Month: August 2007
Rove/Bush Timeline, THE Math, and Fond Memories
The Chicago Tribune put together this handy timeline of the golden years of Karl Rove with the Bushes.
Rover two weeks before the 2006 midterms: “I add up to a Republican Senate and Republican House. You may end up with a different math but you are entitled to your math and I’m entitled to THE math.”
- 1973 — Rove became chairman of the College Republicans. During his time in Washington, D.C., he became a special assistant to Republican National Committee Chairman George H.W. Bush and met George W. Bush.
- 1977 — Worked for a political action committee dedicated to making the elder Bush president in 1980.
- 1978 — Advised younger Bush during his unsuccessful Texas congressional campaign.
- 1980 — Assisted George H.W. Bush’s unsuccessful presidential campaign.
- 1994 — Adviser for George W. Bush’s successful Texas gubernatorial campaign.
- 1998 — Adviser for Gov. Bush’s successful re-election campaign.
- 2000 — Chief strategist for Bush’s presidential campaign.
- 2004 — Chief strategist for re-election campaign.
- 2005 — Currently assistant to the president, deputy chief of staff and senior adviser to President George W. Bush.
Individual dates are missing here, such as the dates Rove called Judy Miller with bogus Iraq weapons of mass destruction intelligence, and when he called Bob Novak, Tim Russert, and whoever else with Valerie Plame’s identity, as well as the date he dissed Sheryl Crow over global warming. My favorite is the date Bush got snitty about Turd Blossom after the disastrous 2006 midterm elections.
“I obviously was working harder in the campaign than he was,†said Bush.
Good times.
But Bush couldn’t be blamed for being pissed at Rover, whose inability to tell which way the wind was blowing led directly to the “good thumpin'” Bush had to take.
Two weeks before the election, Rove showed the world how he reacts when someone disagrees with his interpretation of the facts, and why he is so detested by nice people everywhere. His interview with the polite Robert Seigel on NPR, when it was really looking good for the Democrats, said it all.
SIEGEL: We are in the home stretch though and many would consider you on the optimistic end of realism about…
ROVE: Not that you would exhibit a bias, you just making a comment.
SIEGEL: I’m looking at all the same polls that you are looking at.
ROVE: No, you are not. I’m looking at 68 polls a week for candidates for the US House and US Senate, and Governor and you may be looking at 4-5 public polls a week that talk attitudes nationally.
SIEGEL: I don’t want to have you to call races…
ROVE: I’m looking at all of these Robert and adding them up. I add up to a Republican Senate and Republican House. You may end up with a different math but you are entitled to your math and I’m entitled to THE math.
SIEGEL: I don’t know if we’re entitled to a different math but your…
ROVE: I said THE math.
What an asswipe.
Quote du Jour
The Bible nowhere prohibits war. In the Old Testament we find war and even conquest positively commanded, and although war was raging in the world at the time of Christ and His Apostles, still they said not a word of its unlawfulness and immorality.
— Henry Wager Halleck (1815-1872), American Union general, Civil War
Megachurch Preacher Who Canceled Gay Vet’s Funeral Is In-Law of Top Evangelist Joel Osteen
Many evangelicals consider Pastor Joel Osteen to be a modern-day Billy Graham. Like Graham, Osteen is incredibly popular. He heads the Lakewood Church, the world’s largest megachurch, and is the author of the bestselling power-of-positive-thinking-esque “Your Best Life Now” book series. And like Graham, Osteen tends to focus on positive messages rather than on GOP ideology disguised as theology — particularly the hatred and fear of gay people — that has become an endemic trait of today’s Christian church.
Last week, however, Osteen’s brother-in-law and rival, Rev. Gary Simons, who is head of his own megachurch, the High Point Church in Arlington, Texas, made national news when he abruptly canceled the funeral of a Gulf War veteran after he discovered that the vet was gay:
“We did decline to host the service – not based on hatred, not based on discrimination, but based on principle,” Simons told The Associated Press. “Had we known it on the day they first spoke about it – yes, we would have declined then. It’s not that we didn’t love the family.”
