Monday’s Mini-Report

August 13, 2007

Today’s edition of quick hits.

* Most of the Democratic presidential campaigns issued statements noting Karl Rove’s resignation from the White House, but John Edwards’ campaign had the shortest, most direct response: “Goodbye, good riddance.” That was literally the entire statement. Nicely played.

* PoliticsTV put together a video montage of Rove’s “greatest hits.” It’s definitely worth watching.

* Right-wing uber-lobbyist Grover Norquist argues in the Financial Times that “the next big thing in US politics is transparency: making state budgets, contracts and individual expenditures available to the public on the internet.” (If you’re thinking there’s a disconnect between Norquist and transparency, we’re on the same page.) Right now, FT is accepting submissions from readers for Norquist will respond to. (thanks to Basilisc for the heads-up)

* I suspect he was trying to be funny, but this 2000 clip of Giuliani comparing zoo animals to welfare recipients is … well, let’s just say it’s not particularly “presidential.”

* House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.) is, not surprisingly, still interested in getting information from Rove: “The need for Karl Rove to explain his role in the firing of the U.S. Attorneys does not diminish when he leaves the White House…. We will continue to seek answers to these questions and expect full cooperation from Mr. Rove and other officials regardless of whether they are employed by the White House.”

* ACLU officials met with Justice Department officials today to learn more about the administration’s surveillance efforts under FISA. Wouldn’t you know it, the DoJ was less than forthcoming. Who could have guessed?

* Last week, Bill Richardson inadvertently told Melissa Etheridge, during a presidential forum on gay issues, that he thinks homosexuality is a “choice.” Today, explaining his mistake, Richardson said, “I always love the word ‘choice.’ I’m for freedom of choice, I have in my health care plan a choice where everybody can keep their health care plan. And so I always kind of feel it’s a golden word, and I didn’t think through what Melissa was asking me.” Um, okay….

* Bill O’Reilly is mystified as to why John Edwards would avoid Fox News, after the former senator received what O’Reilly called “fair” treatment in the past. TPM Media offers O’Reilly a video montage that should offer a few clues as to why Edwards knows better.

* How did federal officials bring down disgraced former Rep. Bob Ney’s (R-Ohio)? Having his chief of staff wear a wire seemed to help.

* Hillary Clinton wrote to the administration today, asking for clarification on the White House’s draft policy, following Gen. Lute’s comments on Friday. “Since raising the prospect of a draft contradicts the previously stated policy of your Administration, I ask that you clarify your current policy regarding the possibility of re-instituting a military draft,” Clinton writes in the letter, which was sent directly to Bush. Will the senator receive a response from Edelman questioning her patriotism? Time will tell.

* Spencer Ackerman reports on a fascinating AP story from the weekend out of Italy: “There’s a ton that isn’t clear about this story. But the simplest explanation is that the Interior Ministry needed to hide weapons purchases from the U.S. in order to funnel guns to Shiite death squads and militiamen. As the U.S. has recently been supplying Sunni ex-insurgents in Anbar, perhaps the Shiite-dominated ministry felt compelled to balance the scales.”

* I guess China is taking lead-tainted toys seriously: “The head of a Chinese manufacturing company accused of shipping hundreds of thousands of lead-tainted toys later recalled in the United States has committed suicide, a state-run newspaper said Monday.”

* French President Nicolas Sarkozy attended a family picnic at the Bush retreat in Maine over the weekend, but said his wife couldn’t attend due to a severe throat ailment. Later that day, Mrs. Sarkozy was seen shopping, which apparently has caused a minor diplomatic stir.

* And on a related note, reporters asked Bush, upon Sarkozy’s arrival, whether he might speak a few words of French, as a gesture of goodwill. “‘No, I can’t,’ Bush said. ‘I can barely speak English.'”

Anything to add? Consider this an end-of-the-day open thread.

Not a big deal, but Conyers is a Democrat. I’m proud to claim his as both a liberal and a Michigander. Too bad he’s not running for pres . . .

  • Severe throat ailment= I will throw up if I have to be around that man and his fucking family too.

