America , Come Home!

Recently, New York Times Columnist Paul Krugman wrote about Karl Rove’s American (July 15, 2005}. Depressingly enough, it’s an America many of us have come to know; it’s an America where lies, and rank political ideology substitute for truth. Oh yes, I know, their talk is patriotic; we all heard Bush’s State of the Union Address; America stands as the beacon of freedom loving people; the words stand beyond reproach, but in the world according to Bush, the rhetoric of freedom and democracy are at war with reality. As a graduate of the late Lee Atwater’s school of slime politics, Karl Rove hasn’t been guided by any lofty democratic ideals in managing Bush’s drives for political office. As Frank Rich noted recently of Rove, “Trashing is in his nature. . . . . . . In the 2000 South Carolina primary, John McCain's wife, Cindy, was rumored to be a drug addict (and Senator McCain was rumored to be mentally unstable). In the 1994 Texas governor's race, Ann Richards found herself rumored to be a lesbian.” Karl Rove has a penchant for running sleezy campains against the opposition with a sick, distorted fixation on sexuality designed to cloud the real issues. Referencing a Joshua Green article published in the Atlantic Monthly last year, Frank Rich noted , in the NYTimes today, "a recurring feature of Mr. Rove's political campaigns throughout his career has been the questioning of an opponent's sexual orientation," (Ny Times 24 July 2005}.
Freedom? Democracy? Reasoned debate? Such notions are alien to the Rove-Bush modus operandi. Machiavelli is a far better model to use in understanding the machinations of the Bush-Rove White House than anything bequeathed by the Founding Fathers.

Basic to any meaningful understanding what it means to live and participate in a democratic society is the idea of a loyal opposition openly and freely subjecting the activities of government to scrutiny. Not in the Bush-Rove understanding of democracy.


Now we’re are told that the FBI has been investigating and collecting files on several domestic groups who’ve been highly critical of Bush policies. According to Eric Litchblau, “The F.B.I. has in its files 1,173 pages of internal documents on the American Civil Liberties Union, the leading critic of the Bush administration's antiterrorism policies, and 2,383 pages on Greenpeace, an environmental group that has led acts of civil disobedience in protest over the administration's policies,” ( NYTimes 18 July 2005}.

In the recent developments surrounding the outing of a covert CIA agent by columnist Robert Novak, it’s clear that both Karl Rove and Lewis Libby, Vice President Cheney’s chief of staff played a key role in suppling information to the media specifically for the purpose of destroying her husband, Ambassador Joe Wilson, an administration critic, even though White House Press Secretary Scott McCllen specifically issued a flat denial of such involvement and though he was willing to talk about the case then, his lips are sealed now.

Oh but, have no fear, this tawdry group is not without it’s defenders; the right-wing propaganda machine is working overtime: "The extreme left is once again attempting to define the modern Democratic Party by rabid partisan attacks, character assassination and endless negativity," said Rep. Tom Reynolds, R-N.Y., chairman of the GOP congressional committee. The Republican National Committee, virtually a political arm of the White House, urged GOP lawmakers to go public”( AP 14 July 2005). This comment from Rep. Reynolds is typical of the “talking points” recommended by the Republican Leadership in their effort to keep Karl Rove’s fat ass out of the political fire he has ignited.. Yes, son, this is the same Karl Rove who made one of the most highly charged partisan attaches imaginable against democrats at a recent Republican fund rising dinner in New York City.

Make no mistake about it; democracy as we have know it is under siege. CBS’s , 60 Minutes Two, ran a story recently (7/15/2005} focused upon the literally hundreds of people picked up either by US agents, or friendly governments here, there, everywhere and sent to Middle Eastern countries where they can be tortured free from the oversight of the American legal system or of the Press.

