Frist’s Flip Flop (redux)
(Note: This post comes on the heels of the original Frist’s Flip Flop. The original post was intended to be more along the lines of breaking news, however, now that the news has been nice and broken proper, I’ve had a little time to do some thinking on the subject.)
Since word began to leak out of Frist’s decision to turn around on the issue of embryonic stem cells research, political insiders have been all abuzz as to why. What in the world would convince the socially conservative surgeon turned Senate Majority Leader to turn his back on the political bread and butter that is Bush’s “culture of life?”
Admittedly, it’s an interesting question. Following the logic that the simplest answer is probably the right answer, one would have to assume that Dr. Frist’s change of heart is just that, a change of heart. In his words on the Senate floor, the GOP’s top senator had said this was a decision of “policy, not politics,” and several insiders close to Frist have confirmed that. The story that filters out to regular Joes and Janes like you and me is that Sen. Frist has spent a considerable amount of time going over the science and the ethical dilemmas to come up with this new position.
Of course, how often does one find simple answers in politics?
Before continuing on, let’s make some assumptions. If Frist’s change of heart was not solely based upon the merits of the issue at hand, then we can assume that the change of heart was intended to garner some sort of political gain. Considering that midterm elections are only about a year away, and the involved campaigns could start to warm up later this year, then we can assume that this is at least a possible motivator behind Frist’s decision. Also considering that the White House is up for grabs in 08, it is reasonable to assume that this might also play a part behind the turn around. Another important assumption to make is that since stem cell research is not as prominent among the mainstream, nor is it as divisive, it is probably one of the safest of the hot button issues for Frist to break rank upon. Or at least so we can assume.
With these assumptions we are not ready to answer, but instead only ask more questions.
Is this a political trick, or a political ploy of some sort?
If you’re not willing to accept the easy answer, than this question is probably one of the first to pop into mind. Interestingly enough, I can see this being a ploy very much along the same vein as President Bush’s gay marriage ban attempts. In short I call it legislation without the consequences. We already know, and Frist already knows, that Bush will veto his take on embryonic stem cell research. It’s a done deal, and curiously enough one of the few non question marks in this whole scenario. Already knowing you are going to fail grants one an interesting level freedom to do what you want.
Looking into President Bush’s attempt to constitutionally ban gay marriage, we can see some helpful parallels. First, anyone with half a head on their shoulders knows right now that a national ammendment as such would never get passed in this day and age. Forget about it. But Bush still tries anyway. Now whose vote does he lose on this? Social liberals, definitely, but he was going to lose them anyway. Log Cabin Republicans not endorsing him might have been a little shock, but not much of one. Homosexuals in general are probably out, but again, not a big surprise. But there is a lot to be gained. He gained every homophobe you can imagine, social conservatives, those who don’t hate gays but don’t feel that they should be married etc. Plus, if you listened to his stump speeches and such, he left just enough room for suburbia to feel okay about hating gays because he himself would say that he thinks gays are great American citizens, they just shouldn’t get married. In short, you may be alienating everyone on the hard left, but in return, you pick up lots of people on the right, and at least stay neutral with people in the center. At the same time, you get the added benefit of not having to face the music on your legislation.
With Frist, we can see a similar situation here. Knowing that Bush is going to veto the bill gives Frist the opportunity to back it without having to really face the music on having it pass into law. An interesting thing to look for is if the bill gets sent up to the oval office and if it gets vetoed, does Frist rally Republican support to overturn the veto? To go with this train of thought, my guess would definitely be no.
But how would this affect the 06 elections?
A big problem with the GOP is the Science and Education crowd. Without intentionally trying to start a “we’re smarter than you,” pissing match, I have to admit that social conservatism doesn’t really do well with the largely liberal American Acedamia. A Frist vote could lend the Republicans some legitimacy in this area.
And you have to remember, unlike abortion, many more people are for embryonic stem cell research. You will most likely lose every anti stem cell voter by moving pro choice, but you will not lose every anti abortion voter by going pro stem cell research.
