Beyond HRC

A reader writes:

I think you have pulled back the corner of a bigger scandal. I remember years ago having a conversation with someone at a group then known as Citizens for a Sound Economy (now FreedomWorks). I asked her how it was that for so many years the group had said it had 250,000 members — no more, no less, year after year.  She told me the same thing you heard from HRC — anyone who had ever given them a nickel, ever, was counted as a member, forever. She refused to tell me how many actual, dues-paying members they actually had. I suspect it was in the low four-figures — if that many. 

My point is, How many Washington-based interest groups that are regularly cited in the media as representing millions of people actually represent anyone at all? Women’s groups, abortion groups (pro and con), environmental groups, gun groups, business groups, etc. — how many are in reality paper organizations with no real constituencies? How many, like the AARP and the NEA, have real members, but most of those members probably don’t support many of the organization’s political positions? This is an issue crying out for investigative journalism that will probably never take place — too many journalists depend upon the illusion that these groups actually represent their alleged constituencies, thereby saving the journalist from doing real reporting on what those constituencies actually think.

I think my reader is onto something. The kind of flim-flam that HRC purveys is not atypical. I’m concerned with them because I fear they waste vast amounts of resources from gay donors, have done very little real work on the issues, and yet posture as the voice for all gays (while secretly shilling for Clinton). But the b.s. from special interest groups is a real scandal in DC, and can distort national politics. More scrutiny please. And memo to HRC: please respond to my simple questions as soon as possible.

Gays “Immoral,” Criminals Fine

A reader points out something that Peter Pace forgot to mention:

"The military routinely grants waivers to admit recruits who have criminal records, medical problems or low aptitude scores that would otherwise disqualify them from service. Overall the majority are moral waivers, which include some felonies, misdemeanors, and traffic and drug offenses."

But a soldier who has a perfectly legal relationship is immoral? Even someone from Massachusetts who is legally married? I think Pace just had a Kaus moment. At least we now know what he thinks about gays – and the many gay servicemembers who are currently at war.

Why We Went To War, Ctd.

The source for many of Colin Powell’s false statements at the U.N. with respect to Saddam’s biological WMDs can be traced to one very dubious Iraqi source, known as "Curveball." Brian Ross uncovers his identity here. The guy is still being protected by German intelligence. Powell was never told that the CIA regarded Curveball as "unstable, immature and unreliable". Some tried to warn about the danger. But Cheney and Rumsfeld had their way. Powell is now furious. Money quote:

Powell told ABC News he is "angry and disappointed" that he was never told the CIA had doubts about the reliability of the source. "I spent four days at CIA headquarters, and they told me they had this nailed," Powell said.

They did have it nailed. In the sense of: rigged. And Cheney must have taken particular pleasure in setting up his arch-rival, Powell, this way.

Blah Blah Blah

In trying to justify my intense dislike of Senator Clinton, I come across this piece yesterday by Dana Milbank. Yes, her utter blandness, the fact that every comma and period has been sand-blasted through focus groups, makes me queasy. Here’s a classic piece of Clinton crapola:

"I come to share the memories of a troubled past and a hope for a better tomorrow. Our future matters, and it is up to us to take it back, put it into our hands, start marching toward a better tomorrow."

Just shoot me the minute she wins the presidency, will you? (And that’s a metaphor.)

Riding The Tiger

Gary Kamiya gets the current Republican crisis right:

"For this isn’t really about Coulter at all. This is about a pact the American right made with the devil, a pact the devil is now coming to collect on. American conservatism sold its soul to the Coulters and Limbaughs of the world to gain power, and now that its ideology has been exposed as empty and its leadership incompetent and corrupt, free-floating hatred is the only thing it has to offer. The problem, for the GOP, is that this isn’t a winning political strategy anymore — but they’re stuck with it. They’re trapped. They need the bigoted and reactionary base they helped create, but the very fanaticism that made the True Believers such potent shock troops will prevent the Republicans from achieving Karl Rove’s dream of long-term GOP domination."

More pertinent thoughts from the decent part of the right here.