LITMIR.BIZ

Скачать книгу

WEIGHED HEAVILY ON THE CAMPAIGN. His approval at a historic low, Carter was portrayed as weak and inept, unable to resolve the hostage crisis or the terrible economy. Inflation + declining employment = stagflation, which is what they said we had a case of, along with historically high interest rates. Carter added to the dour mood by continuing to preach belt-tightening and sacrifice. He offered no grand plan, in fact no plan at all.

      Many still viewed Reagan as an unqualified lightweight and reckless hawk, but for his part, the sunny candidate told the American people what they wanted to hear. They deserved to have it all and they would have it all. His economic revival would be led by tax cuts and a balanced budget, a paradoxical recipe his primary opponent George Bush had called “voodoo economics,” though he backed off that when ambition got the better of him. The mechanism was simple – lowered taxes stimulate the profit motive and “hands-off” government lets business do its thing. Production increases, there are more goods and services at lower prices, which consumers, back to work again, can afford. With higher incomes, everyone pays more taxes. Q.E.D. “A rising tide lifts all boats,” Reagan pontificated. What he’s really saying, critics fired back, the wealthy and powerful get theirs first, everybody else gets theirs later (wink, wink). Noblesse oblige with a dash of devil-take-the-hindmost.

      The first televised debate was a charade, Carter refusing to appear in the three-candidate format. Reagan and independent John Anderson took turns blasting him for not showing up. The second debate, however, was pivotal. With Anderson excluded, Reagan’s easy manner and communications skills turned the momentum his way. Consider the impact of one simple question he asked voters: “Are you better off than you were four years ago?”

      Comedians and late-night show hosts had a field day with Carter, while Reagan’s bon mots were superb. “A recession is when your neighbor loses his job, a depression is when you lose yours, recovery is when Jimmy Carter loses his.” Reagan surprised in the debates, coming across as statesmanlike, even presidential. Carter was Carter, and that did him in. The tide was turned.

      I still hadn’t been to Iran and wasn’t likely to anytime soon, but I was looking forward to visiting Baghdad for the first time. For its twentieth anniversary, OPEC was planning a big celebration there in late September and I had just received my invitation. But before the event, Iraq’s strongman, Saddam Hussein, invaded Iran, seeking to exploit his neighbor’s post-revolutionary chaos. It took time for a U.S. position to emerge, and we came down, reluctantly, on the side of Iraq. As Carter Administration officials later explained, “We let Saddam assume the U.S. green light was on because there was no explicit red light.” Later, even as we opposed Iran militarily, we would covertly supply it with arms. If that sounds confusing, it is. Our position seemed to be – we want both sides to lose. In the early going the Iraqis had much the better of the fight, but Iran’s resistance would stiffen and the battle surge back and forth for eight long years. More on this later.

      As the election came on, efforts to free the hostages intensified. Carter needed a miracle and the prospect of an “October surprise” frightened the Reagan camp. Rumors had the Reaganites in clandestine negotiations with Iran to delay a release until after the election. True or not, that’s exactly what happened. In the end, Jimmy Carter sank under his burdens, losing the popular vote by nearly ten percentage points and going 49 - 489 in the Electoral College. His coat tails also failed, and for the first time since 1964 Republicans controlled the Senate. Carter’s star would rise again, but this was the worst defeat for an incumbent since Herbert Hoover, the first to fall since Andrew Johnson. Massachusetts – even Southie, Gus – went for Reagan. I called my old friend to commiserate. He passed along a remark going around Berkeley that summed up what some thought we were about to experience: “Morning in America.”

      4. Morning In America

      WITH JONATHAN AWAY I’VE INHERITED THE JOB of research assistant. Not my cup of tea, but if it helps us finish I’m okay with it. Every day I enter my observations into the computer. I am also reviewing his draft but have given up on that editing program, all those squiggles and underlines. Just another damned gadget I don’t want. Give me paper and a red pen any time. As I do this I have been trying to figure out why Dennis is helping us and what Jonathan can add to the program. My guess, Dennis wants to pin the screwups where they belong, on that bunch of Bush amateurs. I felt bad about Paul’s boy, but what spunk! None of my neighbors built an airplane, let alone in a garage. Nor did I ever have one who made me look reasonable by comparison, whatever that means.

      Last night Jonathan called, very upbeat. A bad connection but I gather they’ve made contact with the “target.” He is really into this cloak and dagger stuff. Home runs are fine, I tell him, but singles and doubles win ball games. You need to get back here and shorten up on your bat.

      * * * * * * *

      THE WARMEST INAUGURATION DAY IN HISTORY saw Ronald Wilson Reagan sworn in as the fortieth President of the United States. So out of place in Sacramento and look where he is now. Despite my misgivings, I wished him well. We needed help and if he was the one to provide it, more power to him. The lavish festivities – even Barry Goldwater clucked his disapproval – ushered out Carter-era austerity with a vengeance. If you’ve got it, flaunt it. If you don’t, what’s wrong with you? The very day Reagan took office, minutes after the swearing-in, the Iran embassy hostages were free. More exquisite timing? Or did citizen Reagan break the law to get himself elected? Once again sizzle beats steak – the American public had given up on steak. Sizzle’s a lot more fun. The day of the hostages’ tickertape parade I interviewed a number of my Vietnam Vets. Many couldn’t care less, but others vented their bitterness at the welcome given this latest batch of heroes compared with the scum treatment they received.

      For the Gazette’s end-of-January business review I would survey the oil scene and venture to project what was coming under the new administration. Reagan’s views augured well for U.S. business, but the outlook for the consumer wasn’t so good. As government restraints were eased, companies would raise prices. Night still does follow day. Protection against dangerous products and misleading practices would suffer as well.

      Sitting around Fred’s table scoping out the story, our team realized the real news was the multinationals. American firms readily leap-frogged our borders, sending work to Mexico, South America, Korea, Taiwan, even China – in some cases even setting up factories to exploit cheaper labor. The dark side of this coin – well-paying domestic jobs were fast disappearing. Free-market capitalism equated to globalization in action, and in our view would only increase under Reagan. Euphemisms like “downsizing” and “rightsizing” were in common use. Could the unions stem the tide? We thought not. Their debilitated condition made them easy prey, and Reagan, the former union chief, would be no friend of theirs. In fact, soon he would deal them a blow from which they would not recover.

      My piece of what became a three-part series afforded me a trip to Paris to interview officials at the IEA, also Brussels for talks at the European Union where much was in flux including the vision of what it might become. I spent a couple of days in our Paris bureau and was able to corner Didier Lemaire for a private talk. When I asked whether he was still interested in having me join his team, he said he’d like nothing better.

      We found ourselves agreeing that if we could pull it off, I’d cover European politics as well as business stories. Also the impact of Washington – its quotas, tariffs, and regulatory actions (what’s left of them). From here I was able to steer Didier to something that would make the assignment much more compelling. “How about an occasional commentary?” I asked. “Business, yes – but politics, culture, sports, too. And I can describe how expats see the U.S. from a distance.”

      “Opinion pieces, like you do now.” Didier paused a moment. “For coordination you would submit your idea first, correct? Also to be sure you are aware of the subtleties here.”

      After a moment Didier started nodding his head. “Well then, I think that could be a very good addition for you,” he rubbed his hands together, “and for the Gazette.”

      I left buoyed by Didier’s enthusiasm. I tried to reach Pat but he was out of the country. Just as well, I thought, no time

Скачать книгу