So while Frist may not be on the ballot in ‘06, those who are on the ballet can get a little love from the science and research crowd based on his vote, particularly if you get Frist to campaign on your behalf.
To be honest, though, I’m not really feeling 06 as a prime mover behind Frist’s decision. No I think Dr. Frist is looking three years ahead and not just one, and that’s where things get real interesting.
First we have to ask; will voters go as socially conservative as they did on the last two presidential elections?
This has got to be one of the big questions facing all republican hopefuls right about now. Coming off of two terms of a socially conservative president, you have to ask yourself if it’ll work for three times in a row. My thoughts are that the greater American voting bloc will shift a little towards the center this upcoming time.
I say this for lots of reasons. First, I need to dispell the thoughts that we can do a radical social shift to the left in this upcoming presidential election. It’s just not going to work, and the reason why is because W just isn’t polling that bad. Okay the working theory is this, in determining shifts in votes based on social orientation, you should be able to gage it based on national content, or discontent regarding the current president. This is a combination of how many people don’t like the president, and how much they don’t like him (in order of importance).
Considering that Bush flits at about the half-way mark and a little below, means that the national consensus isn’t displeased enough with his style of social conservatism to move to hardcore social liberalism, but it is promising for someone trying to move in a little closer to center.
To go along with this, is another theory I have regarding the hardcore religious right voters, and their influence. I think it is reasonable to assume that the dyed in the wool radical rightwing voters make up a relatively small voting bloc. I’m not talking about christians, I’m talking about the fundies. Not just evangelicals, but severely politically active Evangelicals. That’s maybe a point or two on the polls. But their sphere of influence is maleable based upon the political activity that affects and has the attention of those demographic groups adjacent to this small yet potent bloc. In otherwords, if there is a political void of issues for someone that is, say, middle class suburban christian, but not evangelical or politically active, then that person is susceptible to an evangelical person’s influence.
As an illustration, here are two small examples:
Example A; Rob lives in suburbia, takes his family to church maybe once every month or two. He has a good job, and no real worries. With his situation as it is, if a religious political activist makes Rob a target, employing religious motivation and justifications for voting for a particular candidate, then it is likely that Rob will vote that way.
Example B; Same Rob, but now let’s say, his job is in jeopardy, or maybe he’s got a kid that just got diagnosed with a serious disease. Rob is going to be less inclined to allow someone else to set the agenda for him.
Of course it goes a lot more complex than this. There is a definite onus upon opponent candidates to take the Christianity out of debate, or to change the context, but by now you should get the idea, right? The short of it is that the religious right is a small bloc in and of themselves, but weild a large level of inluence that can be overcome.
So why now? Why this issue?
Again, lots of reasons. Maybe Frist forsees a shift to the center, and with presidential aspirations, is seeking to try and move that direction without completely alienating his social conservative voters. Or chew on this.
Frist, despite being a big name on the hill, and the Senate Majority Leader, is in the mainstream a relative no name. He’s not the rockstar that John McCain and Hillary Clinton seem to be (by this I’m referring solely to name recognition). This is one of those times where you have to think not like a political wonk. You say Bill Frist to a political nut, and you got no problems, you say Bill Frist to the non politicos, and you will probably get a blank stare.
So it’s possible that he may be trying to start making a name for himself partly by breaking rank on a somewhat high profile story. At the very least, it’s not unreasonable to assume that Frist is trying to make a name for himself that is SEPERATE from that of President Bush, perhaps in an attempt to avoid being called a presidential lap dog. And remember, if there was an issue to go astray of Bush on, this one would be it.
The most interesting question to me, though, has little to do with Frist’s own ambitions. While it may sound familiar, the question in mind instead looks not just at Leader Frist, but instead at the Republican party as a whole. Could this be indicative of a party wide split from Bush style conservatism? Something I pondered a while ago was that with the weakening of the democrat party, would the vacuum of relative power be significant to propogate the cracks within the Republican Party?
