he nominated Supreme Court justices
with strong anti-choice views who over
turned Roe v Wade.
Most importantly, Trump is a bud
ding dictator who does believe in fair
elections. Re-electing him will destroy
American democracy.
These two men are the exact oppo
sites of one another. If you believe in
throwing people off health insurance,
rolling back environmental regulations,
regressing on civil rights, and ignoring
the will of voters, Trump is your man. If
not, then Biden is the only choice and
must be supported by progressives.
A vote for Joe Manchin, RFK Jr.,
Cornell West, and the like will simply
give us Trump redux.
JACK BERNARD
UGA Comes Up a Bit Short; Still Stands Tall
Well, this last year of college foot
ball, as we know it, is going to end
sooner than we - or at least I - had
hoped.
The 2023 season for the Georgia
Bulldogs football team will end on Dec.
30 in Miami at the Orange Bowl. It will
not extend into a playoff berth, nor a
chance to earn a third consecutive na
tional championship.
First, a few thoughts about this sea
son and this team before we get into the
weighty matters of college athletics,
playoffs, money, and the state of “ama
teur” athletics.
UGA fielded a great team, and the
coaching staff remains elite and among
the best in sports. They’re too often
compared to an idealized version of
those who immediately preceded them,
and not on their own merits and efforts,
which have been substantial.
The critics of this team within
UGA’s own fan base are few, but have
made up for their numbers with vol
ume. They wanted the quarterback who
ended up as a finalist for the Manning
Award benched because he didn’t per
form in his first game as a starter, the
same as if he already had the experi
ence of his predecessor.
It should be noted that many of
these “experts” were sure UGA’s hopes
at a title were finished when Stetson
Bennett was named starting quarter
back. Many of them even doubled
down, expressing frustration that Ben
nett decided to come back for another
year - certain it would rob UGA of a
chance to win back-to-back titles.
These same voices - always unac
countable for their ridiculous demands
- wanted the offensive coordinator fired
because, “We should be winning by
more.” It’s almost as if they haven’t yet
realized there aren’t two sides on every
play, and that both offense and defense
had a lot of growing to do this year to
fill the cleats of those now playing on
Sundays.
These folks
also never want
to hear about in
juries. UGA
dealt with more
injuries this sea
son than any
prior Smart-
coached team,
and by a lot.
Still, the coaches
and players adapted and strung to
gether an undefeated 12-0 regular sea
son.
Many played hurt, many had to
quickly grow into new positions, and, as
was evident in the SEC Championship
game, threw everything they had into
trying to win just one more time. We
need frequent reminders that college
athletics aren’t about us and how much
we care or want to have bragging rights
after a big win; It’s about those players.
They now own the longest winning
streak in SEC history. This is what they
should be remembered by. And to the
UGA faithful about what they endured
and overcame to make that happen.
In future years this team would be
in a playoff to determine who is
“number one.” This ranking has been
and always will be mythical. The drive
to get there - and to keep fans focused
on the quest - is worth billions.
In a sport where the mantra is “on
any given Saturday,” there will never be
an undisputed best team. The team that
might be best in early September might
not be the best by the time the playoffs
conclude in January. Any injury, any
call by a referee, or any action (or in this
season’s case, inaction) by the NCAA
can change the entire map.
Expanding the playoffs won’t
change the arguments. It just adds time
on the clock, and keeps more in the ar
gument longer. If you don’t believe me,
just wait a few months. March Madness
now has four play-in games to get a
field of 64 teams for basketball playoffs,
and people still argue over it.
Meanwhile, college athletics is mov
ing faster and faster toward a minor
league professional sports organization.
Television has long dictated scheduling,
but additional dollars pouring in from
additional games, combined with
“Name, Image, and Likeness” deals for
players and legalized sports betting, is
making it harder and harder to hide the
commercialization of the sport.
Add in the effect of the transfer por
tal and the ability in many states for re
cruits to start receiving NIL deals while
still in high school, and the pretense of
amateurism is mostly dropped. This is
no longer about trading football prac
tice for a college education. Athletic de
partments at competitive schools are
now nine-figure businesses.
Is it all bad? No. It will just be dif
ferent. Bigger stages, brighter lights,
but less tradition, fewer fixed rivalries,
and less nostalgia.
Programs that adapt will be fine.
Those that resist will look a lot like
Clemson.
The future won’t be the same, but
for me, it will still be painted in Red and
Black. It’s on to Miami, and then a brief
rest before there’s a spring game in
Athens, with some returning friends
and some new recruits ready to estab
lish their own place in the Bulldog leg
acy.
CHARLIE HARPER
BW
\ Americans for Limited
1 Government
<©2023 Creators, com
See Studdard, A6