I think President Bush should address this “Mission Accomplished” business, once and for all. They’ve been hammering him on it for four years.

I’m talking, of course, about Bush’s 5/1/03 appearance on the USS Lincoln. He flew in, wearing a “jumpsuit.” And he spoke in front of a banner bearing the fateful words: “Mission Accomplished.”

Probably Bush has dealt with it before, but he should deal with it again — because they keep killing him on it.

It seems to me that the president was congratulating our fighting men and women on carrying out their task — and the toppling of Saddam Hussein was no small thing. As for the jumpsuit: Bush had been a fighter pilot, and he was in among his brethren, so to speak. Is that so despicable?

In the 2004 campaign, we heard endless talk about John Kerry’s prowess as a warrior. Can anyone doubt that, if he had been a fighter pilot, he would have been flying all over the place? (In the same vein, Jack Kemp kept throwing footballs, throughout the ’96 campaign.)

I often cite the lyric, “You’re so vain, you probably think this song is about you.” “Mission Accomplished” made the Left very, very angry. But I don’t believe the event was “about” jabbing CBS or Hillary Clinton. I think it was a military event: a commander-in-chief thanking and relating to his troops.

I could be wrong. Maybe the whole thing was an irresponsible, risible stunt (yeah, right). In any case, I believe the president should “speak to” this, as they say. In fact, he should do more speaking and question-taking than he does. He is his own best spokesman. And anyone who thinks he is deluded or unreasonable probably refuses to listen to him.

‐So, now he’s done it: Hugo Chávez has seized the last remaining oil fields. In case you missed the story:

President Hugo Chavez’s government took over Venezuela’s last privately run oil fields Tuesday, intensifying a struggle with international firms over the development of the world’s largest known petroleum deposit.
Oil Minister Rafael Ramirez declared that the Orinoco fields had reverted to state control just after midnight. Television showed oil workers in hard hats raising the flags of Venezuela and the national oil company over a refinery and four drilling fields in the Orinoco River basin.
Chavez, a strong critic of U.S.-style capitalism and a leader of the leftist movement in Latin America, planned a more elaborate celebration later on May Day, the international workers’ holiday, with red-clad oil workers, soldiers and a flyover by Russian-made fighter jets.

Couple of comments. The report said, “Television showed oil workers in hard hats raising the flags of Venezuela and the national oil company . . .” I’m sure “television” did! Is there any television left over in Venezuela not controlled by the government?

And how about the report’s reference to “U.S.-style capitalism”? And which other kinds of capitalism are there?

Finally, a lighter point. In my first item today, I mentioned a song lyric. Remember “Let me sail, let me sail, let the Orinoco flow”? Well, Hugo Chávez certainly controls the Orinoco flow now.

‐The above item mentioned May Day, certainly an important date on Boss Chávez’s calendar. I had a couple of funny moments yesterday. First, I was talking to a friend about what may be a new Sweden, a Sweden friendlier to free-market economics. He said that he wanted to call some contacts at a conservative think tank in Sweden — but not this day, not on May 1. Because everyone had the day off. “The New Sweden is not that new!”

Also, I tried to call the Czech embassy in Washington. They, too, were closed, because of “a Czech national holiday,” said the recording.

Hmm. Now that Prague is more Havel and Klaus than Lenin and Stalin — couldn’t May Day be ditched?

Or am I being “un-conservative,” in the preservationist sense?

‐Justice John Paul Stevens said something funny — something sad-outrageous-funny. He was on the losing end of an 8-1 decision. (It concerned high-speed chases. For a news story, go here.) Stevens said that the case should have been left to lower-court judges, instead of “being decided by a group of elderly appellate judges” — meaning the Supreme Court.

So now he tells us! Now he feels that way! He has been happy to let national policy be decided by “a group of elderly appellate judges” for 30 years!

‐Above, I was mentioning oil. Wanted you to see this item:

President Bush is threatening to punish Sudan by cutting off its vital oil industry from the U.S. financial system, unless Khartoum takes steps to calm troubled Darfur.
But such sanctions are unlikely to hurt Sudan at all, oil analysts say: China, its biggest customer, already has adapted to similar U.S. pressure on Iran by buying oil in another powerful, rising currency — euros — and can do the same on Sudan.
The issue highlights the difficulty the United States faces in finding effective ways to sanction Sudan in order to ease the humanitarian suffering in Darfur, at a time when oil prices are high and the U.S. dollar is weak.

Ah, yes, China and Europe! You can always count on them to come through when there’s a genocidal dictatorship in need!

‐Do you hate the French? (A dangerous question to ask NRO readers.) Well, it appears they hate themselves more. My homegirl Emmy Chang forwarded the following item:

The French dislike themselves even more than the Americans dislike them, according to an opinion poll published on Friday.
The survey of six nations, carried out for the International Herald Tribune daily and France 24 TV station, said 44 percent of French people thought badly of themselves against 38 percent of U.S. respondents who had a negative view of the French.

It seems that les français might need some psychothérapie.