An interesting factor in all of this is the Niger Affair. One of Karl Rove’s bigger internal success was the successful bid to politic off of Christian Morality, and American Pride in the Military, but as his own actions are brought to question in a growing national forum, is it possible that this could taint the entire neoconservative movement?
Anythings possible. Only time will tell. (You can add your cheesy cliche here)
(Note: credit also to Goose3five who helped give legs to not a few of the ideas here and helped make them walk)
Proof that I am a Capitalist
I know many of you may think that I am some sort of crazy pinko commie lefty but reality is I am as much of a Capitalist as the next guy. Every once and a while I will use this space to pimp my stuff and today is no exception. Today I am rolling out a few new items in the Comments Store with more to come shortly.
Both of these items use a beautiful photograph I took of the night time downtown Pittsburgh skyline from the West End Bridge last Friday night called “Pittsburgh Lights.” You may not be able to see it from this small version but this image contains a small lightening storm above the city. Click the images below to head into the store.
Frist’s Flip Flop
(note: It’s a Mr. M 2 for 1 day. I guess it’d been a little better had I done this yesterday when Goose actually needed the extra postings, but then, I dissappoint, nothin’ my parents haven’t raised me on already. Both posts can also be viewed at the UPC)
Maybe it’s the idea that 2008 isn’t as far off as one may think.
Maybe it’s the fact that two thirds of Americans think that Stem Cell research maybe isn’t that bad of an idea.
Maybe Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist has finally started to see a little reason. Whatever the case, it seems that the Good Doctor has changed his mind from stand last month on embryonic stem cell research.
President Bush is expected to veto the bill if it makes it to his desk, but with Frist’s support, there is a much better shot than before that congress can garner the support necessary to override the veto.
In another interesting, and seemingly unconnected story, it’s looking very much like Bush will recess appoint John Bolton as the UN Ambassador.
Despite ABC’s Note fawning all over Bush & Co’s seeming victories on the hill as of late, you put these two stories together, and what you have is the portrait of a president that is losing even more control over a GOP controlled congress. While the Bolton nomination is not big news, and is easily blamed on the Democrats by GOP flagbearers, what about Frist’s Flip Flop?
Could this be a first sign of Republicans ditching the GeeDub standard as their own careers come closer and closer into question (by which I mean of course election, and nothing more)? Or maybe it’s just Frist trying to dive towards the center before the rest of the non politically addicted America starts paying attention.
We’ll see.
Unamerican
For my conservative friends who don’t believe in the “Vast Right Wing Noise Machine,” allow me to provide you with perhaps an example.
A little background: almost no one heard of USA Next until earlier this year. Just as President Bush began ramping up his bid to privatize Social Security, so too did AARP activate in an attempt prevent said bid. Then, from the dark, dank pits of the neoconservative politico-alchemic laboratories popped out USA Next.
On the surface, USA Next tries to portray itself as an alternative to the AARP. Just a little friendly competition in the business of post career lifestyle assistance. But the excessively transparent charade falls away to reveal USA Next as another cog in the “Vast Right Wing Noise Machine,” that pushes a hard core conservative agenda, along with its useful senior citizen discount coupon books.
Naturally, I signed up for the news letter.
Since then, it’s been an interesting spell from my friends at USA Next. For instance, did you that NONE of our founding fathers owned slaves? And that any historical texts are part of a “Vast Left Wing Conspiracy,” to obliterate the image of our founding fathers as part of a secret plot to destroy America. (Really, one might think that if we liberals hated America so much, you’d think we would just move, yeah)
As it turns out, it seems their periodic newsletter is just a conservative book of the month club. The most recent installation, because conservative books are so important to retired persons, directed my attention to this little gem:
The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam(and the Crusades) by Robert Spencer
The vicious teachings of Islam…PLUS: Why the Crusades were justified wars of Christian self-defense against centuries of Muslim aggressionWhen PC propagandists assure us that jihadist terror doesn’t reflect “true,” “peaceful” Islam, they’re not only wrong, they’re dangerous - because they lull America and the West into letting their guard down against their mortal enemy. And not only do self-appointed “experts” lie elaborately and persistently about Islam - they have also replaced the truth about Christian Europe and the Crusades with an all-pervasive historical fantasy that is designed to make you ashamed of your own culture and heritage - and thus less determined to defend it. But now there’s a remedy: in The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades), Robert Spencer reveals all the disturbing facts about Islam and its murderous hostility to the West that other books ignore, soft-pedal - or simply lie about.
