411 Politics Fact or Fiction: Week 42

Posted by Ryan Latimer on 05.07.2007

Thank God for government. Who else would we yell and point fingers at?

Good Monday, 411 ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to another edition of Fact or Fiction. I'm your host Ryan Latimer, and I'm one of the three persons on the planet who was unable to attend the opening weekend showing of Spider-Man 3. No, seriously, I couldn't. Don't judge me.

Luckily, this film opening didn't stop the world from spinning too much (a few nations shut down completely, but other than that…), so there is plenty to talk about in the messy world of politics on our end. As is the case lately, President Bush, Don Imus and illegal immigration come through - although in different forms as always - and former CIA Director George Tenet makes his debut. Quick -- of the 3 individuals mentioned, which one has the lowest unscientific approval rating? Let the contestants decide! 411's political guest of choice George Sirois and resident Dan Martin are this week's fighters, so it should be good.

Go…


1) As expected, President Bush vetoed the Iraq War spending bill with timetables for troop withdrawals, which was sent by the Democrat-controlled House last week. The House failed to override that veto on Wednesday, also expected. Enough is enough; the President made a mistake by vetoing this bill. The troops need a timetable to come home.

Dan Martin: FICTION - I have disagreed with many aspects of this war. I believe the public reasons for the public policy decision of invading Iraq were not accurate (even with Robinson's extensive work to prove otherwise). I think tactical mistakes and cultural misunderstandings have plagued the operation after its first few weeks. I am all for an intelligent solution can be found to get the troops home.

However, the Congress has certain constitutional powers including telling the executive branch how and when money will be spent and the President has the constitutional power to veto. At this point, constitutional powers and political realities are working themselves out. So I say fiction, because I believe in the process and hope that the President and Congress figure this out. My confidence that it will work out in a fashion that brings a satisfying conclusion to the Iraq (war) conflict is low. However, we may be in a damage control only phase.

George Sirois: FACT - There needs to be some kind of change here, because it's obvious that what's happening in Iraq now isn't working. There has to be some kind of progress towards getting our troops home because, while Bush has been saying it's promoting defeat if we set a schedule to come home, by vetoing this bill, he's sending a more clear message to the American people: I'm only here for another year and change, and after that, it's not my problem anymore.

As I've mentioned in the past, the whole situation here sucks and there seems to be no pathway to take that doesn't involve a truckload of cons to go along with any pros. In a weird way, I think there is really no "right" or "wrong" answer at the moment. Martin and Sirois's responses are proof. Let's just all pray it ends as soon as possible. That's all we can do. 0 for 1


2) Recently-fired shock jock Don Imus has sought the services of a top First Amendment lawyer in what early reports state is the first step in a lawsuit regarding his contract. Reportedly, Imus' contract stipulates that he be given a "warning" before being fired for doing what he made a career out of - making off-color jokes. Imus has a case and deserves retribution for his firing.

Dan Martin: FACT - I must plead ignorant and say I do not know much about Imus' contract beyond what the question stated, but if the data in the question is correct then Imus likely has a case. I wish he would simply start over somewhere and rebuild rather than going the litigious route, but he may be walking away from a lot of money if he simply gets another radio job in a few months.

George Sirois: FACT- I'm not a fan of Imus, never have been (I'm a Stern man myself), but what happened to him is a clear case of CBS Radio caving into pressure from Sharpton and Jackson and not CBS Radio "doing the right thing." Imus has been doing this kind of schtick on his show for YEARS and nobody has been this vocal about it until now. Mind you, I don't support what Imus said because he did it in a way that's less broad and much more direct – going after a specific group of young women – but yes, he should have gotten a warning and I believe he has a case.

I wasn't aware that such material was part of his contract. I have zero love for Don Imus and think his show is beyond tasteless (and I was even glad he got axed, honestly), but if CBS signed the dotted line, they are obligated to pay him. 1 for 2


3) Former CIA director George Tenet released his memoir At the Center of the Storm: My Years at the CIA, which criticized George W. Bush's handling of the Iraq war. Tenet appeared on 60 Minutes and made several accusations against the administration, which included his opinion that his infamous "slam dunk" statement was taken out of context and abused by the administration. Tenet has little-to-no credibility here.

