Tom DeLay: The New Chickenhawk Poster Child

Many of you fellow political junkies have seen Tom DeLay plugging his new book, No Retreat, No Surrender on the TV circuit. The former House Majority Leader and currently indicted money laundering suspect, is lecturing those who oppose the war in Iraq and accusing us of treason, even those of us who actually served in this misguided war. This pattern continued on a recent Meet the Press appearance. When called on this by Rep. Joe Sestak (R-PA), a retired Navy Vice Admiral (three-star) and the first veteran of the Afghanistan War elected to Congress, DeLay and Richard Perle accused Congressman Sestak of ignorance about the miltary, and Former Congressman Tom Andrews (D-ME) said that he would rather take military advice "from Admiral Sestak than Tom DeLay." When questioned by Tim Russert about his insistence that war critics have committed treason, DeLay said the following:

Well, I--it, it is my opinion that when you go to war, we ought to all come together. You can debate going to war, that's a legitimate debate. But once you have our soldiers and our, our young people dying on the battlefield, we should come together, and we shouldn't have what we had yesterday on the Mall of, of, of--in Washington, D.C. When the--those are not, in my mind--my opinion, patriots that are talking about impeaching the commander in chief, that are--that are--work as, as Tom's group works...

Let's look at some of the things that are totally hypocritical about this quote. First of all, DeLay is equating mentioning impeachment with treason. While I want to make it clear that I oppose impeachment because I see no way that it will be successful, and even if it would be, I do not want to see President Cheney either, I think that this is an interesting turn of events from DeLay. As noted in the book The Hammer:Tom DeLay: God, Money, and the Rise of the Republican Congress by Lou Dubose and Jan Reid, Hot Tub Tom (This was his nickname in his days in the Texas Legislature because of his eagerness to be schmoozed by lobbyists and party.) blocked any and all efforts at censure against President Clinton because he knew that such efforts would derail impeachment. In other words, not only did he mention impeachment, he strong-armed Congress into actually impeaching a President.

For someone who was so against opposing a war once it started as treason, it is interesting to note that Hot Tub Tom was a vociferous opponent of the war in Kosovo even after it started. I found the following quotes while looking up Hot Tub Tom's remarks on Kosovo:

• “This is [President Clinton’s] war.” Washington Post, 4/14/99

• “The Kosovo operation is different and oxymoronic. It is a ‘peace war’ waged by ‘peace hawks’ pursuing a dovish social agenda. Peace hawks are global idealists and former anti-war activists, including the youthful Bill Clinton.” Floor Statement, 4/15/99

• “Doing good on a worldwide scale appeals to peace hawks, who are motivated by altruism, not patriotism.” Floor Statement, 4/15/99

• “There's no national interest of the United States in Kosovo. It's flawed policy and it was flawed to go in. I think this president is one of the least effective presidents of my life time. He's hollowed out our forces while running round the world with these adventures.” The Guardian, 5/17/99

• “I rise today to state that no defense funds should be used for ground forces in Kosovo unless authorized by Congress.” Floor Statement, 4/15/99

• “So what they are doing here is they are voting to continue an unplanned war by an administration that is incompetent of [sic] carrying it out. I hope my colleagues will vote against this resolution.” Floor Statement on S. Con. Res. 21, 4/15/99

• “It is clear that any deployment to Kosovo will similarly drag on and go enormously over budget.” Floor Statement, 4/28/99

• “When asked the question, ‘what if he does not come to the table,’ they said, ‘well, we will go to Phase 2, and Phase 2 is that we will bomb for a few more days. Then he will be going to the table, by crackie.’ And when we asked, ‘Then, what?’ then they said, ‘well, we will bomb for another week and that will force him to come to the table and this will be all over with.’ And then when we asked, ‘Then, what?’ there was silence. This administration started a war without a plan farther along than two weeks.” Floor Statement, 4/28/99

• “I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our overextended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today.” Floor Statement, 4/28/99

• “Instead of sending in ground troops, we should pull out the forces we now have in the region. Mr. Speaker, I do not think we should send ground troops to Kosovo and I do not think we should be bombing in the Balkans, and I do not think that NATO should be destroyed by changing its mission into a humanitarian invasion force.” Floor Statement, 4/28/99

