Too Many Cooks

Clay Bennet

Crosses of Lafayette: The Image of our Discontent

Getty Images / Justin Sullivan

This week's Economist has a feature article about how the Iraq War has damaged the Republican party. The image picked by the Economist to represent everything that has gone wrong features the Crosses of Lafayette.

Collateral damage
Mar 22nd 2007 | WASHINGTON, DC
The Republican Party is among the war's victims

FOUR years ago, as American troops rolled across Iraq, the Republican Party was on a roll too. Republicans not only controlled the whole of Washington (seven of the nine Supreme Court justices had been appointed by Republican presidents). They controlled the majority of governorships as well—including those of mega-states such as Florida and New York—and they were winning the war of ideas, thanks to a division of conservative think-tanks.

Republican strategists were consumed by heady visions of power without end. The “war on terror”, which was dividing the Democrats, was encouraging Republican factions to bury their differences. Karl Rove, George Bush's chief strategist, liked to compare his boss to William McKinley, the late-19th-century president who had ushered in an age of Republican dominance. Grover Norquist, an anti-tax crusader, dubbed Mr Bush “Reagan's son”.

snip

There are plenty of reasons for the party's agonies. The Republicans fell victim to all the diseases of incumbency—from spending like drunken sailors to corruption to cronyism—and the Bush administration made a hash of responding to Hurricane Katrina. But the Iraq war lies at the heart of the party's problems. The war has deprived Mr Bush of the oxygen of popularity. A recent CBS News/New York Times poll found that only 39% of Americans now think that invading Iraq was the right thing to do, compared with 55% who think it was a mistake. It has also provided the Democrats with a huge stick with which to beat the opposition.

snip

Stephen Bainbridge, a conservative academic at the University of California, Los Angeles, has argued that Mr Bush's decision to go to war has “pissed away the conservative moment by pursuing a war of choice via policies that border on the criminally incompetent.” William Buckley, the pope of the conservative movement, says that if Mr Bush were the leader of a parliamentary system, “it would be expected that he would retire or resign”. Richard Viguerie, another conservative veteran, says that “I've never seen conservatives so downright fed-up as they are today.”

The war has eviscerated the administration's reputation for competence—and with it the idea that the Republicans have an inherent advantage as the “Daddy” party. An administration that once boasted about its clutch of CEOs will forever be remembered for phrases such as “slam dunk” (of WMD intelligence) and “Mission Accomplished”, or for disasters such as the failure to prepare Walter Reed and other military hospitals to deal with casualties. The same CBS News/New York Times poll found that only 28% of people approved of Mr Bush's handling of the situation in Iraq.

snip

But the Iraq war has destroyed the Republicans' advantage of decades. The party is losing support even among the once solid armed services. Today only 46% of servicemen describe themselves as Republican, compared with 60% in 2004—and only 35% of them approve of the handling of the war. Voters are now much more willing to listen to the Democrats on war and peace. Barack Obama's statement in 2002—“I'm not opposed to all wars. I'm opposed to dumb wars”—is a perfect refrain for a resurgent party.

snip

At the same time, the war has taken a huge toll on the administration's domestic policies. After the 2004 election Mr Bush sketched out an ambitious agenda for avoiding the fate of previous second-term presidents and moving the country in a more Republican direction: reforming immigration and Social Security, simplifying taxes and lifting regulations. That agenda has come to almost nothing. Senior figures have been constantly distracted by dealing with the fallout from Iraq. (One reason the administration was so tardy in dealing with Katrina was that Karl Rove was worried he might become a victim of the Plame affair.) In late 2005 the administration concluded that it was impossible to push through big initiatives, such as Social Security reform, in a time of war.

The man who will pay the biggest political price for Iraq will ultimately be Mr Bush. It is hardly surprising that liberal historians debate whether he is the worst president ever. But now conservatives are beginning to play the same game. A recent poll of hard-core conservative activists found that only 3% described themselves as George Bush Republicans, compared with 79% who regarded themselves as Ronald Reagan Republicans. But the damage will not be limited to the party leader. For years to come, the Republicans will be paying a collective price for the “stuff” that happened in Iraq.

Crosses of Lafayette: "Thanks For Doing This"

Click to enlarge

This photo was taken Sunday, March 25, 2007. In addition to this group paying their respects to the fallen, I met a soldier wearing a Notre Dame cap who is returning to Iraq in two weeks. We chatted briefly after I finished planting 6 new crosses. He said that he had heard about the memorial and wanted to come see the crosses. Then he added, "thanks for doing this. We appreciate it." I was speechless.

Crosses of Lafayette: Sky Pilot

On the morning of March 19, 2008, the fourth anniversary of the War in Iraq, this cross was seen in the sky in Lafayette at about 7:30 in the morning.

Photo by John Eaton

Twelve hours later there was a candlelight vigil marking this tragic anniversary.

Photo by John Eaton

Crosses of Lafayette: Sense of Scale

Photo by John Eaton

This shot taken from the far side of Highway 24 with Bart in the foreground provides some scale of the Crosses of Lafayette project.

Crosses of Lafayette: Blossoms and Crosses

Photo by John Eaton

Spring blossoms on March 14, 2007 partially obscure the hillside of crosses just before sunset.

Photo by John Eaton

Crosses of Lafayette: 3188

Photo by John Eaton

Today, Melanie Morgan brought her Move America Forward caravan to Lafayette to demonstrate in front of the hillside crosses together with the "Lafayette Flag Brigade's" Never Forget 911.

Photo by John Eaton

While everyone at the gathering in Lafayette today supports the troops, the caravan believes that it is also necessary to support the war to support the troops. Furthermore, many in the caravan also believe that the troops "can win."

Photo by John Eaton

The caravan pulled out before 11:00 AM but the crosses remained. All 3188.

Crosses of Lafayette: BART

Photo by John Eaton

At the San Francisco Chronicle, Jason B. Johnson posted this article today about the Crosses with video and photos by Carlos Avila Gonzalez:

A controversial Iraq war memorial in Lafayette reached an emotional milestone Sunday, when a group of volunteers added 290 new crosses to the site so there were enough symbols to represent each of the 3,170 American soldiers killed in Iraq since the start of the war. (The count by the Associated Press reached 3,173 late Sunday.)

About 50 people hammered nails, painted the crosses and planted them under a clear blue sky. In clothes flecked with white paint, many smiled and chatted while others worked quietly.

A group opposed to the war has expanded its stark display overlooking the Lafayette BART Station over the past several weeks -- gathering in cold weather and at times staging candlelight vigils. Several members said blanketing this green hillside with a sea of crosses, Stars of David and Muslim Crescents has reinvigorated their sense of civic activism.

Crosses of Lafayette: March 4, 2007

The Crosses of Lafayette memorial now has one cross for each soldier killed in Iraq.

Photo by John Eaton

Photo by John Eaton

Here is a photo taken at dusk on March 4, 2007.

Photo by John Eaton

Check out the full set of photos of the Crosses of Lafayette on Flickr.

Honoring The Warriors

Clay Bennett