National GOP Likely Behind Push To Get McGreevey Out of Office

According to Fox, the NJ Republicans are trying to push McGreevey out "immediately". I'm not so sure that this isn't actually a push from the National GOP. Here's why: if McGreevey goes sooner rather than later, then there will be a special election for Governor, THIS NOVEMBER.

The most recent poll of New Jersey I could find said the following:

"In Fairleigh Dickinson University's PublicMind Poll released Wednesday [July 28th, prior to the Convention--Rob) 45 percent of registered voters favor Kerry for president while 43 percent said they would vote for Bush. Ten percent were undecided."

With a close race in NJ it would be beneficial to the GOP to have a Governor's race on the ballot as well. It would get their base out to vote in the Governor's election, maybe enough to tip the state. Read the rest of this post...

turning the corner on taxes?

well, at least something's "turning the corner" in the Bush Administration.

US exports -- as Michael pointed out earlier -- have turned the corner, but it's the wrong corner.

As you may know, the heralded "turning the corner and not turning back" language has suddenly disappeared from the campaign lexicon. Apparently it didn't quite pass the bullshit test with the American people. Can you imagine the audacity of the American people to not blindly believe whatever crap comes out of his mouth?

Another flip-flop from the bushies -- shortly after the bipartisan Congressional Budget Office determined what we already know -- his tax cuts skew to the super-rich and increase the proportional tax burden on the middle class -- the campy campaign has backed away from the preznit's comment that he'd like to "explore seriously" a national sales tax, which also tends to hit poorer families disproportionately.

Funny -- it used to be that Bush only got into trouble when he strayed off the pre-drafted talking points, like he just did with the sales tax thing or when he invents a new word like "misunderestimate" or "formater." But now his prepared remarks are sloppy as well, like the "turning the corner" debacle and the "our enemies are looking for new ways to hurt Americans, and so are we" statement last week.

Say what you will about Karl Rove and his gang, but they showed they're real smart. What's happened? There's a noticable decline in the quality of the work product.
Read the rest of this post...

Great essay on the McGreevey issue

Here's a great essay on the McGreevey story, and I think that it should help add to the "how should straight people view" this dialog.

"Still, McGreevey could have handled this scandal the way so many other politicians do. He could have given a brief statement acknowledging that he had "caused pain" in his marriage and was resigning in the best interests of his family. He could have issued a short press release and disappeared. End of story.

Instead, he laid open his soul and his sexuality on camera. His speech was so personal and revealing, at one point I found myself wishing he would stop. It was as if he were giving us too much information, even for a society and media that crave such intimate details about our leaders and our celebrities.

Talk about reality TV."

McGreevey's laid bare his soul unlike anything you will see from a human being for a long, long time. If you're straight and that sounds like hyperbole, sit a gay or lesbian friend down and have them watch the entire speech and then ask them what they think. Read the rest of this post...

the straight fella's take

There's plenty to blog about with the president today, and I'll get to that, but I feel compelled to start with a "confession" of my own.

While I consider myself a passionate supporter of the gay civil rights movement, I'm straight. As such, I just don't think it's possible for me to completely understand everything about the Governor's resignation that a gay person does. I just don't have the personal perspective. I know that what the Governor did yesterday was very brave, but I doubt I can fully comprehend how much.

My first reaction to this is that it's a shame because gay politicans are held to a higher standard than straight politicians, and will continue to be for quite some time. The mistakes gay people make will get much more attention, and the consequences for those mistakes will be particularly dire. There's no doubt that straight officeholders have done as much or worse and remained in office. Henry Hyde comes to mind.

I also think, if what I read is true, that putting someone with whom you're having a secret affair on the public payroll in a "national security" position, is a terrible mistake, gay or straight.

But I hope the people who read this blog will share with me what they hope straight people should take away from this event. I fear that this may set back the cause of civil rights and marraige - but I want to learn from the people here.
Read the rest of this post...

Bush Sets Record Trade Gap

First Bush set that record budget deficit. Now he set a record trade deficit for the month of June -- a $55.8 billion shortfall, with the biggest drop in exports in nearly three years and a record level of imports. Is there nothing he can't do? Go Bush!
Read the rest of this post...

Blog and Media reaction to the McGreevey Story

How are people reacting? How is the press covering it? I've read a number of blog comments here (my own and others) and elsewhere, criticizing McGreevey, saying that he basically said you can't be gay and be Governor. I have to take that back. That's not what he said. "It makes little difference that as governor I am gay. In fact, having the ability to truthfully set forth my identity might have enabled me to be more forthright in fulfilling and discharging my constitutional obligations."

The television media has been pretty good on this, developing the story more and showing it's complex, and that he's leaving office not because he's gay, but because of political scandals. Both NewsNight and John Stewart took it a step further, both openly asking the question whether he could have held onto the office if the story were only his sexuality. NewsNight said this: "But we wonder in this day and age if a 47 year old married father of two who realizes he is gay could make such an announcement without being forced to leave political office. And we wonder also will the day come, ever, when he could." So do I.

