|
Edited on Wed Jun-07-06 04:03 PM by PCIntern
As a clinician, I have had the opportunity to meet people to whom I would never have been introduced in ten thousand years. It is the nature of my occupation that makes it as appealing as it is at this life stage, because the entire health care establishment is circling with some fair degree of coriolus force in the toilet as far as I’m concerned.
It was with some surprise however, when a patient of mine contacted me and asked if I would wish to join her and her group for a ‘small, private dinner’ with Joseph Wilson. In the milliseconds before I almost literally jumped at the chance I remember a certain silence and stillness in the room – that it was almost unbelievable that this opportunity would arise. The dinner was scheduled to be in Philadelphia’s only 5 star restaurant and if for no other reason, I really needed an excuse to have a meal there – rationalizations are always necessary when it comes to these things and these large dollar donations. I am a cynic by nature, but if there were one true ‘hero’ of the years since the recount of 2000, it was this individual, and it would be less than honorable to decline if for no other reason than to pay homage to someone who really risked it all in the name of American Righteousness. Years ago, I had met with Eliot Richardson post-Watergate and he was another who had risen above the fray to at long last, do the right thing.
Last night was no disappointment. First of all, unbelievably, I was seated at a table for seven, directly across from Ambassador (call me Joe) Wilson. Understand this: he is as charismatic, deft, witty, charming, and obviously brilliantly competent as he appears on the television, with the exception that he is even more so. Now clearly, much of this is practiced, for I am certain that he answers the same fifty questions daily, but he is really – and I am a child of the fifties, so many of you won’t necessarily understand the real meaning of the word – really cool. Believe me, the word has evolved, but I’m talking about the beat generation definition of cool.
My take on him is that he is a meticulously rehearsed, guarded, brilliant guy who is aware of the nuances of every single utterance which left his mouth. You would expect this from a career diplomat of course, but his responses to asides which people made to him were crafted to allow you to realize that he’s bright, and you are to know that he’s that bright, but it’s acceptable in his case because he is someone who clearly, is in command of the truth. More on that later, of course.
To make a long story shorter, he spoke to us after the order and before the appetizers were served. He stated, and I’m paraphrasing because I was absolutely not going to record this conversation out of respect to him, that the country is careening towards repression of a massively frightening nature, that the Republican Party - in his words one fo the two great parties in the country, has been hijacked by this radical element; that the attempt at personal destruction of him and his family was in fact personal, and he regarded it as such. He was pretty witty at times, he referred to an aunt of his as Mrs. John Birch, and she’s off his Christmas card list because she sided with Bush in 2004; he referred to Bush not as stupid, but as “bright, in a feral way”, which I thought was terrific. He asked for questions around the room, and gave very long, involved answers, some of which were included in his books or heard on TV almost verbatim. He asked for “THE question” – everybody looked at everybody else, so I went out on a limb and said, “OK, we haven't heard much from Bob Novak lately. Any personal thoughts about him, by any chance?” He was pleased with the question – I think – and stated that the reason that Novak did asserted neither his 5th amendment rights nor his 1st amendment rights was that he would have wound up indicted, or in jail with Judy Miller. Rather, he sang like a bird and answered ‘every question’ that Pat Fitzgerald put to him. He seemed to imply, although I can’t say for sure that he stated, that there were going to be more indictments coming down the pike.
Someone asked him why Rumsfeld and the others would like about something which really didn’t matter so much – I can’t remember what exactly – and he said that these guys lie about everything, “just to keep in shape”. Really brought the house down.
Importantly, someone asked him, “What can WE do about all this?” and his response was to continuously and without fail petition the representatives in congress no matter what their previous affiliation or party is, no matter how they voted or sucked up (my words) to the Administration in the past. Once they get wind that there’s a seismic shift, they will have to respond or run the risk of losing, no matter how safe a district. They could be ousted the implication was, via their own primary defeats as we have seen in PA (not a good thing I might add – because it’s the wingers taking over from the moderates), or in the general election. Either way, change is brought about by the people, and he quoted a great man, and I don’t want to get the citation wrong and I don’t have time to research it now, but it could have been Jefferson, who stated that he was never afraid of the People,
On other subjects, he remarked that he wasn’t getting much sleep since he and his wife have the 6 year-old twins, and his writing was very early in the AM before they got up; that his wife – and this was in response to a question – did not ‘retire’ from the CIA, she left after 20 years and will have to wait until 56 to collect her pension.; that he is still intensely interested in Africa and expounded at length on the remarkable Continent wherein the people carry on with good humor despite the bad ruler which many have had to have endured for the past 400 years or so.
One interesting comment he made was that the Iraqis have remarkable memories – the are still angry at the fall of the Caliph some 600 years ago (may have been 400, but what’s the difference?) and are vengeful. What are they going to be saying about us 600 years from now? Also that as far as Israeli-Palestinian relations go, if there had been someone besides Arafat, and that if they had been able to bring in the Saudis, Jordanians, and Egyptians on site – for you need to have your allies present during these meetings - in order to assure the Palestinians that they would be preserved as a people, and at the same time the US demonstrated as it always should, that this negotiation is not the first step in pushing the Israelis into the sea, then these talks would have worked better – that Israel must know that it has never in its history had a better friend than the US and that will always be true, that this was critical to the success of talks there.
He stated this in a matter-of –fact manner and that he was totally in command of all kinds of arcane details. Remarkable.
For my part, besides the Novak question, I mentioned that I had just seen Matthews (didn’t call him Tweety) suck up to Trent Lott right before I had left my office. I asked what happened to the adversarial press? He replied that it was all about ratings and Matthews himself had been overheard saying that. So if Hillary-bashing garners greater ratings, then so be it. I had alluded in my question to a notion that there was a lot of, shall we say, male fawning in Matthews, but he chose to ignore that aspect – he heard it all right, but he let it go and I didn’t press.
Also, he responded diplomatically to other queries at the table, with responses which we have all heard on network television, so I won’t go into that.
At the presentation at the University of the Arts, held at Broad and Pine Streets, he had a pretty good, but not sell-out crowd. My guess would be 350-400 or so. The moderator, a local guy who’s bright but not brilliant, basically asked him to refute the three major reasons why the Right wing says that Wilson twisted the truth. He did so effectively and completely, and people applauded him often, which he didn’t mind too much. It was quite an evening, to say the least.
One post-script – he was saying early on that he wanted to be known less as Mr. Valerie Plame, so I said impulsively: “ I read somewhere that you’re the most famous husband since Desi Arnaz.” He smiled and said, “I’d read that too. And fortunately, I laughed” So I said to him, “I guess that means I can still sit here, right?” And he laughed and nodded. At least I think he nodded.
ON EDIT: HE also, when queried about Hilly's run, stated thathe thought that someone who had been thru a campaign, ashillary had as a spouse, against the Republicans would be more successful than someone who had not. That she was a veteran of two of these campaigns and would be able to hit back as it were. soemeone in the dinner audience suggested that that was also true for Kerry. He allowed as that was true, and then made a remark, as he was leaving, that Gore, in his opinion, was NOT going to run again.
I hope this hastily 'scribbled' post gives you an idea of the evening. I would be happy to fill in details, but it’s been a long two days and I’m exhausted from work.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