Dan Martin: FACT - I think Tenet may be telling the truth. My instincts say Powell, Tenet and others knew they were overstating their case and reaching for reasons to invade Iraq . However, none of them resigned and none denounced the faulty job they did until a time when serious political consequences were no longer an option. Had Tenet or Powell come out before the 2004 or 2006 elections, they might have brought some real consequences to those they worked with but claim exaggerated or falsified the evidence for war (lied about is such an ugly term). Instead, Bush is a lame duck and the 2008 election cycle is unlikely to really be shaken by any of this so I think Tenet has little to no credibility.

George Sirois: FACT- What stopped him from speaking up when he was needed to do so? We've had so many Monday-Morning-Quarterbacks on this issue ever since we first set foot into Iraq in 2003, and quite frankly, we don't need another. What makes this particular case the most frustrating is that Tenet is trying to come off like someone who saw problems from the start and yet he was one of the most instrumental people that got us into this problem in the first place. To have access to that much information, then resign once the going got tough, get a Medal of Freedom and then turn around and write a book about how he was "misled" is disgusting. The man's trying to come off as a victim in this whole situation and, quite frankly, I would have had more respect for him if he wrote a book defending his original conclusions.

Eh, these government types are all the same. Now I remember why I became a cynic. 2 for 3


4) Thousands took to the streets last week in Los Angeles and other US cities to protest immigration reform and demand amnesty for illegal immigrants who "just want to work." Americans and legal immigrants should be insulted and angry by what these protesters are doing.

Dan Martin: FICTION - U.S. citizens should take an honest look at a couple of things. First, most of us benefit from the cheap labor immigrants provide. Many of our purchases knowingly or unknowingly fund the situation. It is easy to say "I am against illegal-immigration", but few are willing to put their money where their mouths are. Second, NAFTA is a piece of U.S. public policy and it makes the flow of goods and capital between Mexico and the U.S. an unregulated flow, but somehow labor is not allowed to flow? If you unite your economies, labor is also part of that equation. So either the U.S. needs to roll back NAFTA and raise tariffs or it needs to admit that a free market between the U.S. , Mexico and Canada implies that labor also has to be mobile. Finally, a human right to migrate exists in my mind. If a person faces degradation or a starving child due to a weak economy in Central America or Mexico, does their right to seek life (an unalienable right according to Jefferson) trump national laws – I would say yes. The key question is: where does one draw a line for where economic degradation is or is not a threat to life?

Having said all of that, I think it is also perfectly reasonable and after 9/11 absolutely essential that the U.S. know who is living here and why they are here. If someone wishes to work, let them come, but in such a way as to be documented. The E.U. is another free trade zone/common market and a person from Portugal can move to France for a job, but it is all documented. Why not do the same thing among the NAFTA nations? Of course, this might mean employers have to pay minimum wage and payroll taxes on immigrants working for them, but that is another issue.

George Sirois: FACT - Apparently, illegal immigrants expect to get amnesty if they tell the right people that they "just want to work" and, if that becomes a reality, we're going to see our problems multiply with many more people coming across the border – who want to work or want to cause harm to us – and claiming that they're only in America for work. This is not only insulting to our intelligence, but it's also insulting to the many immigrants in this country that put in the work to become American citizens.

Well, among a host of other problems our nation is currently seeing from there being no system in place, illegal immigration is actually COSTING Americans a lot of money, even when taking into account cheap labor (which is a whole other issue to discuss). I'm actually in the middle of reading Pat Buchanan's State of Emergency, and to say it is frightening isn't doing the situation justice. Go read that if you need proof. It would take too long here. 2 for 4


And so ends another week. Thanks as always, everyone. See you in seven.

-rl