Wasn’t it Lord Acton who said, “Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel”? Given the torrent of patriotic talk that spews forth from the Bush Administration, there are scoundrels enough to go around; we’re experiencing the reign of right-wing , ideology driven, extremism. The House for the third or fourth time, now, in the last ten years or so, has again overwhelmingly passed legislation making it a criminal offense to defile the flag. Never mind that the Supreme Court has held that the flag itself, Old Glory, isn’t freedom but rather is the symbol of freedom and all that freedom means in our society; it’s kind of a reminder. The high court ruled that people may exercise their freedom, even to the extent of defiling the symbol-- the flag itself. But oh, how the scoundrels, pedaling there patriotic candy, seek to shift attention to largely irrelevant issues while our young men and women die in Iraq and Afghanistan. Yes, these are the issues that play upon the lips of the patriotic scoundrels as they cut funding for veterans programs.

To be sure, there are other mean spirited, red meat issues at play in this cesspool game of politics being played. There are people in America who are utterly repulsed at the thought of gay marriages and whose understanding of religious obligations oppose extending marriage or family rights generally to members of the gay community. I understand that and think it’s simple minded, but I can accept it as a point of view. However, it’s powerfully clear that many politicians use the gay issue merely as a wedge issue in much the same way that anti-communism was used in the fifties and sixties; if the truth were known, they really don’t care about the gay issue one way or another. Remember former Congressman Bauman? He used to rail on the House floor against the gays. A first class gay basher he was. Well, the long and short of his story is sad; he was spending the evening cruising the gay bars in the Washington area. In a nutshell, involuntarily outed by his indiscretions, Congressman Bauman ended up leaving Congress and his family. Now, I’m not suggesting that all those who rail against gays are closet homosexuals, no; but, I am stating that many, most I suspect, are using the issue to divert attention away from the real issues that confront this nation. Oh, how they so zealously, so self-righteously wrap themselves in the flag and spew forth torrents of ideological bilge or rail against members of the gay community.

To be sure, there have been periods in recent American history marked by strife: the turbulent 60's and 70's came complete with the riots and protests in city streets all over American. At the time few people viewed such political expressions as a sign of America’s political health; however, I think they were wrong; there was a vitality, a vibrant life force at work in those obstreperous demonstrations. Democracy, as Jefferson envisioned it, got a wake up call from the people. Today, in Bush’s America, with the notable exception of a few lonely voices in the wilderness, the Bush minions in Congress and other nationally prominent leaders, march silently in lock-step to the sound of Christian-right-wing babble. Those moderate voices in the Republican party, who in the past, dependably looked beyond party ideology in working for the greater good of society have been largely muted.

The few prominent Republicans who refused to march in step are gone or altogether ignored: Former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neil who wrote disbelievingly about the bungling in evidence at Cabinet meetings; Richard Clarke, the Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence, who wrote about his inability to get anybody in the Bush Administration interested in the terrorist theat before the 9/ll attack; Christi Todd Whitman, former New Jersey Governor and later head of the Environmental Protection Agency, who wrote a book about the difficulties faced by moderate Republicans in the new Bush right-wing theocracy; and then, there was former Senator, former United Nations Ambassador, former ordained Episcopal Minister John Danforth’s who wrote on the Op-Ed page of the NY Times about the hijacking of the Republican party by the Christian right. He noted, for example, that in all his years in the United States Senate, where he served as a rather conservative Republican (as a Senator, he sponsored Justice Clarence Thomas before the Senate Judiciary Committee at the confirmation hearings) that in all those senate years, and he emphasized this point, he had not spent as much as a minute worrying about what effect gay marriage might have on family life in America, not one minute. Senator Danforth emphasized the importance of maintaining some sense of perspective in our political life.

Because the Republican have a strangle hold on Congress, there are no committee investigations of the Bush transgressions. In sharp contrast poor old Bill Clinton, suffered the harassment of Republican controlled investigating committees for the duration of his presidency, and we, the taxpayers of America, spent 60 plus million dollars to find out that the Clinton’s 75,000 dollar investment in the White Water Land deal was legal. Oh, we did find out that Wild Bill was doing something with Monica; however, Bill’s indiscretions pale to insignificance when put in focus against the backdrop of Bush’s mendacity in leading this nation to an unnecessary war. If there’s to be dissent, it must come from the moderates in the Republican party who, to date, have remained mute. They must find the strength to write new profiles in courage, or the fate of this American democracy is bleak.