  • Wonder if anyone will ask Grover if his “drowning” government plan prevents maintenance on bridges?

  • “‘No, I can’t,’ Bush said. ‘I can barely speak English.’”

    W says something truthful! I guess my heart attack at reading the above doesn’t matter since hell clearly just froze over!

  • When I read what Richardson’s answer was to the question of whether being gay was a matter of biology or choice, I wish Etheridge had come back to him with, “So, tell us about how and when you chose to be heterosexual?” I can’t even imagine how he could have responded to that without making a mockery of his original answer.

    Re: the Sarkozy snub – the funniest thing I heard was from a friend of mine, whose reaction was, “she probably had a frog in her throat.”

  • Last week, Bill Richardson inadvertently told Melissa Etheridge, during a presidential forum on gay issues, that he thinks homosexuality is a “choice.”

    Hey, CB, since when do we have to treat everything that could clearly be a slip of the tongue as if it’s not a slip of the tongue? It’s entirely plausible that Richardson could not be versed in the choice-v.-trait debate about homosexuality. It’s really unfair to the guy to talk about him as if this could not be the case. This guy is not Joe Lie.

    And on a related note, reporters asked Bush, upon Sarkozy’s arrival, whether he might speak a few words of French, as a gesture of goodwill. “‘No, I can’t,’ Bush said. ‘I can barely speak English.’”

    CB, didn’t Bush use this line once before fairly recently? Point being his people might have wanted to walk it out again…

  • Interesting choice of the “African Safari” theme for Guiliani’s little joke don’t you think?

  • While the Bush line was funny, I believe he used to speak Spanish on the campaign trail when he ran for governor and probably did in his presidential run. I doubt he was ever fluent in it, but he did at least try. But perhaps he had that part of his brain removed after 9/11. After all, there’s really only so much he has to spare.

  • * I guess China is taking lead-tainted toys seriously: “The head of a Chinese manufacturing company accused of shipping hundreds of thousands of lead-tainted toys later recalled in the United States has committed suicide, a state-run newspaper said Monday.”

    Well, suicide is probably preferable to going through the Chinese system and being executed at the end. They did execute one of those guys about a month or so ago. Can’t remember whether he was the manager of the factory which put antifreeze in cough syrup and toothpaste or the manager of the factory which added whatever it was to pet (and not only) food.

    * French President Nicolas Sarkozy attended a family picnic at the Bush retreat in Maine over the weekend, but said his wife couldn’t attend due to a severe throat ailment.

    Not sure whether she was avoiding the bushes or Sarkozy himself. She was not particularly visible at his side during his presidential campaign or even during the post-election celebrations. I bet she was not a happy camper when he won; if he’d lost, she could have left him (the way Holland left Royal) but now she’s stuck, for propriety’s sake.

  • Regarding the Richardson faux pas, I also felt that he might have gotten hung up on the word “choice” and was simply ignorant of GLB politics and the unusually negative connotation of the word in that environment.

    Having said that, his not understanding the implications of the word hardly affirms him as a champion of progressive causes.

  • * And on a related note, reporters asked Bush, upon Sarkozy’s arrival, whether he might speak a few words of French, as a gesture of goodwill. “‘No, I can’t,’ Bush said. ‘I can barely speak English.’”

    Last time this subject came up, he spoke Spanish, and was a real jerk about it.

    While the Bush line was funny, I believe he used to speak Spanish on the campaign trail when he ran for governor and probably did in his presidential run. I doubt he was ever fluent in it, but he did at least try.

    From that link: “He doesn’t try very hard to get the pronunciation the way native speakers speak.” and
    `As the Spanish wire service Agencia EFE has noted, Mr. Bush speaks the language poorly “but with great confidence.” ‘ Much like being president.

  • I dunno JTK, as long as he gets to the right policy result, how is he less progressive? (There is an argument that he is actually more liberal if he believes it is a choice but supports gay rights anyway).

    On the other hand, his explanation is awful. He may as well just say “well, you know I’m not real formal about things and I like to shoot the breeze and every so often my mouth just runs whether I’ve been listening or thinking about what to say or not and who knows what the hell comes out?”