• “So what they are doing here is they are voting to continue an unplanned war by an administration that is incompetent of carrying it out. I hope my colleagues will vote against the resolution.” Floor Statement, 4/28/99

• “It’s very simple. The president is not supported by the House, and the military is supported by the House.” As quoted in USA Today, regarding Floor votes on Kosovo, 4/30/99

• “For us to call this a victory and to commend the President of the United States as the Commander in Chief showing great leadership in Operation Allied Force is a farce.” Floor Statement opposing resolution commending America’s successful campaign in Kosovo, 7/1/99

All but the last of these statements was made by Hot Tub Tom during the operations in Kosovo. (Thanks to blogger Justin Logan for cataloguing these statements.) If Tom DeLay were held to his own standards on treason, he would already be executed.

However, the fact that he told a 31-year Navy veteran that he was a traitor really bugs me the most. After all, Hot Tub Tom came of age during the Vietnam era and was 26 when the draft ended in 1973. You would think that he would have served proubly in the Vietnam War. However, when asked in 1988 about his military service, Hot Tub Tom said the following:

So many minority youths had volunteered for the well-paying military positions to escape poverty and the ghetto that there was literally no room for patriotic folks like myself.

Hey, Hot Tub. Here's a newsflash: There was a draft! Of course, there was room for people like you, although I would argue that the "patriotic" part does not apply. After all, Al Gore, who was and is a patriotic person, enlisted in the Army in 1969 and served as a journalist in Vietnam. If you want to question his service because it was not a combat role, the second Vietnam veteran to win a major party's Preisdential nomination was John Kerry, who received a commission in the Navy in 1966, and then went on to win a Silver Star, a Bronze Star, and three Purple Hearts as a swift boater. Hot Tub also had praise for President Bush for the aricraft carrier landing, complete with codpiece, telling a group of College Repbulicans:

Could you imagine Ted Kennedy in uniform, making that landing?

Well, admittedly, I would wonder if Senator Kennedy could land a plane. However, I could imagine the senior Senator from Massachusetts in uniform. You see, unlike Hot Tub Tom, Edward Kennedy did serve his country, with a two-year stint in the US Army (1951-53) when he served in Europe. If one wanted to quibble, they could point out that he served in Europe during the Korean War, but this was the height of the Cold War, so I see no reason to question Senator Kennedy's willingness to serve his country. His brother, John, also showed the difference between himself and chickenhawks by getting waivers so he could serve in the Navy during World War II, despite health concerns.

The thing that is shocking is just how many Republican hawks managed to avoid military service and war in particular during their own youths. As Al Franken pointed out in Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot and Other Observations and Lies and Lying Liars: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right, this list is quite extensive. Here is a partial offering:

Newt Gingrich (Former House Speaker, 1995-98 and Congressman, 1979-98, possible 2008 Presidential candidate): Received student and teaching deferrments during the Vietnam War. Later wondered aloud if he "missed something" by avoiding military service.

Pat Buchanan (Presidential candidate, 1992, 1996, 2000. Political commentator, Nixon official): 4-F due to a football injury in high school, still manages to run on a treadmill almost daily.

Dick Armey (Former House majority leader, 1995-2003, Congressman 1985-2003): received student deferments

George Will (Washington Post columnist, contributor to Newsweek and This Week with George Stephanopholous): student deferments

Bill O'Reilly (conservative commentator, host of The O'Reilly Factor and The Radio Factor): avoided service, no one is really sure how

Rush Limbaugh (conservative commentator and radio talk show host): claimed to have a pilonidal cyst, went to draft board with a doctor's note, despite the fact that pilonidal cysts are an operable condition

Paul Wolfowitz (former Deputy Defense Secretary): student deferments

Richard Perle (former Reagan defense official) and Bill Kristol (editor, The Weekly Standard): student deferments

Dick Cheney (Vice President, 2001-present; Defense Secretary, 1989-93; Congressman, 1979-89; Chief of Staff, President Gerald Ford, 1975-77): five deferments, said he had "other priorities at the time," first daughter born nine months and two days after President Johnson announced that deferments for married men with no children would be lifted