[And…]
“Even though we could not condone that lifestyle, we went above and beyond for the family through many acts of love and kindness,” Simons said.
How did Simons show “love and kindness” to the family of the deceased? By equating their loved one with a murderer:
The pastor said that he could imagine a similar situation involving a different sin. Perhaps a mother who is a member of the church loses a son who is a thief or murderer, Mr. Simons said. The church would surely volunteer to hold a service, he said.
“But I don’t think the mother would submit photos of her son murdering someone,” he said. “That’s a red light going off.”
And then, having proved he is totally unprincipled, at least as it comes to Jesus’ message of love and inclusiveness especially for society’s outcasts, Simons sums up: “Can you hold the event and condone the sin and compromise our principles? We can’t.”
What about the sins of hatred and bigotry, Gary?
Chicken Dance Time! Rove is Leaving
As Karl Rove leaves the White House to spend more time with his family and work on his memoir, we can’t help but say, “We knew it!”
The timing is suspect, coming just as the Democrats in Congress are really digging in to how the White House has been run, possibly even finally getting at those deleted emails.
The line that was deleted in later versions: “He’s been talking with the president for a long time, about a year, regarding when might be good to go,” Perino said.
This is the quote you’re seeing in all the stories concerning the “why now” aspect of Rove’s departure:
“I just think it’s time,” Rove told the Wall Street Journal. “There’s always something that can keep you here, and as much as I’d like to be here, I’ve got to do this for the sake of my family.”
But look at how the earlier versions quoted White House deputy spokestool Dana Perino when she made the happy announcement.
“He’s been talking with the president for a long time, about a year, regarding when might be good to go,” Perino said. “But there’s always a big project to work on, and his strategic abilities, and our need for his support, kept him here. He said there’s never a good time to leave, just the ‘right’ time.”
He’s been talking to the president for about a year? My bet is he’s been talking to president about it since last November, when Rove proved dead wrong on the midterm elections. I think he was a hair away from following Donald Rumsfeld out the door back then and has been on thin ice ever since, as Scooter Libby was convicted and as the Alberto Gonzalez scandal continues to grow.
Of course, no matter when Rove leaves, we’re just thanking God and Greyhound that he’s going.
Hey John Edwards, Learn to When to Stop Talking
I know just how Jon feels. He is disenchanted with New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, whose poor showing in the recent “gay debate” left Jon revisiting his early support.
In a job interview you’re not supposed to say that you’re late a lot or call in sick when you’re not. Does anyone really need this explained to them? Apparently Edwards does.
Like Jon I’ve been cringing but over John Edwards, my early favorite. It started with the monumentally idiotic criticism of Hillary Clinton’s jacket during the YouTube debate. For a man trying to shake off the “vain and shallow” characterization by Republicans to cluck his tongue and cock his head over the senator’s suit was dumb, dumb, dumb. Especially after making the case that he could represent women better than a woman can. Way to not get what women are up against, John.
And it’s not like Edwards didn’t have time to prepare his response, waiting as he did for Mike Gravell and Chris Dodd to go first, and following Dodd’s ovation for refusing to say anything negative about Edwards. John started out fine, admiring Clinton’s work as a senator and her husband’s service. No need to go further. But he did.
Does he not get that when you are asked to, “Say what you don’t like about the person to your left,” that’s your cue to say you don’t like how smart they are, or how good they are at golf? It’s like being asked in a job interview to name your flaws. You’re expected to say you work too hard or that you’re too much of a perfectionist. You’re not supposed to say that you’re late a lot or call in sick when you’re not. Does anyone really need this explained to them? Apparently Edwards does.
And now he’s done it again. Edwards was talking about the recent comment by Bush’s new war czar about possibly reinstating the draft.
“Enough is enough,” the Democratic presidential candidate said. “Let there be no doubt that the Bush administration’s new talk of a draft is a profound measure of how much this President has failed our brave men and women in the military, and the American people. This is exactly the wrong way to go.”
If only he had stopped there. But alas, no.