‐In the current National Review, Mark Steyn has a column that mentions the famous James Montgomery Flagg image: Uncle Sam, pointing his finger at you. In 1916, the image appeared with the words, “What Are You Doing for Preparedness?” (meaning war preparedness). And I was reminded that, when I last visited Rumsfeld, in the Pentagon, he gave me a little poster, with that Flagg image — and the words, “We’re at War: Are YOU Doing All You Can?”

One guy who is doing all he can is . . . Mark Steyn.

And Rumsfeld — whatever his errors — did, too.

‐Have you noticed that atheists — professional atheists, literary types — have been unusually brash and cocky lately? They are, indeed, “in our faces.” I have just received a copy of a magazine called The New Individualist — probably Randian, not sure. And the cover features the words: “Sam Harris — Faith’s Feisty Foe.”

“Faith’s Feisty Foe”! Nice alliteration, guys. By the way: If the atheists’ views are correct — couldn’t they be sort of relaxed about it? At ease? Why all the agitation? Why should their knickers be in a twist?

Anyway . . . I still admire the alliteration.

‐When I first saw this news story, I was sort of rolling my eyes, at the magicians. But I quickly had a change of heart. See what you think:

A group of Japanese magicians sued TV broadcasters on Tuesday for revealing closely guarded secrets behind a series of coin tricks, a news report said.
Forty-nine magicians are seeking $16,000 in damages from Nippon Television Network Corp. and TV Asahi Corp. for airing shows last year that revealed how magicians perform tricks involving coins, according to Kyodo News agency.
In a suit filed with the Tokyo District Court, the magicians claim the programs infringed on their common property, Kyodo said.
The broadcasters “instantly deprived professional magicians of their assets,” built up through the accumulation of ideas and long-term practice, magician Shintaro Fujiyama was quoted as telling a press conference.
Fujiyama apparently refused to talk in any further detail about the tricks that were exposed.

You know, I feel kind of sorry for the magicians — bread taken out their mouths. (Dear readers: I left that “of” out deliberately.) Still, we can’t approve of the lawsuit, can we? (And some of us aren’t so hot on trickery altogether. Although I should watch what I say, lest David Copperfield make me disappear, or cut me in half without putting me back together, or something.)

‐In Monday’s Impromptus, I mentioned the late Johnny Hart — author of the comic strip B.C. — who sometimes sounded Christian themes. (Of course, these did not go over very well with newspaper editors and other commissars.) This prompted the below, fascinating letter:

Dear Jay,
My wife and I were visiting Chicago, and spent part of Saturday afternoon at Adler Planetarium. There is an exhibit about Project Apollo, and one wall discusses the adventures of Apollo 13. Included in the exhibit are framed copies of the front page of the Chicago Tribune during and after the crisis. I was struck by the April 18, 1970, edition.
First of all, they printed their lead editorial on the front page. More amazing was the title of the editorial: “Praise the Lord.” The first paragraph read,
“The incredible journey is over, and the astronauts are safely home, borne through the void by the prayers of their countrymen. Appropriately, the odyssey through space of Apollo 13 ended on the deck of the Iwo Jima with a prayer of thanksgiving to the Lord. At times it seemed that only divine intervention could save the three men in their perilous return from their aborted mission around the moon. But God held them in the hollow of His hand and brought them back.”
I immediately pointed this out to our group, and said, “Can you imagine any major newspaper in this country today even acknowledging the existence of God, or allowing that He might influence events in our world, let alone proclaiming it in a front-page editorial?”
The sad, obvious answer is, “Of course not.”

Yes, times have changed — markedly.

‐Throw a little music at you? For my “New York Chronicle” in the April New Criterion, please go here. (And for the new issue — the May issue — go here.)

And here are two New York Sun reviews: For a concert by the Los Angeles Philharmonic, under Esa-Pekka Salonen, with Jean-Yves Thibaudet, piano soloist, go here; and for a concert of the Chamber Music Society of Lincoln Center, go here.

‐Last, let’s have a little language. (Talk about alliteration!) In a recent column of his — found in The Spectator, here, but a subscription is required — Paul Johnson used three words I didn’t know: in one sentence. Here is the sentence:

“The Bible devotes a lot of space to gulosity in general, let alone the excesses of Lot, Belchezzar, Herod and other esurient characters, killing fatted calves, selling birthright for pottage and glaring examples of edacity.”

Gulosity: “gluttony or greediness.”

Esurient: “hungry, greedy.”

Edacity: “the state of being edacious,” meaning “devouring; voracious; consuming.”

In the rest of that column, Johnson used four more words I didn’t know: banting, brawn (in an unfamiliar sense), pantophagist, and syllabub.

Banting, I could not find the meaning of. Must be very, very British. Brawn: “a boar’s or swine’s flesh, esp. when boiled and pickled.” Pantophagist: “A person or an animal that has the habit of eating all kinds of food.” Syllabub: “A drink of milk or cream sweetened, flavored, and mixed with wine or cider.”

Are you hungry? Anyway, I’ll see you later.