This book is a unique guide to the bloody teachings and history of Islam, and to the Crusades that still stand today as the Western world’s most sustained and successful defense against the warrior hordes who were inspired by those teachings. Exposing myth after myth of the “Islam means peace” establishment, Spencer (director of JihadWatch.com and the bestselling author of Islam Unveiled and Onward Muslim Soldiers) here tackles all the hot-button issues regarding Islam and the Crusades.
Holy Shit I must get this book! If for no other reason than I expect it to be a theory to practice excercise in strawman arguments, and misrepresentation. Unfortunately, it is stupid crap like this that undermines the hopes and works of true Americans… even some of the more reasonable conservatives (not that I think Harky is reasonable, never that.) (That was a bit of cheek. In reality, I was pointing out that I understand that not all conservatives think that Islam is an inherently evil religion incapable of doing good).
But stupid is such a harsh word, so let me qualify it.
-Whether you like it or not, Islam IS A PART OF American culture. This is not an “us vs. them” situation. If we should ever decide to have a War on Islam, it would be an “us vs. us.” situation.
-Note, this cheery bit of propaganda is attacking the religion. While many people are careful to differentiate between peaceful muslims, and the non peaceful muslims (you can tell the difference because the latter demographic typically wants to blow lots of people up), this little screed not only abandons that differentiation, but revels in the abandonment. This is dangerous. This is dangerous because there are MILLIONS of muslims that just happen to be decent American citizens. And in championing immature crap like this, you are attempting to create an atmosphere for subjugation. In case you are keeping score, subjugation is bad, and can be seen in many different instances throughout world historyfrom the holocaust, to slavery, to lynchings, to Japanese in concentration camps, to… you get the idea.
-This book cherry picks by examining the text, and not examining all of the people who practice it. This is a two for oner. First off, give me a bible (and I actually have two) and by quoting the right passages, I can prove Christianity is anything I want it to be. We’ve had this argument here once at the UPC, so I’m going to stifle all forays back into said argument by going into the other half of my point. What the book says is unimportant. It’s what people do with that book that makes the difference.
Despite rampant murder, incest, debauchery, and all kinds of other evil stuff printed in the bible, millions of people worldwide somehow manage to practice Christianity in a peaceful manner. You’ve got to be kidding me.
Or…
Maybe it’s just possible that people can take the good from a book, teach that, and then discount the obviously bad stuff. It’s called discretion, and people practice it every single day. But this isn’t what USA Next wants its secior citizens (and their family’s) to believe.
Instead, they attack a religion in an attempt to rally support under the flag and the cross. You make an us vs. them situation, then you define us as being ultimately good, and then you involve a majority in the us category, and what you get is a bunch of emotionally charged voters ready to go to the voting booth in order to make the bad men stop. It’s an ingenious political tool, and is unfortunately one of the few things that will actually get me to call something Unamerican. Call me silly, but attempting to subjugate a group of American citizens is thoroughly Unamerican.
On their own petard…
How’s about we take out the Democratic stuff in that last post and tweak it a bit for the GOP…
The Republican party is a party in decline. Truth-fearing Americans know that the Republicans are the party of the war-mongers, the hate-mongers, and various other forms of immoral social behavior. Economic Republicans stand for nothing but themselves; Evangelical Republicans stand for no one but those who believe just like they do. Both would fight at the drop of a hat. Instead of making peace in the world, they would rather just fight. They lack the moral strength to look evil in the mirror, call it for what it is — hypocrisy — and defeat it. America has empowered the patriots of any political party or philosophy by giving them a vote, a free press, and freedom of speech, so that the executive branch and both houses of Congress and the courts shall be answerable to the people. TRUTH, JUSTICE, AND THE AMERICAN WAY DEMAND THAT WE HAVE FREEDOM OF CHOICE! (Remember the story of Adam and Eve? Jesus is the way, the truth and the light for those of us who believe; if you believe otherwise, then you came to the right country — it’s called America. You cannot find your path to Jesus, Yahweh, Allah, Nirvana, Tao, Shinto, or just truth and love by sponsoring a party with hands stained with the blood of tens of thousands of our troops and Iraqis or any other innocent people — not fetuses, but thinking, feeling, conscious people, who have a right and a duty to not let theocrats and powerful greedy people bully them or anybody else)
Amen.