I didn't see it but Keith Olberman on MSNBC evidently ran McGreevey's entire speech on his show last night. Good for him, it had the depth and honesty to stand on it own, and it was amazing political theater.

This morning, it was the top story again, pretty much a redux of last night's coverage. ABC's Good Morning America did a series of interviews with women who had been married to gay men for years and didn't know it - interesting take. CNN's American Morning's Question of the Day. Who will be elected president first, a gay man, an African American, or a woman? That gets right at it.

The Crawl: on the news networks and morning shows, however, the crawl so far has been pretty thin, mostly NJ Gov. McGreevey Gay, Had Affair with Another Man, Resigns. This is potentially a very big problem - if you see the crawl on a network not telling the whole story CALL THEM.

And a public thank you to Arianna Huffington who has been everywhere on this (CNN's Anderson Cooper last night, Keith Olberman's show on MSNBC, Nightline, and again on CNN's American Morning) talking about her personal experience with her husband, and then using the McGreevey story to champion gay marriage. If you see her and agree, send her a note on her blog.

Here's how print is covering it:

NY Times: New Jersey Governor Resigns, Disclosing a Gay Affair

Washington Post - two items:
A GREAT essay: The Closet Case, Left Without a Room of His Own

N.J. Governor Resigns Over Gay Affair

Boston Globe:
N.J. governor resigns, citing affair with man - powerful picture of his wife at his side and his father behind him with this story.

NY Post - cover story:
Gay blackmail scandal - I'M OUT - McGreevey quits over secret affair with male aide

Chicago Sun-Times:
N.J. gov says he’s gay, resigns - I really don't like this headline.

LA Times:
N.J. Governor Quits Over Gay Affair - another headline that I hate.

JTA - a good background on how McGreevey met his lover.

I bring up the headlines and the crawl because the last thing that the gay community needs right now is the public seeing this as a "gay" resignation, not the political scandal that it really is.

Read the rest of this post...

This McGreevey story is REALLY amazing, but so complex

The McGreevey story is huge -- and extremely complex. I came home last night to a TiVo full of it. It was the top story on NewsNight, it was the topic for the full half hour of Nightline. Even John Stewart led off his program with it, and his news is always a day behind. The problem is that there are really two stories here, a human one of a courageous man coming out publicly, and a political one about a leader who made a couple of bad decisions.

The human level story is a remarkable one on its own. Right before a nation's eyes, a 47-year-old married man, father of two, stood up and said, "I am a gay American." As McGreevey began his speech with "Throughout my life I have grappled with my own identity, who I am", I could only think, where is he going with this? He couldn't possibly be going where I think he's going. (I had heard the rumors many times before.) I sat in my office and I watched it live over the Internet. For the next couple of minutes, I was completely taken with the moment. It was one of those rare events in politics when you actually don't have any idea what's about to happen next. Everything in politics has become so scripted, so forced. I sat with awe at what was happening, and then I let out a very audible gasp when he finally said it.

To be honest, even with the scandal/s (more on that later), he didn't have to come out. He didn't have to stand up and declare his sexuality. He simply could have resigned and let people wonder. He didn't, and for that he is a courageous human. He opted, with his wife at his side and parents behind him, to tell everyone that he was gay. It was one of the most joyful moments I've ever had. Truth was finally being spoken aloud and people were listening.

But then came the resignation, and the beauty of his declaration began to fade. And it became political. The political story is of scandal status that, gay or straight, would have brought a politician down. It will likely play out that he met his lover in Israel, brought him to the States, and installed him as New Jersey's top anti-terrorism coordinator. Up to here, the story is probably bad enough to have him resign on its own. But, being New Jersey, the story gets a little better. The FBI wouldn't give his lover clearance, his being an Israeli citizen and all, and questions were raised about his actual qualifications for the job. Instead of firing him, McGreevey brings him over into the Governor's office as an "aide" at $110,000 a year. Gay or straight, at least poor taste and probably against any number of anti-patronage laws. The media is now reporting that his lover threatened to expose his sexuality if he didn't come up with $5 million. (This part enrages me so much, but I don't want to focus too much on that here.) Rather than pay, he came out. Oh and then said he wouldn't leave office until Nov. 15th so the state doesn't have to hold a special election and his successor, a fellow Democrat, would hold the seat until the regular 2005 election. McGreevey was political all the way through.

And that's where it becomes an issue for the gay community. If the media covers this "McGreevey Gay, Resigns" we have a problem. His being gay is not why he is resigning.
Read the rest of this post...

Department of Injustice

I wish John Ashcroft would get his act together or at least be a little consistent.

In Germany, he was withholding evidence from a trial and forcing that case to collapse and the govt. to let possible terrorists go free. (The US has finally relented.)

Here at home, his people have been withholding evidence so they could win a trial and claim a terrorist cell had been defeated. [Go to bottom of link for story.]