John Wayne (starred in numerous war movies, released America, Why I Love Her, a patriotic spoken-word album in 1973; major donor to George Wallace in 1968, supporter of conservative causes, icon of "tough guy" and "American hero"): Sought, and received, draft deferment to take care of his kids during WWII. Stayed home despite the fact that many (at the time) bigger actors served in WWII, including Clark Gable and Henry Fonda, who were older than the Duke. Re-classified as 1-A (fit for service and eligible for draft) in 1944, but studio appealed and had his draft status changed back to 2-A. Apocryphal stories tell of a time when John Ford, who did serve as a film-maker during several key air missions in the Pacific, would criticize Wayne for his salute, saying "god****it, don't you know how to salute? Never mind." Would repeatedly get into fights with soldiers who were angered by the fact that Wayne didn't serve.

George W. Bush: served in Texas Air National Guard 1968-73, asked to be exempt from overseas service, left Texas Air National Guard eight months early to attend Harvard Business School (lampooned later in Doonesbury when Ray and an unnamed soldier requested an early release from their enlistment to attend business school), no one really sure how he spent that year that he was supposed to be in Alabama, despite offers of $10,000 to anyone who could conclusively prove that he did his full stint of service in Alabama, grounded in 1970 after refusing to take a flight physical, which is the same year nasal cavity inspections and drug tests were made (ironic because he appeared in TXANG anti-drug posters); later complained about anti-war "elitists" and refuses to listen to anyone who disagrees with him on the Iraq War.

Ronald Reagan (President, 1981-89; Governor of California, 1967-75): Spent WWII making training films. Later confused his action on training films with actually fighting in WWII.

The fact that so many Republicans who now lecture us about our patriotism (as well as Joe Lieberman, who got student and family deferments during the Vietnam War) for opposing such a foolish mission tells me that we have to fight back. As soon as your Republican friends talk about how great the war is, if they are capable of military service, hand them a business card for their friendly neighborhood recruiter. If you ever get the chance to debate someone, call them out on their lack of service. If your local paper runs ads for Hot Tub's book, write letters-to-the-editor criticizing his hypocrisy. But, above all, we cannot let these chickenhawks get away with their false patriotism.

Don't Blame It on Incompetence

Over the last few years, I have heard people of various ideological stripes blame the Bush Administration's malfeasance on incompetence. However, I would argue that there is a different problem that makes the problem of incompetence possible. That problem is anti-government conservatism.

There are three basic types of conservatives in this country: big-government conservatives (think Bill Kristol), small-government conservatives (think Barry Goldwater) and anti-government conservatives (think Tom DeLay, Grover Norquist and George W. Bush). Big-government conservatives are a problem all there own, because they have a misguided notion about what big government should do. In other words, instead of protecting the people, they believe that the goal of the government is to fight the big wars and other things that the government should not be doing (For example, Dinesh D'Sousa wants the government to embrace the thecoracy of the Taliban to create a Christian/Islam alliance). I'm not too worried about small-government conservatives, because most of them usually abandon this track as soon as they become the party in power.

However, anti-government conservatives are a different animal altogether. The main belief of the anti-government conservative is that government can't do anything right. This is exemplified by Ronald Reagan's "ten most frightening words in the English language" (I'm from the government, and I'm here to help.) and his insistence in his 1981 inaugural that government is "not the solution to our problems. Government is the problem." The main goal of these conservatives is deregulation of business. The subgoal of the Grover Norquist type of anti-government conservative is to manage the government so badly that they destroy people's faith in government and eventually cut so many taxes for the wealthy and raise the debt so high that the only thing government can actually pay for is interest on the national debt and maybe defense. Think I am being cynical? Norquist is on the record saying, "The goal isn't to get rid of government. The goal is to reduce the government to the size that we can take it into the bathtub and drown it."