Hilarious
I must be maturing as a blogger because comments like this from Republicanas Maximus used to set me off…
The Democratic party is party in decline. God fearing Americans know that the Democrats are the party of the abortionist, the homosexual, and various other forms of immoral social behavior. Democrats stand for nothing. They would fight for nothing. Rather, they turn and run from a just fight. They lack the moral strength to look evil in the eye, call for what it is, and defeat it. America has empowered the Republican patriots by giving them control of the executive branch and both houses of Congress. The courts shall be next. GOD WILLS IT! (Jesus is the way, the truth and the light. You cannot find your path to Jesus by sponsoring a party with the the blood stained hands of millions of babies)
…now I just find them hilarious. Was it a full moon last night or something?
Democratic Crisis in Pennsylvania
There is a ongoing crisis in the state of Pennsylvania that has received little to no attention to date. It is one that effects all Pennsylvanians and if it is not addressed we will likely feel the repercussions for years to come. The crisis I am talking about is the systematic and deliberate denial of the democratic process in this state by the state and national Democratic party. I know this will not go over well with my colleagues in the Democratic party establishment but it must be said none the less.
In 2006 Pennsylvanians will participate in one of the highest profile races in the nation for the seat of junior Senator from PA currently held by Rick Santorum. In an effort to save money, the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee along with Governor Ed Rendell and the PA Democratic party immediately came out and endorsed Pennsylvania Treasurer Bob Casey Jr. as the man to run against Santorum. This would be fine except for the fact that he is not the only Democrat vying for that position not to mention the fact that the primary is still over a year away.
Now I am not here to bash Bob Casey, I am sure he is a great guy and a viable candidate, my problem is that it should be up to the people of Pennsylvania to make that decision, not the DLCC or the Governor. Personally, I have met and spoken at length with the leading challenger in this race, Chuck Pennacchio, and I can tell you all that this man is THE Progressive choice.
Until now I have hesitated throwing my support in for any candidate but the stakes are simply too high for me to remain on the sidelines. Therefore I am asking all of you to please take a look at Chuck Pennacchio, his website is a good start as it does a great job of laying out his positions. Chuck has committed to spending a significant amount of time in Western PA - he was here this weekend as a matter of fact - and I will make sure to alert you all to any future visits so that you can come out and decide for yourselves. If you value the democratic process and feel that the people should decide who represents them then it is up to you to make Pennacchio’s candidacy viable.
Robert Novak
Follow-Up to Judge John Roberts: A Sugar-Coated Poison Pill
My previous post got some notice and caused a lot of controversy, even among fellow Democrats, with whom I’ve conferred. Although the following won’t appease everyone (which has never been my goal, of course), it does address some serious issues and make some important points, for us and our country…
In the confirmation hearings, I adamantly believe the Democratic senators should ask Roberts point-blank whether he as a person or as a judge agrees or disagrees with each of the controversial positions that his supporters claim he was just supporting as an “advocate” for someone else — parties such as the Reagan and first Bush administrations or large corporate clients that I’m sure he did everything in his power to represent and he lists prominently on his resume.
And by the way, as a fellow liberal pointed out, since when did a THIN resume — lack of experience on the bench, in Roberts’ case — become a positive recommendation for getting a job?!