Davy Crockett

A Profile In Courage: Judith Miller

"The freest and fairest societies are not only those with independent judiciaries,but those with an independent press that works every day to keep government accountable by publishing what the government might not want the public to know."

--Judith Miller addressing the judge who locked her up.


As I write, New York Times writer Judith Miller sits in jail, condemned to serve time because she refuses to divulge the names of her news sources. Never mind, now, that she didn’t out a CIA agent, didn’t in fact, write about the case; no, she’s paying a high price for being committed to ideals larger than her self-interest. Robert Novak, on the other hand, the scum ball conservative columnist for The Chicago-Sun times newspaper and television commentator, DID in fact identify the name of an undercover CIA agent in his newspaper column. He wrote, using information provided by what he said were two high ranking White House sources. Why hasn’t the special prosecutor hauled Novak’s slimy ass before the grand jury? He continues writing his column and appearing on the weekly talk shows unaffected by it all.

This doesn’t make sense. . .Novak’s the jerk who outed the undercover CIA agent using information provided to him (that’s what he wrote) by the White House. Why are this judge and this special prosecutor playing games with us. . .attempting to make us believe that they’re trying to find out where the information came from. . .what crap! Let’s get beyond these childhood pretend games, we don’t need a round of paddy cake to make us happy, Robert Novak knows who gave him the information. He said so in the column he wrote specially for the purpose of blowing an under cover CIA agent’s cover.

The Special Prosecutor was appointed to find out who leaked the information. Why are he and that screw ball judge chasing after Ms. Miller of the New York Times and Matt Cooper of Time Magazine, neither of whom outed anybody? This is beyond crazy! This is another diversionary tactic to keep our eyes off the ball. Novak should be hauled before that Grand Jury; he’s the jerk who talked to the unidentified sources in the White House and who violated federal law in revealing an undercover agents name and possibly endangering her life. It’s very clear in the story that Cooper did write in Time Magazine that the White House wanted a pound of flesh because that undercover CIA agent’s husband, Ambassador Joseph Wilson, had publicly criticized the President for misrepresenting the truth in his rush to war in Iraq. Make no mistake about it, this was more gutter politics from the White House.

There is a disturbing pattern in this nonsense. Think about it, during those days when journalists were trying to find out whether or not Bush served in the Alabama National Guard, whether they could actually find ANYBODY who remembered even seeing Bush, CBS became the issue. Now as an Army veteran myself, I can, after the passage of many years, vividly remember the names of most of the soldiers I served with; not only do I remember their names, I remember many of the details of their lives: where they came from, how they liked the Army etc. President Bush, on the other hand, couldn’t and didn’t give us any names; he couldn’t come up with one single, solitary name. Let's be honest about it, Bush was AWOL! The American people where too easily side tracked. . .by diversionary tactics. The Bush operatives drag a red herring across the trail, and the poor old blood hounds and the White House Press Corp don’t know whether to shit or go blind; they usually error and go bline.

When Newsweek published a sentence in the Periscope section recently detailing miss treatment of the Muslim Holy book, right-wing commentators, outside and inside the White House, made Newsweek responsible for much of the death and destruction in Iraq (See my earlier post on this subject). The reports from FBI agents, The International Red Cross and Amnesty International, all supported the Newsweek story, got lost in the shuffle along with numerous other reports.

And then even more recently, poor old Senator Durbin from Illinois dared to read an FBI agent's horror story, the account the agent wrote after watching interrogations at the Cuban prison. Again, never mind that other reputable sources, sources that the Administration frequently quoted when it suited their purposes, presented evidence totally in line with the comments made my Senator Durbin. Another red herring hit the tail and truth lost out.

