Bush ‘stands behind Alphonso Jackson’

It’s been a few days since we learned that [tag]HUD[/tag] Secretary [tag]Alphonso Jackson[/tag] said publicly that it’s “logical” for the administration to deny federal contracts to those who don’t like the president. While several Dem lawmakers have called for Jackson’s [tag]resignation[/tag], and several legal experts have noted that Jackson’s comments were [tag]illegal[/tag] if accurate, the [tag]White House[/tag] hasn’t had much to say.

Today, however, new White House Press Secretary [tag]Tony Snow[/tag] addressed the issue.

QUESTION: Is he going to fire the HUD Secretary?

TONY SNOW: No. He stands behind Alphonso Jackson. Alphonso Jackson has admitted that what he said earlier was improper, that it was a mistake, and the President accepts that and still supports a man with whom he’s had a long and close relationship.

As it happens, perhaps the only person in America who was thrilled to see USA Today expose the secret administration program that collects records of our domestic phone calls was Alphonso Jackson. Interest in his story was building quite a bit, conservatives have been unwilling to defend Jackson, and his explanation for his remarks was completely incoherent. It could have become quite a headache for the administration — were it not for the fact that a secret NSA call database shifted the political world’s focus.

With this in mind, I’m glad a reporter asked Snow about it this morning. It would have been even better if Snow’s response were compelling.

Alphonso Jackson’s comments were more than “improper.” By his own admission, he broke the law by rescinding a government contract over an applicant’s political beliefs. Jackson later said he lied about the whole, detailed exchange, which means his public comments were merely a veiled threat to those who plan to apply for HUD contracts.

Perhaps, then, Mr. Jackson intended the story as a warning to business executives interested in HUD contracts not to criticize the president? The last time we checked, such veiled threats were also improper. Whatever his intention in telling the story — and whether the story is true or false — it appears to lead to only two possible conclusions: Either Mr. Jackson broke the law and then lied about it, or he lied that he had broken the law. Which of those actions makes him fit to be secretary of housing and urban development?

Jackson is currently under investigation from HUD’s inspector general, but [tag]Bush[/tag] has already made up his mind: Jackson is doing a heck of a job.

“Bush has already made up his mind: Jackson is doing a heck of a job.” – CB

Isn’t that pretty much the kiss of death?

Jackson should go, he told a room full of minority business men that they can’t ‘dislike’ Boy George II. It’s not wonder Boy George II doesn’t get why this is wrong, but the rest of us do.

  • Conclusion Three: He’s an incompetent moron who snagged a sweet appointment gig.

  • by “improper” snow obviously meant that he shouldn’t have opened up his big yap. the issue isn’t what he said; it’s what he DID.

  • “Brownie” was doing a heck of a job, until Kid George dropped back five yards and punted….

  • i read the rest of the gaggle, and i have to say that snow uses the same rhetorical trick over and over (one i’m familiar with because my father uses the same one): when asked about A, respond to related but different point B, especially if B is not in dispute. scotty did this too, usually by invoking 9/11, but not with nearly the rhetorical precision.

  • Alphonso Jackson’s comments were reprehensible. Somehow Americans need to keep the attention on this issue, however, given all of the other scandals of this administration its becoming a lot of work.

    In any case, include this episode in any accounting of showing the pattern of the Bush adminstration at work, its rare to catch them being so honest about how the administration really thinks.

  • Although Jackson appears to be a grade ‘A’ jackass, I tend to believe him when he says he made up his intial story.

    After all, wouldn’t the fellow who lost the contract in Jackson’s cautionary tale have stepped up by now & said “Yes, I do exist & yes, that really happened”? After all, the guy doesn’t like Bush right? Or, if this is Jackson’s SOP in awarding contracts, wouldn’t someone else would step out & say “yeah, the same thing happended to me”?

    I think this is a cautionary tale, however unsubtle, by Jackson – ‘get on board, or get left behind’.

  • Comments are closed.