    I like many things about Richardson, but this is not the first (or second or third) time in this campaign he has said something odd, gotten challenged, and made up an excuse that was worse than the initial gaffe. Not sure that is a trait I want in my candidate or my President.

  • Zeitgeist said:

    On the other hand, his explanation is awful

    Give me a break. He was trying to say that it should be people’s own business / up to them and no one else what their sexual preference is, and you call that an awful explanation because he used the word ‘choice’? Until someone explains to me exactly why Richardson’s remark can’t be explained by this and my comment # 7 (highly doubtful), he doesn’t lose a drop of respect from me over this statement, not a drop.

  • Just a quick note to let people know what our least favorite senator from Connecticut is up to lately to create more turmoil with the help of a nation that has not signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Thanks again Connecticut, for nothing. I’m sure Musharaff and Pakistan won’t notice. US senator to push Congress for Indian nuke deal.

  • If Richardson had a chance in hell of winning the nomination then his gaffe would be important. As it is, the only question is how long until the Democrats seize defeat from the jaws of victory by nominating Hillary Clinton.

  • I actually wouldn’t be surprised if Richardson’s explanation for his blunder is accurate…in that he really didn’t understand the question, and approaches political terrain from the simplistic presumption that “choice = good”, and as such, kinda stuttered out “I…think its a choice, its a choice”

    What does it say about the candidate that he wasn’t versed in that question before he went out in that debate? I mean, seriously now. That’s like going before the NRA and not knowing the content of the 2nd amendment. Its basic.

    This isn’t the first time Richardson has looked incredibly unprepared. Indeed, every time I’ve seen him speak publicly, he’s been atrocious. By all accounts, he’s a wonderful statesman because he’s charming and good at shooting the bull, but that hasn’t translated at all to these forums. He just looks totally unprepared.

  • Lotus, maybe you need to watch the video? When he talked to Carlson, he very clearly said “I don’t think it’s a matter of preferences.” And then the person who uploaded the video to YouTube apparently edited out the rest of his sentece. So that makes him sound like he picked up on homosexuals not wanting people to call it a choice, and clearly was not flubbing in front of Carlson, like you strangely claimed.

    As far as Etheridge- hey, I can understand that it’s rhetorically more powerful for gay people if homosexuality is proven to be an unchangeable trait one’s born with. But can’t he support gay rights even if he doesn’t think that, and doesn’t that make him and even more potent supporter of gay rights if his position is, “And you know what, even if it is a choice, I support gay rights anyway”? Furthermore, when Etheridge responded to him, he didn’t say anything along the lines of, “Look, I want to make this clear, I don’t think gays are born with this, but… ” If anything, it seemed most likely that Richardson had just never thought about the question before and didn’t understand its signifigance to gay activists in their legal and rhetorical struggle for rights. That hardly makes him a right-winger or a bigot.

    All he seemed to be trying to say by saying that it’s a choice is that it’s something people should be allowed to do. He sounded like he thought ‘choice’ was a social-libertarian buzz-word because of its use in the abortion debate.

  • Richardson can be a good guy without knowing this. I don’t understand putting him through this wringer if he’s not a Republican or anything. This guy’s job is to be a liberal politician. Give him a break.

  • Of Course Grover Norquist wants transparency in government.

    He’s fully aware that Republicans are going to take a severe beating in 2008 at all levels of government. If he can get his hands on anything remotely questionable that is done by Democrats he and his crew will blow it way out of proportion and attack their strawman and call it the Deomcratic position.

    They have no shame they are Republicans

  • Swan, you can’t actually be suggesting that someone who purports to want to be the president hasn’t really thought about whether being gay is or is not a choice, or that, even if he were that oblivious, that he didn’t have campaign staff who would make sure he not only thought about it, but had a position on it that he would not have to stammer out and then later backpedal on, can you? This was, after all, a forum hosted by the Human Rights Council, and he knew going in that he would be addressing issues that matter to the LGBT community – it was not his finest moment.

