Received the following from Democrats.org today:
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Sign the petition and spread the word!
http://democrats.com/gannon
To: George W. Bush, Alberto Gonzales, Congress, and the Media
We demand the appointment of a Special Prosecutor to investigate the "journalist" using the pseudonym "Jeff Gannon" who attended daily press briefings at the White House and was regularly called upon by Scott McClellan.
Obviously "Jeff Gannon" is not a bona fide journalist ... In 2003, top White House officials gave "Jeff Gannon" exclusive access to an internal CIA memo that named Joseph Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, as a covert CIA agent ... It is obvious that there was a conspiracy between "Gannon," McClellan, and other top White House officials to run "smear" campaigns against White House "enemies" and to interfere with tough questions by real White House reporters. This is unacceptable in a Democracy.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
So far, so good -- we SHOULD challenge this aggressively. But keep reading below the fold for the rest of the e-mail:
In addition, "Jeff Gannon" may have dabbled in male prostitution rings (through registration of sites like Hotmilitarystud.com, Militaryescorts.com, and Militaryescortsm4m.com) which
raises the possibility he was bringing male prostitutes into the White House or other institutions of our government.
These issues go infinitely beyond the charges involving Monica Lewinsky and therefore demand immediate investigation and prosecution.
Sign the petition and spread the word!
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
THAT part is what I question -- it's the kind of slander and innuendo and character assassination that the Republicans have made an art form, but I don't like the way it feels. No one REALLY thinks those allegations are in any way valid -- they're made only because throwing more dirt is seen as better than throwing less in a case like this.
What the GOP did to Clinton and others in the 1990s was wrong (even IF on a factual basis they were "correct"), and while this is not on the same level, I tend to think it's just as wrong -- not because of any moral purity on my part, but because we -- those of us who care about the long-term future of our democracy and our country -- have a responsibility to think long and hard about how our actions affect the rest of the population.
I think those of us who do that thinking will identify the overwhelming disengagement of the majority of Americans from our political process as a RESULT (partially) of the slime and smear campaigns that now dominate Washington, and a prime CAUSE of the Republican dominance of the past 10-20 years.
The more voters are "turned off" by politics and politicians, the better the Republicans do -- if "they're all crooks", after all, why not vote for the guy who says he HATES government, as opposed to the guy who says he wants government to do more?
So I oppose the substance and tone of the 2nd part of the democrats.org e-mail, because -- even if "successful" in the short term -- I think it hurts our cause in the longer-run.
(There is also, by the way, a subtle homophobic tone to this ... why does it matter that he dabbled in "male" prostitutes and may have brought "male" hookers into the White House? Would it have been OK if they were female escorts???)
But enough about me ... what do YOU think?