How does this play out? Let me give you a few examples:

Iraq War There are a lot of people who complain about the incompetence displayed by former (Oh, what a joy it is to add that word!) Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld in relation to the management of the Iraq War. However, a read of Plan of Attack points out the problem is really, to invert the Michael Dukakis argument, one of ideology and not competence. Rumsfeld was determined to surround himself with yes-men who believed that the Iraq War could be won with 150,000 troops or less and a very short post-war invasion. In the book, Woodward writes that Rumsfeld liked Franks because he was the one who believed that a smaller force could do the job. However, Franks initial war-planning put the needed troop strength at 245,000-300,000. Rumsfeld repeatedly challenged Franks to find ways to shrink the force. It is obvious that there weren't enough forces in Iraq to secure the country, but ideology ruled the day. Ideology also ruled the day when Rumsfeld was asked about looting and vandalism in post-war Iraq, and he gave the infamous reply, "People in a free society are free to do whatever they want." In other words, Rumsfeld didn't believe that the government could or should act to keep law-and-order, thus giving his tacit approval to the insurgency.

Hurricane Katrina OK, let me make this clear. I do not believe that George W. Bush caused Hurricane Katrina. However, I do think that he is to blame for the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. It had been reported for years that the levies in New Orleans were not prepared to handle anything over Level Three force hurricanes. However, despite years of the Army Corps of Engineers asking for the levies to be fortified, these requests were ignored. President Bush also took five days after Hurricane Katrina to fly over Hurricane Katrina, after attempting to play a G chord in California, thus providing the modern equivalent to Nero's fiddle. He also imfamously insisted, when talking about FEMA head Michael Brown, whose previous experience was running the Arabian Horse Association, "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job," days before being forced to fire Brownie.

However, we found at later that as clueless as Brownie was, he tried to warn President Bush about the problems in New Orleans and he did nothing. In other words, it seems to me like Kanye West was accurate when he said, "George Bush does not care about black people." This is not to say that he actively hates black people, but let's just say that they aren't a concern.

The last major hurricane to hit New Orleans under a Texas President (albeit a real one) shows the difference between someone who believes in government and someone who doesn't. In 1964, when Hurricane Betsy hit New Orleans, President Lyndon B. Johnson flew to New Orleans almost immediately, actually bothered to land, and holding a flashlight to his face (in a big contrast to President Bush landing in New Orleans eventually for a press conference with plenty of generators that were turned off as soon as the cameras were, showing his true indifference to the people) and told the people, "Your President is here to help." In other words, Lyndon Johnson showed us how a President should handle a crisis, and just about any President who actually believed in government would have done this.

VA and Military Hospitals As a veteran, I take this one personally. The Bush Administration has repeatedly underestimated the needs of the Department of Veterans Affairs, which have had a huge spike in demand because of the haevy reliance on reserve components in the Iraq War. (Reserve Component veterans are ineligible for any VA benefits unless we served in a combat zone, 180 consecutive days active duty, or 20 years active service in the Reserve Component.) As a result, the VA hospital system, which was supposed to be free, went from $2/month co-pay for prescription drugs when President Bush took over in 2001, to $15/month for prescription drugs and an annual user fee of $250 for those who make at least $26,000/year. In other words, the VA has gone from costing those who laid their life on the line $24 to $430 in the last six years. Is this something someone who believed in government would allow?

Even worse is Walter Reed Hospital, considered to be the premier military hospital. However, those who were at the residence had to endure rats in the rooms, feces-stained matresses and old food. Defense Secretary Robert Gates decided to make heads roll, especially after the commanders insisted there was nothing to see in a scene reminiscent of Officer Barbrady in South Park. While this seemed to be a sign of better things to come, the soldiers were required to wake up every morning for inspection as a reminder of what happens to those who squeal.

Each of these are well-documented examples of the failures of anti-government conservatism. It is easy to see why cronies who don't care about their jobs and couldn't do them properly even if they wanted to are put in such positions. If someone doesn't believe that the government can work, what is wrong with letting some of your buddies make some money off the system? This is why we should make a pledge to refuse to vote for anyone who insists that the government can't do anything right and is the problem. Hopefully, this is the time when liberals stand up and make 2008 the year of transformation to a government that works for the people. The problem isn't the government, or incompetence, it is the anti-government conservatives who are trying their darndest to run the government into the ground.