After 9/11: Got big Chutzpah? - Inside Politics - politics after the terrorist attack

Well, there is one way we can say with certainty that the horrific events of 9/11 have changed American politics (at least in the short term). The attacks, which struck at the very heart and soul of this nation, have pumped politicians chock full of... what's the word?...how do you say?...chutzpah (which in the vemacular is pretty much the euphemistic equivalent of possessing more than, uh...one ball). More accurately, politicians have contracted Big Chutzpah, a more acute strain of garden-variety chutzpah -- a kind of pre-existing condition for most politicians.

This latest outbreak -- the first industrial-strength strain to surface since the heady days of the Cold War -- has also hit the public at large, symbolically reflected in the countless American flags flying from homes, cars, buildings, trucks, storefronts and the occasional sedentary human (and, of course, the bigger the flag, the better). However, the epidemic seems to be striking politicians at a disproportionately high rate. In swelling (for lack of a better word) numbers, politicians have contracted Big Brass Chutzpah... no, Big Brass Gun-Slinging Chutzpah... no, no that's still not quite right...Big Brass Nationalistic Gun-Slinging Chutzpah, yeah, that's it.

U.S. Army Special Forces, helicopter gunships, 15,000- pound "daisy cutter" bombs, military tribunals, unilateral termination of the ABM Treaty -- you better believe we've got Big Chutzpah. And it should be noted that the condition seems to be contagious.

What can also be said with certainty is that we have no idea what the current rash of Big Chutzpah Disease (not to be confused with the ubiquitous Foot-in-Mouth Disease) -- in its many manifestations -- will mean for the November elections. The best we can do is observe.., preferably from afar.

Let's take a look at some of the more unsensored displays of Big Chutzpah that have been reported: Consider a remark from U.S. Rep. John Cooksey (DLA), who, incidentally, is running for the U.S. Senate in November. Cooksey: The United States should be questioning anyone "wearing a diaper on his head and a fan belt wrapped around the diaper." I'm not even sure what the part about the fan belt means, but it does seem to be indicative of a particularly aggressive strain of Big Chutzpah.

Our new common enemy, terrorists, have stepped into the shoes of our old long-lost nemesis, Communists. It really has been too long, I think we'd all agree, since we've had someone to hate.. together, as a nation. Remember Richard Nixon's case of Big Chutzpah, which first struck during his unsuccessful 1950 run for the U.S. Senate. He went after his opponent, Helen Gahagan Douglas, with his well-documented soft touch. "She's pink right down to her underwear" Nixon charged (of course we're all still a little curious as to how he gathered that intelligence). But boy, those were the days, comrade!

U.S. Rep. C. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA), in another contemporary display of BC, had a choice recommendation for Georgia law enforcement -- although unlike Cooksey (or Nixon) he opted not to provide any time-tested scientific process for physically indentifying the culprits (e.g., the proverbial diaper--or the pink panties). Chambliss, chairman of the House sub committee on terrorism and homeland security, suggested this to law enforcement officials: "just turn [the sheriff] loose and have him arrest every Muslim that crosses the state line." Hey, racial profiling... shmacial profiling!

The stream of nationalistic bravado flowing from Capitol Hill is at times deeply inspiring and at others profoundly disturbing. Let's take a look at some of the commentary from our chief executive, George Dubya -- who, all kidding aside, has done an admirable job under exceedingly difficult circumstances. Having said that, in Bush we see a strange sort o hybrid condition best described as Big Chutzpah meets Wild West.

Here are some highlights:

* "We will find those who did it; we will smoke them out of their holes; we will get them running and we'll bring them to justice. We will not only deal with those who dare attack America, we will deal with those who harbor them and feed them and house them."

* "I want justice. And there's an old poster out West that says, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive.'"

Did anybody else hear the theme song to "Gunsmoke" playing in the background during these addresses? I could've sworn...

Big Chutzpah has even caused certain politicians to wax poetic about a renewed interest -- possibly even a new demand --forTax-and-Spend Big Government. New York Sen. Chuck Schumer wrote in the Washington Post: "Since the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980, those who believe the federal government should shrink have had the upper hand. Sept. 11 changed all that For the foreseeable future, the federal government will have to grow." Now if that ain't the Big Chutzpah talkin'...

You can almost hear the collective glee of liberal politicians and aspirants across the country as they prepare their agendas and compose their speeches.

According to Schumer, they can once again, unabashedly, let their liberal tax-and-spend flags fly freely.

Even the mild-mannered Democratic senator from Connecticut, Joe Lieberman, has not been immune to this latest outbreak of Big Chutzpah. It has prompted the former VP nominee to take on the NRA, which very well may have the biggest Chutzpah of all. Lieberman's beef with the gun lobby is that the distinct lack of background checks at gun shows provides terrorists (and anyone else for that matter) with a perfectly legal means for purchasing weapons, including assault rifles and hand grenades.

Big Chutzpah has also provided cover for embattled politicians to revitalize their careers. Former super-Mayor Rudy Giuliani went from a 41 percent approval rating pre-BO to a stratospheric 89 percent (statewide) after contracting the disease. Can you say "Man of the Year? And U.S. Rep. Gary Condit (D-CA) (remember him?) was hit with such an acute case of Big Chutzpah that not only is he going to run for re-election, he has gone so far as to publicly double-dog dare anyone to make an issue of Chandra Levy during his campaign.

So what are we left with? How do we make sense -- in a political context-- of this epidemic? Perhaps Schumer is right. Running on a platform of increased government spending may be the trend for the 2002 elections. It does seem that the public is ready to forgo near-future tax cuts for beefed up homeland security. And the Dems have already pushed the airport security staff (all 28,000 of 'em) onto the federal payroll. But it also seems that if government spending does indeed expand, it is unlikely that additional funds will be allocated to many -- if any -- traditional liberal causes. In fact, money funneled into policies like immigration reform could go a long way in hurting the Democratic base.

The GOP finds itself facing a dilemma as well. It's going to be tough -- without losing political face--to stick with the M.O. of shrinking government when the public is pushing for growth in traditional Republican areas of concern (e.g., defense, immigration reform).

The GOP does, however, have an escape hatch. Republicans would be wise to expand spending, but do so -- in the name of federalism -- by channeling money to state and local government rather than watching that pesky federal bureaucracy balloon further.

As the high-stakes 2002 elections near and the War Against Terrorism" switches gears, there is sure to be more political posturing from both parties. And many of the stories that have been squeezed out by the constant focus on bin Laden, al Qaeda and anthrax will reappear in newspapers and TV segments. We've heard little from 2002 congressional candidates and even less from 2004 presidential hopefuls.

And, sooner or later, the news media will return to its proud (and at times rabid) role of government watchdog. And as our collective rage subsides and the national ranks re-open, the debate -- and the inevitable criticism -- will begin as to how we, as a country, handled the tragedy of 9/11. At that point, the closed-ranks mentality summed up brashly (and with what must have been a Big Chutzpah-addled brain) by Attorney General John Ashcroft in his declaration that any criticism of government policies gives "ammunition to our enemies" will be justly taken to task.

And although Ashcroft occupies an appointed post, Cooksey, Chambliss, Schumer and company are elected officials, and they may very well see their words (uttered at the height of the outbreak) pop up in their opponents' campaign ads and questioned during televised debates. Then we will see which politicians will ultimately survive this particular epidemic of Big Chutzpah... and which ones will see their Royal Bigness come back and bite them in the...uh, derriere.

Peter Wendel is managing editor of C&E.

COPYRIGHT 2002 Campaigns & Elections, Inc.
COPYRIGHT 2002 Gale Group