It’s tough, no, close to impossible to get a handle on the morality of these Bush people. Hell, the Vice President can tell the Senior Democrat member of the Senate Judiciary Committee to go F ----himself and get away with it, as he did. The Vice President’s comment was so rank most newspapers of any note would not print his words. I actually heard some right-wingers chuckle about it; indeed, a couple of them were men of the cloth, ministers, at least they’re supposed to be. Even old self-righteous himself, Sen. Hatch smiled when asked about it.

Oh how selective our sense of civility and decorum become when we let our identity as human beings take on the shape of political ideology. Oh how willingly so may willingly sacrifice their humanity in the service of right-wing gutter politics.

The nobility of our purpose does matter as we make this journey in life! Though Ms. Miller may not have all the legalisms sorted out, she does show incredible courage in following convictions larger than self. It is not avarice, or any of the base motives that drives her; it's her belief in an important ideal. I’m reminded of Henry David Thoreau sitting in jail for refusing to obey an unjust law. When his dear friend Ralf Waldo Emerson asked him why he was sitting in jail, Thoreau pointedly replied, “Why are you standing out there?” Hopefully Ms. Miller's example will serve to excite others to fight for things noble, things larger than self. Our spirit has been starved too long by the mean spirited greed that seems to inform the Bush people.


Davy Crockett

Pat Boone, Scientology, Frankie Ford and Foot Tap'en Music

Tom Cruise’s recent primate metamorphosis, on the Oprah show; that is, his strange declaration of love complete with the orangutan jumps (See my June posting), and then his subsequent confrontation on the Today Show with Matt Lauer about the psychotropic drugs Brooke Shield shouldn't be taking, according to Tom that is, has all combined to really put his name in the news lately. Oh, and just incidentally  he has a new blockbuster movie in the theaters just now. . .some coincidence huh? Now old Tom probably knows more about these things than we've ever suspected; I mean, after all, he is a self-avowed Scientologist. I’m also aware, as one of my critics aptly noted in a commentary on my posting, that Tom can’t be too dumb or he wouldn't have all that money. I suppose I’ll give in to the idea that something about this whole matter is pretty dumb and let it go at that. Anyway, these recent discussions involving Cruise, Scientology and the like reminded me of an experience I had which included, among other things, my first awareness of Scientology.

I was involved in a discussion with a friend who, in passing, mentioned some of the music of the fifties and sixties, noting how downright enjoyable it was, not at all like this rapper, crapper, sapper stuff that’s taken all the Grammy awards by storm.

Well, that recent reflection on music from the 50's and 60's pushed my own thoughts a bit, giving me just enough courage to mention one of my own favorites from that early period–Pat Boone; I recently acquired a copy of his supposed 16 greatest hits. Now I don’t publicly admit to liking his music and, in fact, have a little trouble admitting it to myself during my private moments, but the fact is I love the strong, rhythmic beat of his early music. If you’re a rocker, it’s hard to find better dance music. However, I can’t think of anyone, just off hand, who gives me a greater sense of nausea when I listen to them talk. In sum, I find Boone’s simple-minded religious views hard to take. I’m always left wondering, "Is he really that simple- minded?" My fear, of course, is that he is!

Then there’s Frankie Ford from down in Louisiana. .. .remember him? His one big hit "Sea Cruise?" is another of my favorites. One hot summer night several years ago, I came out of a Broadway theater having just seen Miss Saigon and was standing on the side walk watching people pass by. Suddenly, I could hear the sounds of live, rock music. I looked down the street and saw a London style double decker bus slowly moving through the post show theater traffic. The top of the bus had been removed creating a band stand on one end and a small dance floor on the other. Several musicians-- couple saxophones, a trombone, a trumpet or two and an electric bass guitar--were energetically performing Frankie Ford’s foot stompin’ "Sea Cruise."

The bus, momentarily tied up in a snarl of taxies, stopped just in front of me. For the first time I noticed large white signs with black hand scrawled messages extolling the virtues of Scientology, a religion I new by name only, taped to the sides of the bus. The band stopped playing and one of the performers with a microphone in hand invited those of us standing on the side walk to join them on the bus. An attractive young couple , who looked to be in their twenties, standing near me on the side walk did just that. As they ascended the spiral stair way to the top of the bus, the band stated to play again as the bus continued slowing down the street with the stylish young couple bopping to the sounds of Frankie Ford’s music.

