Burnt Orange ReportNews, Politics, and Fun From Deep in the Heart of Texas |
![]() |
March 31, 2004Is the WH Trying to Out Richard Clarke?By Andrew DobbsYou may have noticed that in the last two days all of the coverage of Dick Clarke has included vague references to his "personal life." Wolf Blitzer, according to Atrios, said that "there are some weird aspects in his life as well," I saw Joe Scarborough make a reference to how Clarke "has no personal life"- a claim that seems both impossible for him to know and completely irrelevant to any discussion of his claims, and others are making some curious references to his "personal life" as well. Clarke is in his 50s and has never been married. The implication, it seems, is that Richard Clarke is gay. Clarke may very well be gay- I have no idea, the WH seems to think so and they'd be the ones to know. Wonkette says that there are some questions being raised among media types by the White House of a more explicit nature. Of course, this has absolutely no bearing on whether or not he's telling the truth or whether or not this president ignored the threat of al Qaeda, but you can believe that the WH will use it to distract the media from these important issues and you can believe that they will eat it up. Bush should know that those in glass houses ought not throw stones- there are plenty of gay Republicans in positions of authority and they don't want to start this little game. If being a homosexual makes you unqualified to serve in government, we'll see if a few GOP congressmen/cabinet officials/governors want to resign after we even the score a little. I know that might be a sleazy thing to do, but if Bush wants to play character assasination, we can play right back with him. Say what you will about Clarke- believe him or not- but let's keep this on the issues. Posted by Andrew Dobbs at March 31, 2004 02:27 PM | TrackBackComments
Bush should know that those in glass houses ought not throw stones- Well, if the Bushies were really worried about offending gay Republicans, they never would have backed an anti-gay amendment to the U.S. constitution. The Bush-Cheney-Rove crowd are reminiscent of the zealots who were working to re-elect Nixon. They will do or say anything to achieve their goal. We'll be seeing a lot of dead grandmothers on the GOP interstate this year. Posted by: Tim Z at March 31, 2004 06:45 PMWhite House Republican Thinking: If the guy threatens you politically...follow these steps... 1. Ignore him I'm wondering if 'convenient disappearance' is next on the list. Posted by: Karl-T at March 31, 2004 07:16 PMAndrew, Two issues: 1. It seems to me that you and other liberal-leaning bloggers are inadvertantly doing more to spread the "Richard Clarke is gay" rumor than the Bushies are. The "Rick Perry is gay" rumor didn't gain much traction until it started flying around the internet, via this blog and others. From what I can tell, the mainstream media have avoided reporting Bush administration smears, with the exception of Wolf Blitzer. His quote was the one thing that turned up in a Google news search of mainstream media sources. I don't deny that the Bushies are engaging in a unfair smear campaign, especially if what Blitzer said is true. But even if you buy into the idea that "weird aspects" is necessarily code for being gay (which I don't), a lot of the blame here lies with Blitzer. If Blitzer believed the Bush official was trying to anonymously smear Clarke, he shouldn't have agreed to play the game. Passing on nebulous, anonymous remarks like Blitzer did is just sloppy journalism. 2. I believe that the majority of gays in America are well-aware of Republicans' hypocrisy on gay issues. Gays are smart. Give them credit. They know what's up, and vote accordingly. I think the point is not what gays think but what does "mainstream" America think. However, I do agree that it is the media and internet speculation that is driving this rumor. I think if you have to give Rove any credit for anything, he knows how to manipulate the media. One little mention of something "odd", and off it goes. They would never be so stupid as to actually make such an accusation, they don't have to. Post a comment
|
|