When faced with such pointed questions, either Roberts clams up — citing the oft-cited Ruth Bader Ginsburg precedent (although contrary to what Karl Rove would lead us to believe, she did indeed answer pointed questions on such subjects as abortion and had eleven more years of decisions on the DC appellate court to review for bias etc.) — or Roberts publicly disavows those positions outlined in that piece I cited – in which case he’ll be branded a hypocrite by most people and he’ll also be disowned by the Right, many of whom are already suspicious of him — or he owns up to them — in which case we Democrats might lose this confirmation battle (barring some new revelation, he’s gonna get confirmed) but we will win the public relations war, and rightly so: We support the much more popular stands on environmental protections, worker protections, minorities’ rights, and women’s rights (some 70% of the public does NOT want Roe overturned, for example).
This nomination was indeed a “cagey” selection — with, thus, Karl Rove’s fingerprints all over it (I wonder if he’ll be able to run Geo.’s White House as well from the slammer) — but if we Democrats “focus like a laser beam” (to quote the most successful Democrat of recent times) on the ISSUES more than on the individual — after all, this is bigger than any one person — then we will make the most of a Golden Opportunity to stand up for what we believe in and make political hay in the process.
Now, I’m just an outspoken blogger, not a lawyer or senator, skilled in the nuances of these things. But watch for what Senator Joe Biden does or doesn’t say or do: He’ll be prominently featured in the judiciary committee hearings; and as a declared candidate for President (praised on the air by my friend Barry Gordon, by the way), you can be sure he’ll make the most of this well-publicized forum.
Intelligence Officers Rip Bush Over The Niger Affair
The heat is on…
President Bush is jeopardizing national security by not disciplining Karl Rove for his role in leaking the name of a CIA officer, and has hampered efforts to recruit informants in the war on terror, former U.S. intelligence officers say.
How ironic that the man who crafted Dubbya’s tough on terror image is being hammered for making us weak.
Little Victories
For the most part the city of Pittsburgh has left behind its historical reputation as a dirty, polluted, industrial city. As a matter of fact, if you have lived here most of your life you are likely overjoyed with the current state of Pittsburgh’s industrial footprint. Unfortunately there are still some hold outs from the bad ole days that are helping to keep our air quality in the top 10 worst in the nation. Unfortunately a good chunk of those old school hold-outs are located very near me on Neville Island.
A day does not go by where I do not see or smell Pittsburgh’s industrial past. As a result, for the past several years I have been active with a local citizens group called the Neville Island Good Neighbor Committee, most recently as part of a video monitoring project keeping tabs on one of the most visible throwbacks, Shenango Coke Works.
Well I am happy to report that the hard work of the citizens of the North Boroughs has finally begun to pay off. Yesterday the Allegheney County Health Department fined Shenango $252,000 for violations over the past quarter and, even more significantly, forced them to slow down their cooking times from 18 to 24 hour cycles. Hopefully this fine and the subsequent action will help to bring Shenango into compliance, something they have not been able to do for some time now.
According to the Health Department records, Shenango was able to comply with combustion stack emission limits just 40 percent of the time in April and its coke ovens were in compliance 13 percent of the time.
If you take anything away from this story it should be the realization that individuals can and do have an impact on their communities. This action was brought about by the work of a half a dozen or so dedicated citizens with little money but a ton of heart. Everyone in the North Boroughs owes the Neville Island Good Neighbor Committee their thanks for doing their part in creating a safe, clean environment for their families.
UPDATE: The Pittburgh Tribune-Review has a story on the Shenango action today (Sunday July 24, 2005).
Help Support the Pennsylvania Young Democrats
510 North Third Street
Harrisburg, PA 17101
We Need YOUR HELP To Represent Pennsylvania!
will convene in San Francisco for the Young Democrats of America 2005
National Convention. This convention provides an incredible
opportunity for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. At the convention,
young activists will participate in campaign trainings and network
with Young Democrats from across the country. While several
Pennsylvania Young Democrats can afford to pay their own way to San
Francisco, some of Pennsylvania’s most politically engaged and
energetic young people need your help to attend.
targeted by the Young Democrats of America. This status brought
hundreds of volunteers and tens of thousands of dollars into the
Kerry-Edwards campaign in Pennsylvania through campaign invasions and
the Young Voter Alliance. On election night, the impact was clear.