“Our all-volunteer force has helped make America what it is today.”
Yeah, they have. Along with all those who answered the call when they were drafted during World Wars I and II, Korea, Vietnam, and oh yeah, the Civil War. They had a little something to do with making America what it is today also.
There are those who think the reason there aren’t mass street protests ala Vietnam over Iraq is precisely because there is no draft. Edwards is right that for Bush to bring it back would be yet more proof of how badly this invasion was planned, and for five long years, executed. But John, please learn to stop talking while you’re still right.
Poll: Over 90% of Gays Voted in 2004 – Proves Americans Will Vote When Their Rights Are At Stake
Could this trend be a harbinger of things to come?
Consider that last statistic for a moment: a turnout rate among gay men more than twice that for the nation’s voters as a whole.
A recent study by San Francisco-based Community Marketing Inc. found an eye-popping 92.5 percent of gay men report they voted in the 2004 presidential race, and almost 84 percent said they cast ballots in the 2006 midterm election. Among lesbians, the results were almost as impressive; nearly 91 percent in 2004 and 78 percent in 2006.
By comparison, the Washington-based Committee for the Study of the American Electorate puts the turnout for all Americans eligible to vote at about 61 percent in 2004 and roughly 40 percent in 2006.
Consider that last statistic for a moment: a turnout rate among gay men more than twice that for the nation’s voters as a whole.
The survey questioned more than 12,000 gay men and more than 10,000 lesbians, giving its results a minuscule error margin of plus or minus 1 percent.
What this shows is that people will vote when they feel like they have something at stake. It speaks to the central point in “Sicko,” Michael Moore’s documentary about the corruption of the American healthcare system. Moore suggests that in Europe, where universal healthcare is, well, universal, voters control the politicians. Governments there are vulnerable to the citizens’ displeasure, both at the ballot box and from civil unrest in the streets.
But in America, says Moore, the politicians control the voters — or rather corporate interests control politicians who run the government to benefit the corporations at the expense of citizens. Voting is considered a waste of time and boring, and protest is only fashionable among scruffy vegan ruffians.
In 2004, Republicans were using gay rights as a wedge issue in the states to gin up the homophobe vote in their base. Feeling under assault, gays answered with the weapon available to all: they voted.
Perhaps the good news here is that we gays are considered to be trendsetters. Who knows, maybe this voting thing could catch on.
Rudy in 1994: ‘Freedom Is About Authority’
Paging Mr. Orwell: Rudolph Giuliani may be a liberal on social issues but when it comes to his views on the authority of the government to regulate the lives of its citizens, he is 100 percent conservative.
“Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do.”
— Rudolph Giuliani, 1994
— Rudolph Giuliani, 1994
During his tenure as mayor, Giuliani was in a constant struggle to impose authoritarian rule onto a city known for its liberal, non-conformist culture. At one point, things grew so contentious that America’s Mayor declared it illegal to criticize Himself.
That came as no surprise to locals. For one thing, in March 1994, early in his first year as mayor, he laid out his views on the supremacy of the authoritarian state in remarks during a forum on crime:
We look upon authority too often and focus over and over again, for 30 or 40 or 50 years, as if there is something wrong with authority. We see only the oppressive side of authority. Maybe it comes out of our history and our background. What we don’t see is that freedom is not a concept in which people can do anything they want, be anything they can be. Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do.
In other words, life was better back in authoritarianism’s golden age because citizens bowed to the government and kept to their place. Looking ahead from 1994, he seemed to be saying that the only way to quell the disorder in the streets was to bring all the citizens, especially the criminal element of the lower classes, into submission.
In the authoritarian way of thinking, social ills at the root of unrest are unimportant, and will likely resolve themselves after order is imposed. Of course, suppressing the criminal element does not make crime disappear. It just pushes it into someone else’s district.
After eight years of Cheney and Bush shredding the Bill of Rights and ceding power to themselves, it is unsettling to think that more of the same, or worse, could lie ahead under a Giuliani regime. If he becomes the GOP nominee, all he has to do is run a rematch of 2004, pummel the Democrats, as Bush did, with fear politics and the specter of 9/11 — and cakewalk into the White House. Now that is scary.
