Karl Rove

by

Where Have All the Decent Republicans Gone?


I just watched a salute to Bob Dole, former senator from Kansas, who is now 98 and dying from cancer. I never voted for Bob Dole, but I recongnized him as a very decent person, a veteran who was a hero, as a good man. In 1997, President Bill Clinton bestowed upon him the highest honor a civilian can get from the government. In those moments, there was no Republican-Democrat divide. It was the simple acknowledgement of a member of one party to another that his sevice must be recognized.

I have never voted strictly party line, Democrat, simply because I recognized the huge failings of certain Democrats and would vote for their Republican opponent. In Massachusetts, where I spent most of my life, I am now living in North Carolina, I can remember as a teenager when Ted Kennedy first won a seat in the senate, there was something about him which I did not like, even though I could not put my finger on it. The, in 1967, when he caused the death of MaryJoe Kopeckne, my mistrust of him and his ability to escape prosecution he so richly deserved, was solidified. Not once did I ever vote for him.

I spent 11 years on active duty in the Army and was stationed in states such as Louisiana, Texas and Georgia, all of which had seen the old Dixie-crats (Democrats) switch parties in 1968. And even though I do not remember who I voted for in those states, they were solidly Republican. That never bothered me. Most of the senators and representatives for both parties were largely centrists.

Then in 1996, the Senator Newt Gingrich decided it was time to become devisive with his “Contract to America.” That piece of legislation, with the Republican controlled house, was passed into law and pushed the Republican party a little further to the right. Also at the time there were people like Pat Robertson, a man from the far right, who were trying to pull the party further to the right. It was Gingrich who first introduced the “us against them” sentament. And then when they decided to get rid of the most hated Democrat, Bill Clinton, they spent millions of dollars, with Ken Starr in the lead, to convict Clinton of an abuse of power charge. It failed by a single vote, as most have, but it set into motion a move that continues to this day.

But even in those days, the majority of Republicans were decent people. In the 2000 election, which the Republican party started using dirty tricks to win, George Bush won when Republicans usurped the power of the Florida State Supreme Court, and got a decision they desired to give George Bush the win. I never voted for George Bush, but even so, I found myself defending him against Democrats who liked to call him a draft dodger and druggie. I reminded them that Bush was a member of the Texas Air National Guard during Vietnam and was subject to activation to Vietnam just like so many National Guard units had been. He is a veteran and I almost always defend veterans against those who choose to demean them by spurious lies. That exact thing happened to John Kerry, a silver star awardee for his service in Vietnam, when a group called the “Swift Boaters” mounted a series of lies about Kerry to insure Bush’s win. I thing George Bush would have won anyway, but this was Karl Rover, the Republican architect of the early 2000s, working his dirt.

And now Republicans are giving homage to a man who is probably the worst president we have ever had, even worse than John Quincy Adams and Andrew Johnson, both of whom scholars show them as complete failures as president. But in the case of Adams, he returned to the U.S. House and became an extremely successful leader there. And so it is not unheard of for an former president to continue public service. William Howard Taft became a member of the U.S. Supreme Court after his defeat for re-election, and eventually became the chief justice and an admired member. I only wish the George Bush would consider doing the same in Texas.

The term “Moderate Republican” is fast becoming a name difficult to assigned to any Republican in either the house or senate. Why is that? Donald Trump managed to so polarize the American republic, they fear that to speak out against him will cause their defeat for re-election. Why are they cowtowing to the will of a single man over the greater good of their contituents? Why do they find it so difficult to speak the truth over perpetuating the great lie of 2020 that the election was somehow stolen from Trump even though Republican jurists around the nation have declared Joe Biden to be the legitamite winner?

To those few Republican who still stand for something, the truth, Liz Cheney, Chuck Grassely, Mitt Romney, Susan Collans and a few others, I truly hope they will rescue the Republican party from its death wish.

by

Clinton Broke the Law: So Did Others, Now What?


This is difficult for me to say as someone who tends to vote for Democrats but Hillary Clinton broke the law. It is even more difficult to say that Donald Trump is correct on that fact. But the law, regardless of the crime or injury, in civil cases, is bound by precedent.

What I am talking about is the 20,000 emails Karl Rove deleted from a private server located in the White House which was ostensibly for political uses only. This happened in 2007 and is well-documented. In question is whether there were emails pertaining to the Valerie Plame scandal of the Bush regime. At the time, neither the Justice Department nor its arm, the FBI, start an investigation. Congress, Republican controlled, saw no reason to set up a special committee to investigate what Rove and his accomplices had done. And there you have the precedent.

Good leadership always recognizes that the man, or woman, at the top is ultimately responsible for all things which happen during their watch, good and bad. Our politician, and this is without regard to political affiliation, always takes credit and always deflects blame. Ask yourself when the last time you heard any politician say “I screwed up” and take responsibility either for his erroneous actions or for the actions of those who work for him? I am willing to be you never have.

For many decades I held security clearances of various sorts and levels. It was always made clear to me that should I break any of the rules I faced almost certain jail time. But I was neither a politician nor someone in a high position.

Now there is one thing that has been missing from the Clinton debacle, the word ethics. As a public servant, both in the U.S. Army and the U.S. Department of Transportation, particularly in the latter, I was made aware on a regular basis my absolute responsibility for maintaining a completely ethical position in all my works. Little things like not accepting a gift or other item worth in excess of $25, and never doing anything that even “gives the appearance of” a lack of ethics. To do so meant a punishment of some sort.