    I do not mean to suggest that he cannot believe whatever he wants to, but if he’s going to represent all of the people, he has to do better than he did. He could have said, for example, that he accepts people for who and what they are, and rather than seeing people as being straight or gay, he just sees people as people, and assumes that like all people, gay people also worry about the war and the economy and gas prices and health insurance and retirement. He also could have said that since he doesn’t recall ever making a conscious choice to be straight, he has to assume that gay people didn’t make a conscious decision about their sexuality, either.

    But, he didn’t do any of those things – he answered that question as if it had been lobbed out of left field.

  • Swan, I like Richardson. But seriously, that explanation is not prime time stuff. It isn’t about the substance, necessarily, it is the “I just kinda made it up as I went along” or “I just reacted by rote” quality of the explanation that is painful.

    Sorry, Dumbya may have lowered your expectations for the thoughtfulness and articulateness of a President. Not mine. Saying, essentially, “I didn’t really process it, I just shot from the hip” doesn’t cut it.

  • There’s no doubt that Richardson messed up at the debate. On the positive side at least he realized he messed up and quickly issued a correction:

    “I misunderstood the question. Let me be clear- I do not believe that sexual orientation or gender identity happen by choice. But I’m not a scientist, and the point I was trying to make is that no matter how it happens, we are all equal and should be treated that way under the law. That is what I believe, that is what I have spent my career fighting for. I ask that people look at my record and my actions and they will see I have been a true supporter of the LGBT community.”

    In another response to a question about this he said, “This is something you are born with, and regardless of whether there is conflict about the science of it (homosexuality), I support full and equal rights. I fully support domestic partnerships.”

    Daily Dish had some comments in support:

    I suspect Richardson did do himself significant damage last night with the “choice” comment. And I think that’s too bad. This is a guy who even back in the 1990’s when, from what I can recall, most Democrats as well as Republicans were sticking by Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, and he didn’t. The fact that he was on the right side of that one, from the gay community’s perspective, way back then (unlike Hillary and her hubby, who a lot of people in the gay community seem to like, which baffles me) tells me something about what he really thinks. So does his record of supporting civil unions as Governor.

    Perhaps I’m just feeling sorry for Bill at the moment… I will admit that he is by far the most palatable Democrat from my perspective in the entire race. By far.

    This comes from a post at Liberal Values which includes further links:

    http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=1990

  • Goodbye, good riddance I always liked John Edwards. Now I Ilike him more. Rover deserves no more than three words.

    Rove’s departure is most likely not a departure, but a slip-and-a-slide into the shadows where he does his best work. We’ll know him by his handiwork when the real smarmy stuff starts hitting the fan about Hillary and other Dems. The only thing Rover knows how to do is control elections, especially close ones, and he may be beyond his sell-by date on that too.

    There is not a breath of gossip about his decision to leave, or the timing of it, or the lame excuse that justifies it – “more time with my family, etc., etc., retch, retch, retch – but I sense a victory for Bolton. Bush’s disasterous governing record is largely due to Rover who could only see every issue as a political one, as if the election campaign was never ending, and everything had to be played for the base. Bolton couldn’t possibly function with Rover roaming around and having unparalleled access to the dimwit. Perhaps now he who can “barely speak English” will make more reasonable sounds in whatever language it is he speaks. Doubtful, however. Bolton may be trying to save the Rethugs from themselves, and avoid catastrophe in ’08, but he can count on the Dim-Dems to blow it big time.

    Nothing should ever be taken at face value with this criminal bunch. This low-key, mid-August announcement is meant to be under the radar, and the braindead, credulous media will treat it that way. Yesterday I heard commentaries about the quiver in Rover’s voice as he announced his departure. I heard Grover Norquist interviewed on NPR about Rover’s sterling qualities. NPR? Now better known as the National Propaganda Network, a wholly owned affiliate of RPN, the Republican Propaganda Network.

  • I sympathize with Mrs. Sarkozy. Would you rather spend the day shopping or hanging with George and Laura and a few hundred Secret Service agents for a day of fun and photo-ops?

    • Comments are closed.