Will Someone Please Take Bill Richardson to the Gay Rodeo?
I’m still on the fence about which candidate to support next year but have been leaning toward Bill Richardson. He’s got more boots-on-the-ground foreign policy experience than all the other candidates in both parties combined. He’s served in cabinet posts, was a member of the House of Representatives and he’s run two successful campaigns for governor of New Mexico, a state that tends to elect more Republicans than Democrats to high office
But Richardson’s appearance Thursday night at the Human Rights Campaign Presidential Forum has given me pause. It’s not just that he said that homosexuality was a choice — an incredibly stupid statement that he later took back — it was his entire performance. He was obviously uncomfortable, and it was clear that he had not given gay civil rights issues an in-depth analysis. (I know the campaign is being run on a shoe-string but was there no one available who could have given him a briefing?)
My sense is, Richardson is not a dyed-in-the-wool bigot but rather a a clueless macho straight guy who was suddenly immersed in the heady waters of gay politics and quickly found himself to be in over his head.
If Richardson had performed so badly in front of any other group — blacks, union members, women, Irish-Americans — his campaign would be in freefall right now. Fortunately, it was only the gays, so hardly anyone will take notice and he can recover.
He can even rehabilitate his image with gays, if he chooses to. All he has to do is introduce himself to a strata of gay life with which he can probably relate — the gay rodeo. As it happens, a golden opportunity presents itself next weekend when the 16th Annual Zia Regional Rodeo, sponsored by the New Mexico Gay Rodeo Association (NMGRA) will be held in Albuquerque.
Maybe someone in the leadership of NMGRA could invite the governor to attend the rodeo so he could get a taste of gay life closer to his own experience, and begin to rehabilitate his campaign after a disheartening presentation on gay issues.
Growingly Desperate, Army Trying Anything to Nab Recruits
You know the Army is getting desperate for recruits when it starts overlooking drug use, criminal records, age, and obesity. But oh yeah, you still can’t tell anyone you’re gay.
Despite spending nearly $1 billion last year on recruiting bonuses and ads, Army leaders say an even bolder approach is needed to fill wartime ranks.
Under a new proposal, men and women who enlist could pick from a “buffet” of incentives, including up to $45,000 tax-free that they accrue during their career to help buy a home or build a business. Other options would include money for college and to pay off student loans.
This would come after the other recent enhancements to recruiting failed to get the numbers up, including:
- Increasing to $20,000 the bonus for troops who join by Sept. 30 and leave for boot camp within a month
- Raising the enlistment age to 42
- Allowing recruits to come in with non-offensive tattoos on their hands and neck
- Offering a $2,000 bonus to Army soldiers who refer a new recruit
- Enlisting recruits who don’t meet weight standards and must trim down their first year
- Advertising that targets potential recruits’ parents
- Increasing the number of recruits with general education diplomas (GEDs) rather than regular high school diplomas
- Creating a more pleasant boot camp environment
- Sending “gung-ho” soldiers fresh from boot camp or war zones back to their hometowns to visit old friends and schoolmates to promote the Army
- Increasing to more than 15 percent the number of Army and Army Reserve troops given waivers for medical and moral reasons or for positive drug and alcohol screen tests
The Army blames the dwindling numbers on several factors.
More high school graduates are going to college, and the economy is strong, providing lots of civilian jobs. At the same time, only three of 10 people between 17 and 24 fully meet the military’s standards.
Less obvious factors have also decreased the recruitment pool. They include higher obesity rates, more people diagnosed with mental health conditions such as attention-deficit disorder, more criminal citations due to the increase of the drinking age from 18 to 21.
Let’s see, did we miss anything? Nah, I guess that pretty well covers all the possible reasons people aren’t joining the Army.
Oh yeah, how about THE FRICKIN’ WAR? Maybe the idea of being cannon fodder in an endless and futile bad idea doesn’t appeal to a lot of people.
