ustxtxb_obs_1984_09_14_50_00005-00000_000.pdf

Ititterrt*****Itilreterrlittl`rtleglOrer**1 -**1-1-11113-13in an attempt to prove economic theory. As he walked off the platform, giving the thumbs up gig’em sign so rapidly that he seemed to be shaking a pair of dice, it was obvious that Gramm’s machismo quotient was high. On Inwood Road domestic workers come and go, Remembering Archbishop Romero. OUTSIDE THE convention hall, Texas Civil Liberties Union legal director Jim Harrington had his hands full. While most of the protestors from Tent City of the weekend before had left town, a few busloads of Yippies remained in the designated protest area. One afternoon, in 100-degree heat, a Rastafarian named Henry grabbed the lens of a video camera wielded by two undercover officers dressed in bermuda shorts in order to simulate tourists. Four police cars immediately appeared. Henry was thrown to the ground and handcuffed, all the while saying the video camera was robbing his soul by taking his picture. At the very least, it was capturing his identity to reproduce in police files around the country. Every day two factions of Iranian protesters clashed in the protest area. The ACLU, the police, and the Guardian Angels set up barricades to keep the two factions apart, but inevitably fights broke out. One faction was pro-Shah; the other was anit-Shah; both opposed Khomeini. On Tuesday night, the Dead Kennedys, a new wave band, staged a concert in the protest area for the Yippies and for hundreds of Dallas kids. Pointing to the convention, a band member announced, “This is to let them know we think they suck.” There were signs saying, “Ban the Poor,” “Eat the Rich,” and “Jesus is Lord.” A kid with greased-back hair and studded leather bracelets approached an ACLU volunteer and, pointing to her armband, asked, “What does A-C-LU mean?” The Dead Kennedys rocked on into the night not more than seven blocks from Dealey Plaza. I Wonder Who’s Kissinger Now INSIDE THE convention hall, a young preppy woman wearing a guest badge told a young preppy man with a security badge, “Have fun in Dallas.” “How can I help it?” he replied. At one point, the wife of the Dallas mayor cornered several journalists to tell them of the wonders of Dallas. She imparted “the most amazing story” to prove her point. It involved a delegate from the East Coast who wanted to have her hair done at Neiman Marcus but, of course, did not have an appointment. Just as she was about to leave Neiman’s salon in despair, a Dallas woman came up and told the delegate she could have her appointment. “If you were a woman and knew how difficult it is to get an appointment,” Caroline Taylor told the reporters, “you would realize how much that story says about Dallas.” On the podium, the machismo contest continued. There was no mention of Henry Kissinger. Detente now signals weakness. But Kissinger’s former crony was up there, trying to atone for his moderation of years past. Former President Gerald Ford bemoaned “the wishers, the wasters, the wanters, the whiners, and the weak.” He said Walter Mondale had “embraced fear as enthusiastically as he embraces his preconvention rivals. All he has to offer is fear itself.” Ford repeatedly praised his former rival, Reagan, for his strength compared to Mondale’s weakness. He was echoed by Transportation Secretary Elizabeth Dole, who said, “Ours is neither the time nor is this the place for men or women with faint hearts, feeble courage, weak commitment. . . .” Then there was Senator Howard Baker, who tried to join Dole and Ford in their quest for right-wing credentials. Baker also denounced the Democrats’ attention to misery, saying Mondale invented the idea of misery in this “successful America.” “We want America to be successful, not miserable,” he proclaimed, praising a 25% tax cut without saying who was its beneficiary. But Ford, Dole, and Baker were still out of their depth when set against the likes of Laxalt, Kemp, and Kirkpatrick in a test of machismo. Kemp, though touted by the news media and loved by the extreme right, still has some credibility problems. For one thing, he still talks about returning to the Jeane Kirkpatrick warned against the “danger of self-criticism.” gold standard. And he feels compelled to say things like “Ronald Reagan actually seems to be getting younger.” But every once in a while, this former quarterback can go to the wall in a test of machismo. “Isn’t it good to have a President who doesn’t apologize for America?” Kemp said, warming up. “And isn’t it wonderful to have as our ambassador to the U.N. a woman like Jeane Kirkpatrick, who doesn’t apologize for America’s foreign policy?” Then he declared, “This is a time for courage and optimism. The world is filled with continents not yet developed. . . .” It warmed the imperialist, multinational heart. And Nevada’s Senator Paul Laxalt was no slouch. In making the nominating speech for Reagan, Laxalt said Carter and Mondale “had this nation on its knees.” Then he talked about “confidence” under Reagan: “confidence of the American people confidence in themselves, their country, and confidence in our President.” “Remember when this President was in the People’s Republic of China and spoke to the Chinese people on television?” Laxalt asked. “It took courage for him to tell the Chinese people, in plain language [though in English], that our system of self-government was better than theirs. . . . It’s a choice between Walter Mondale’s ‘fear of the future’ and Ronald Reagan’s ‘enduring, consistent optimism.’ ” Laxalt was peddling the Republican theme: this election was a choice between attitudes. Who wants a miserable President when you can have a happy one? But Laxalt got a little soft around the edges. To push his point, he said, “I’ve never known of anyone more optimistic than Ronald Reagan. Give him a cloud, and he’ll find a silver lining every time.” You’d never catch Jeane Kirkpatrick saying something like that. What made her so macho was her obvious disgust at the thought of reflection, guilt, introspection. “The Carter administration’s motives were good, but their policies were inadequate, uninformed and mistaken,” she told the convention, sounding like a junior high social studies filmstrip. “The United States grew weaker,” she said. “Meanwhile, the Soviet Union grew stronger. . . . The American people were shocked by these events. We were greatly surprised to learn of our diminished economic and military strength. . . . And we were outraged by harsh attacks on the United States in the United Nations. As a result, we lost confidence in ourselves and in our government. . . . [Reagan’s] inauguration, blessed by the simultaneous release of our hostages, signaled an end to the most humiliating episode in our national history.” THE TEXAS OBSERVER