That's just too confusing. Please either withhold evidence to win a trial or lose a trial; doing both just gives me a headache.

Thanks to a witness who says that a "surveillance video" was actually "sightseeing pictures taken on a student trip," not to mention all that withheld evidence the Justice Dept. admitted to, this blow against Al Quaeda looks shaky. But hey, even if it turns out to be an unfair trial, that's gotta be better than no trial at all, right J.A.? So what are they moaning about?
Read the rest of this post...

Homeland Insecurity

The Bush people continue to dribble out information to try and justify that raised terror alert/campaign stop led by Tom Ridge. Every time they offer up another tidbit, I can't help thinking, "Stop!" Today they're saying/repeating that the surveillance files were "updated" as recently as spring. I put "updated" in quotes not to be sarcastic but because it could mean as little as the fact that the files were opened, something that has been reported previously.

But what about that leak of the Al Quaeda turncoat? Condi Rice said the Bushies just gave it to the mean ole reporters on background. Tom Ridge said he doesn't know who leaked out. But now the White House is claiming vaguely that

"it appeared Mr. Khan's name had been first disclosed by officials overseas, not in the United States. In any event, the [White House] official said, the arrest of terror suspects, even when unannounced, is often quickly detected by their families and associates. American officials have denied news accounts that Mr. Khan was working as a mole, or an informant for Pakistan, when he was arrested."

In other words, the White House said: it wasn't us, it was someone else; what's the big deal of announcing an arrest in the press since everyone would know about it anyway; and he wasn't really a mole."

Wow, that's a lot of backtracking.




Read the rest of this post...

Oil For Food Scandal: YOU Pick The Headline

What'll it be?

1. UN Knew Hussein Was Stealing Billions All Along

2. Iraq Was Starving Its Own People The Entire Time

3. Hussein Begged For Money For Food -- Spent It on Gold Tiles And Liposuction Equipment

4. Shouldn't We Be Angrier At France And Russia Than We Are At Bush?

It's all there in this one article about the burgeoning oil-for-food UN scandal.

Pick one or write your own headline spotlighting a favorite shameful detail.
Read the rest of this post...

What are polling "internals"

Welcome back Michael - it's been an interesting day. Polling "internals", as they have become known, reference the full details of a poll that include all of the questions. All the media covers in a poll, for the most part, is the horse race question. If you look, most polls have upwards of 30 questions that they ask people, and we generally see only one or two of the results. In addition, the full poll generally includes a lot of back data. For example, if the same question has been asked by the poll for a couple of years (or weeks), you can watch as the numbers move. You can then look at the date that they moved and try and ascertain what caused the move. Was it a post convention "bump" or is something more at work? Internal polls, by contrast, are those polls conducted by the campaigns themselves which generally are viewed as not being objective and therefore not as reliable as a poll conducted by an independent third party like the media. The good news for amateur poll geeks like me is that most media organizations now have the full poll results on the Web sites.

I too will probably be blogging the night away, kicking into my TiVo and watching the McGreevey coverage on Nightline (it was the topic for the full half hour) as well as Aaron Brown's Newsnight coverage (it was the top story). Maybe a little Jon Stewart as well, where you guessed it, it was the top story. There was a little complaining that I didn't hit the CA decision first, but I stand by my belief that the McGreevey story is more important and more significant than anything that has happened since the Mass. decision. (Full text of McGreevey's speech from the NY Times.) Read the rest of this post...

Bush's Tax Cuts Favored the Rich...Duh

It seems obvious, but hopefully the Congressional Budget Office's clear analysis that Bush's tax cuts were heavily weighted towards the rich will gain traction. One-third of the entire tax cut went to the top 1%. Two-thirds went to people making more than $200,000. Bush's people lamely say, "See, this proves everyone benefits since everyone gained a little." But if you save $20 on your taxes and someone in the top 1% saves $2 million, well that's the very definition of a poorly targeted tax cut. I'm all for smaller tax cuts for everyone (just because someone is successful in business is no reason to soak them). And the government will spend every penny you give it. But when you're trying to stimulate the economy and there is massive overall debt (as opposed to the massive annual deficits Bush brought back into fashion), then stealing from the poor (by cutting the social programs that could help lift them out of poverty) and giving to the rich is a terrible idea.
Read the rest of this post...

Blogging The Night Away

Like our godlike creator -- John in DC -- I, too, have been away. (Actually in Toronto going on the set of a new TV movie version of Kojak starring Ving Rhames. So hello Rob of Baltimore. Now what say you to Carl with a K's comment: are the details of a poll's breakdown called "internals" or "cross tabs?" Or has "internals" morphed into a phrase covering both polls done by a campaign itself to judge where it's at AND the more detailed analysis of a poll showing where voters stand on their attitudes towards a particular candidate, what issues they consider important, etc? Inquiring minds want to know and clearly you know.
Read the rest of this post...