Daniel Henninger took over writing the "Wonder Land" column from Paul Gigot when the latter was promoted to edit the opinions page. Unfortunately, while I considered Mr. Gigot's work entertaining and informative about the wonderland that is our nation's capital, Mr. Henninger has been decidedly less perceptive. Or, in an event, decidedly more partisan.
On March 15th, he opines on "The Walter Reed Fiasco," in which injured veterans were treated poorly at that hospital, and apparently had been for some years. Mr. Henninger quotes Speaker Pelosi's spokesman, and then opines:
"The American people spoke clearly in the November elections that they wanted accountability and oversight. Under the Republican Congress it has been almost nonexistent, and you can certainly see that with what occurred at Walter Reed." No, you cannot see that.
Mr. Henninger then goes on to note that
On Feb. 17, 2005--two years ago--GOP Rep. Tom Davis and the government reform committee held a public hearing on the maltreatment of wounded soldiers. The hearing was the culmination of an investigation, begun in 2003, by the committee and the Government Accountability Office. Virtually everything of substance in that Washington Post story was described, in numbing detail, at that hearing two years ago.
So, you cannot see a lack of effective GOP oversight in the Walter Reid scandal when, in fact, the Republicans have controlled both houses of Congress and the executive branch and had hearings two years ago in which all this came out? I'd say Speaker Pelosi's spokesman seems quite right in his indictment of Republicans.
The following week, he writes on the Bong Hits 4 Jesus case - in which an Alaskan high school student off school grounds was punished for a banner he unfurled. In 1969, the classic Tinker case established that students' First Amendment rights do not stop at the schoolhouse door. In that case, the court found that students could express "speech" (in that case black arm bands protesting the war in Viet Nam) as long as it wasn't disruptive.
Mr. Henninger notes his hope that the Court will "take Tinker and throw it out the window." However, he expects that, instead, "They'll tinker, telling us what to do, but unable to give coherent reasons why we should do it." Nowhere in this does he even address what may be the core legal issue - that the speech occurred off the school grounds. Might we not get a reasonable ruling that school administrators aren't particularly able to restrict what students may say away off the school grounds? But, of course, that is not sufficient for Mr. Henninger, who wants the Court to use this to roll back the First Amendment for public school students.
Finally, most recently, he declares premature victory both over the Democrats and Al Qaeda in Iraq, speculating on The Democrats' Surge:
Carried aloft on the gassy fumes of politics, the congressional Democrats may be overshooting on Iraq. Six months from now, they may wish they had been more temperate. Helped finally by the right U.S. military strategy, the Iraq nightmare might be ebbing. Then what?
Well, then the Democrats claim that their insistence on an exit date stiffened the spine of our Iraq allies, and they can claim sole credit for our victory. I certainly agree with Mr. Henninger that the Democratic strategy is cold calculated politics, and reprehensible. But they clearly are engaging in it because they have calculated (correctly) that it allows them to both take credit for victory and avoid blame for defeat - even while increasing the likelihood of it. I abhor their naked calculation on this matter, but I certainly don't dismiss it.
I miss the old "Wonder Land". Mr. Gigot was sometimes too conservative for my tastes - I recall he opposed stem cell research, and not just on grounds of fiscal conservatism. Yet, I agreed with him more often than not. And, he was always insightful and wrote with humor. In theory his influence diffused into the rest of the editorial page, but, in practice, I miss his direct voice.