While other age groups split between Bush and Kerry, young democrats
carried the state for John Kerry by a whopping 32-percent margin!
national convention is an important step in mustering even greater
resources for Pennsylvania in 2006. We must send a diverse delegation
to the National Convention to help shape the 2006 agenda and ensure
that Pennsylvania is again a target for campaign invasions and
national contributions. The Convention is also a week-long opportunity
to meet and learn from some of the top political organizers in the
country. This training of our dedicated young Democratic leaders will
also pay dividends in Pennsylvania for years to come.
officials, county Democratic committees and private citizens have
pledged their support. We hope that you will join them. The
Pennsylvania Young Democrats are the Party’s foot soldiers, its
up-and-coming leaders and its future. Please make an investment in the
Democratic Party in Pennsylvania by making a check payable to:
Thank you in advance for your support.
Very truly yours,
The Pennsylvania Young Democrats Executive Committee
Not authorized by any candidate or their committee.
Thanks to Andrew for bringing this to my attention.
Note that you can also donate online with a credit card or PayPal via this link.
Or become a sustaining supporter via this link.
Karl Rove and The Free Press
True Blue Liberal on WHIGgate
Light Up The Darkness on House and Senate Democrats investigating the outing of a CIA agent by White House Staff.
Under Cover of SCOTUS Appointment, Niger Affair Continues
With all the buzz surrounding President Bush’s appointment of John Roberts to the Supreme Court some may have forgotten about the ongoing investigation into who in the White House leaked the undercover CIA identity of Valerie Plame (Wilson). Don’t get me wrong, I do not dispute the fact that a Supreme Court nomination has a tremendous impact on the public. Considering that Roberts is only 50 years old, if approved it is likely that he will serve through roughly 10 Presidential terms. That being said, I am sure that both camps will grace us with a confirmation circus fit for Vegas so in the mean time I would like to redirect some attention to the scandal at hand.
Over these past two days a couple of earth shattering revelations in The Niger Affair have passed nearly unnoticed. First, an American Prospect article revealed that during his initial interview with the FBI, Karl Rove misled investigators into believing that he had not discussed Plame’s identity until after the article by Robert Novak appeared.
Rove insisted, he had only circulated information about Plame after it had appeared in Novak’s column. He also told the FBI, the same sources said, that circulating the information was a legitimate means to counter what he claimed was politically motivated criticism of the Bush administration by Plame’s husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson.
If this is true, we have a full blown perjurer on our hands and we all know that perjury is the worst crime a public official can commit - we need only look to Bill Clinton as proof. I can not think of any reason why Rove would have ommitted from the interview his conversation with Cooper other than to mislead the investigators. Keep your eyes on this story.
The second big revelation came yesterday in the Wall Street Journal and has been followed up on by the Washington Post today. Apparently a classified State Department memo was circulated among Administration officials on July 10, 2003 that clearly identified the identity of Valerie Plame as secret.
A classified State Department memorandum central to a federal leak investigation contained information about CIA officer Valerie Plame in a paragraph marked “(S)” for secret, a clear indication that any Bush administration official who read it should have been aware the information was classified, according to current and former government officials.The paragraph identifying her as the wife of former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV was clearly marked to show that it contained classified material at the “secret” level, two sources said. The CIA classifies as “secret” the names of officers whose identities are covert, according to former senior agency officials.
So now we have proof that her identity was no secret to the administration contrary to claims by Rove. Very interesting. At this point I have a question, does anyone reading this believe that it was not the intention of this administration to leak Plame’s identity in order to discredit the work Joe Wilson did in disproving the Niger yellow-cake claims by Dubbya? Seriously. If you agree that this is the case then you must take it one step further and ask, why were they so intent on discrediting this man? The answer as I stated on Monday is clear, they were hell-bent on propping up the WMD lie as a reason to invade Iraq.