What many of you may not know is the fact that every department in the United States government has its own Inspector General. This is the person who upon gaining knowledge of some breaking the rules, or worse, possibly committing a crime, is duty-bound to investigate. Every person in the U.S. Government, political or otherwise, takes an oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution. And by extension, that means that they will do all within their power to remain above reproach, to be ethical, to safe-guard the secrets of our government, and to conduct themselves in a manner which is in all respects, ethical.

Now we come to Title 18 of the U.S. Code. This section of Federal Law deals with classified documents and materials. So here is what the code says 18 US Code § 798 – Disclosure of classified information:

“(a) Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information—

(1)

concerning the nature, preparation, or use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic system of the United States or any foreign government; or

(2)

concerning the design, construction, use, maintenance, or repair of any device, apparatus, or appliance used or prepared or planned for use by the United States or any foreign government for cryptographic or communication intelligence purposes; or

(3)

concerning the communication intelligence activities of the United States or any foreign government; or

(4)

obtained by the processes of communication intelligence from the communications of any foreign government, knowing the same to have been obtained by such processes—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.”

 

The way dissemination of classified material works is that it is available only on a “need to know” basis. That means the recipient has both a security clearance equal to the classification of the material in question and that that person needs that classified material for the conduct of his job. I suspect Clinton failed to use good judgement in who she shared classified material with. And that she could claim not to know that any particular item was not classified is laughable. In her position she should have had a heightened state of awareness of classified material.

There is another situation which exists which any person who has spent considerable time in government knows: any singular piece of information may not in and of itself be classified, but when many bits of information are put together they must be at the very least be considered sensitive in nature and be treated as classified. On her staff Clinton had someone whose sole purpose was to review material of a sensitive nature to determine the level of classification necessary. It is axiomatically given that you always defer to things being classified until proper authority deems otherwise.

The Bush administration proved fast and loose with its handling of classified material, vis-à-vis Valerie Plame et. Al. No one was ever held responsible for making public knowledge of a person who was in the conduct of her job classified. The Plame incident at the least meets the level of Clinton’s indiscretions if not exceeding them. The FBI could not have gone after Clinton without someone insisting upon an investigation of Bush, Cheney and Rove, and the Republicans know this.

All this is nothing new, sadly, it has been going on for administrations going back as far as anyone cares to go. Politicians typically, and regularly, place themselves above the law, and sadly most get away with it. The only way to change that is for the general public to demand change. Sadly, I do not see that happening any time soon.

by

The Deplorable State of American Politics


enemy

The cartoon above, from the strip “Pogo,” first appeared in 1952.  Walt Kelly produced this comic strip from 1948 to 1975.  Pogo Possum was a humble, personable and philosophical character who spoke on many subjects.  This particular one, I believe, speaks most tellingly about the state of our present politics.

In 1994 a Republican think tank came up with the idea of the “Contract with America” which all its members in both the senate and house signed.  In its most basic form it was a wonderful and powerful idea.  But those behind it had other ideas, sinister ideas.  Certain non-elected people had a very deep hatred for President Bill Clinton and this was supposed to be their open foray into removing him from power in 1996.  It failed simply because Clinton co-opted them by endorsing certain portions of the contract, most especially balancing the budget.  But those power brokers knew quite well how to win wars while losing a battle or two.  Clinton gave them that opportunity by having an affair with Monica Lewinsky and then denying it ever happened.  For the first time since Andrew Johnson a president was impeached.  Clinton’s crime?  Not that he had the affair but that he lied to Congress.  With attack dog Kenneth Starr at the forefront running a broad and unrestricted investigation, it was game on.

Who was behind this?  It was not the members of Congress but those moneyed interests behind the Congressional powers.  To be certain, David and Charles Koch were two of them.  Other powers behind the scenes were Republican strategists such as Karl Rove and talk show hosts Rush Limbaugh and Bill O’Reilly.  What each of these men knew, and relied upon, was the average American’s disinterest in discovering the truth about any particular subject.  They knew their target audience would take them at their word despite the use of hyperbole, exaggeration and out right lies.

The Democrats have been equally as bad though usually not in the same way.  While Democrats love to use hyperbole, exaggeration and out right lies too, they are not nearly so well organized as Republicans and other conservatives.  And while the Democrats certainly have their share of moneyed interests, the do not have a strategist who approaches the ability of Karl Rove and have virtually no presence, let alone following, on the air waves in the form of an O’Reilly or Limbaugh.

Although I am a life-long registered Democrat, of late I have made a habit of voting Republican in Massachusetts elections.  This has been because of my disgust by state-wide politics as a whole, and those who are running for office in particular.  The brilliance of Senator Elizabeth Warren is unimpeachable but she is an uninspiring academic who had previously no civil experience.  She won, not on her merits, but because she was the Democrat who opposed Republican Scott Brown.  This sort of politics exists in every state which holds a large majority in one party, Idaho, Utah, and Wyoming for Republicans, Rhode Island, New Jersey and Michigan for Democrats.

I find it troubling that the Republican Party has found itself split between their long standing moderates and those who have given their allegiance to the Tea Party.  But if you look at it closely, you will find the Tea Party is simply a reincarnation of the old Libertarian Party with a new platform.  The Democrats have their own group on the far left who, although without name, are equally as polarizing.  It is this polarization that causes intransience over issues which desperately need resolution.

The only resolution to these issues is for all Americans to hold their elected officials, those who the voted for, to back up their stands with absolute truth, to work in the best interests of their constituents and not the PACs, and to always work towards a common ground with members of the other party.  I would say that any member of Congress who votes in excess of 75% along party lines should deemed as of suspicious designs.  Each senator and representative should be able to report back to his constituents on a regular basis how each of his votes worked to the favor of the majority of those he represents.

Americans seem to be of a mind that politics as a whole are disgusting, but until each American decides to hold those he has voted into office to a higher standard, then nothing will change.