Though it did not occur to me then, I’ve often thought that the young couple had been planted their waiting for the bus to come along, to encourage, by their example, others to join the Scientology party on the bus; I don’t know. In any case, a couple years ago, reflecting on the events of that night, it occurred to me that I’d really liked the music. I searched for several days before I finally found what I was looking for. Initially I’d been looking under the title "Sea Breeze" which is also a legitimate song title but not the one I wanted. Well, I did ultimately find what I wanted and Frankie and I’ve been close ever since, and to hell with the Grammies and Scientology ploys of whatever intention.

Ever keepin’ track of the beat for ya!

Davy Crockett


Post Script: After putting some of the above reflections in words, I sent them on to a number of friends. One night several weeks later, I returned home after having spent a wild weekend in Chicago, and there, tucked between the storm door and the entrance door, I found a small UPS package containing an old beatup looking cassette tape along with the following note:


Dear Davy,

Well, if you liked Pat Boone you were probably
disappointed, as was I, in the Rolling Stone's recent
selection of the 5OO greatest songs of all time. Pat
Boone gets a mention for covering a couple of songs
but that's all. Bill Halley gets on the list only
once, for Rock Around the Clock. Frankie Ford is, of
course, nowhere to be found. Charlie Ryan and the
Timberline Riders don't make the list at all with
their Hot Rod Lincoln. The list does contain a lot of
other examples of goddamn dissonance and abuse of
innocent musical instruments. I played in a band in
the mid fifties—the transition period from swing to
early rock and roll (I got to be in the band, Bernie
Tucker's Off Beats, because I owned a drum set though
I was not a good drummer). My kind of rock and roll
was pretty much over with by 1959. At that point I
mainly listened to jazz, classical, and nostalgic
4O-50's stuff. Now, in my sixties, I have taken up
with "a young chick" (9 years my junior) and I wake up
every morning to Fox Radio's classic rock and roll
hits—many of which are on the Rolling Stone list—and
they piss me off. As a result, J often break in to a
chorus of "music from MY era," including Sea Cruise.
Otherwise, life is good so I guess I shouldn't
complain and Sandy likes to be sung to at 5:30 AM.
Re L Ron Hubbard and the Scientologists: several years
ago J heard that they were trying to get the first
edition of his book, Dianetics (sp?) removed from
libraries. So, naturally I got a copy of it and a copy
of his latest edition and shelved them side by side in
the NMC library. I didn't read either one so I never
found out which one was loopyer.
Anyway, several months ago Sandy and I were in the
Salvation Army store and I ran across a tape of songs
from 1959—including Sea Cruise—which you will find
enclosed. Listen to it in good health, and to hell with
the Rolling Stone.

Your friend Dan’l B.

Update: Brooke Shields Educates the Orangutan

Frankly, I don't know much about Brooke Shields, and what I did know, I didn't like. . . always seemed to me that she was the product of a pushy old broad (her mother) who had no sense about how to be a loving, caring parent. Brooke always seemed, to me at least, to be one of those lost souls whose identity, as an individual, got mangled in her mother's mad rush to make her a celebrity of some sort.
Well, in my eyes she's redeemed herself. One, she's done much to help us all understand the trials faced by many young mothers who suffer after the birth of a child; and two, she's helped us understand what an idiot Tom Cruise really is. Too bad that his movie, War of The Worlds, seems to be ranking in the money at the box office this week, but I will take some comfort in the notion that not one penny of it came from my pocket. . . stay away from the theater. . .he's a religious zealot!
Beyond the zealotry, it amazes me that one would engage in a war of words, as Cruise has done, and come to the battle so totally unarmed. Stupid!
See Ms. Shields Op-Ed response to Tom Cruise in the NY Times July 1, 2005 edition; it's nothing short of excellent!

Ever on the watch,
Davy Crockett