Judge John G. Roberts: A Sugar-Coated Poison Pill
There’s no denying it: John G. Roberts is no Robert Bork. Bork was too bitter a pill for the Senate to swallow; Roberts is much sweeter. But no amount of sugar coating can make the policies he has promoted any less poisonous to the body politic.
Although the “conventional wisdom” is that he’s a “conservative, not an ideologue” — with a big intellect and a short paper trail (of opinions as an appeals court judge, for just a couple years, by which we might intelligently judge the judge) — just consider his record in the Reagan and first Bush administrations. Although he was confirmed unanimously, by consent, for the appeals court (a different job, not as profoundly affecting the rest of the country as the position to which the second Bush has now nominated him), even then Roberts was opposed by the Alliance for Justice, Americans for Democratic Action, Feminist Majority, Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, NARAL Pro-Choice America, National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, National Council of Jewish Women, National Organization for Women, and the NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund.
And what piqued the opposition of these leading progressive groups? Well, according to the well-documented (and oft-cited) report by the Alliance for Justice, released in opposition to his elevation to the appeals court (where he could do less damage than from the Supreme Court bench…for perhaps the next 40 years):
“John G. Roberts…has a record of hostility to the rights of women and minorities. He has also taken controversial positions in favor of weakening the separation of church and state and limiting the role of federal courts in protecting the environment…
“While working under Presidents Reagan and Bush, Mr. Roberts supported a hard-line, anti-civil rights policy that opposed affirmative action, would have made it nearly impossible for minorities to prove a violation of the Voting Rights Act and would have ‘resegregated’ America’s public schools. He also took strongly anti-choice positions in two Supreme Court cases, one that severely restricted the ability of poor women to gain information about abortion services, and another that took away a key means for women and clinics to combat anti-abortion zealots…
“He is a member of both the Republican National Lawyers’ Association and the National Legal Center For The Public Interest. He serves on the Legal Advisory Council of the latter group, which states as its mission the promotion of ‘free enterprise, private ownership of property, balanced use of private and public resources, limited government, and a fair and efficient judiciary,’ euphemisms for hostility toward environmental and worker protections and a commitment to an ultra-conservative, anti-government legal agenda, including the confirmation of President Bush’s pro-corporate judges. In addition, Mr. Roberts states in his Senate Judiciary Committee questionnaire that he ‘regularly participate[s] in press briefings sponsored by the … Washington Legal Foundation,’ a rigidly right-wing legal organization that litigates on behalf of corporate interests and wealthy property owners challenging environmental and other regulations.”
To be more specific, as cited in the website of the National Organization for Women:
“As Deputy Solicitor General, Roberts argued in a brief before the Supreme Court that ‘we continue to believe that Roe was wrongly decided and should be overruled. The Court’s conclusion in Roe that there is a fundamental right to an abortion…finds no support in the text, structure, or history of the Constitution.’
“As Deputy Solicitor General, Roberts filed an amicus curiae brief in NOW’s case against Operation Rescue — in support of Operation Rescue, of course and in support of named individuals who routinely blocked access to clinics…The brief argued that the protestors’ behavior did not discriminate against women and that blockades and clinic protests were protected speech under the First Amendment. The case helped us push congressional passage of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act.
“[Roberts was] Lead counsel for Toyota Motor Manufacturing, KY, Inc. v. Williams. The case involved a woman who was fired after asking Toyota for accommodations to do her job after being diagnosed with carpal tunnel syndrome. The court ruled that while this condition impaired her ability to work, it did not impair her ability to perform major life activities. Disability rights groups fear that this decision may erode the Americans with Disabilities Act.
“Filed an amicus brief…supporting a challenge to federal affirmative action programs. He also argued against Title IX as applied to the NCAA…”
For more up-to-date information on Judge Roberts, you might want to read this profile in Slate.
And of course, all of us await the Senate hearings, to get a better sense of the person behind all these opinions.
Bush chose well by choosing a nominee as affable and intellectual as John G. Roberts.
But no matter how well-packaged, these are the positions he has uph