Calblog

In Defense of John & Ken (and Dreier bashing)

I assume that everyone knows I work for KFI and that John & Ken don't particularly need anyone defending them regarding their show.

But I just have to wonder if some people heard the same show that I did yesterday.

I am a bit unclear to what extent the criticism read here is directed specifically at John & Ken versus the larger "outing" issue. I am also unclear if subsequent tentative retractions were referencing earlier charges of John & Ken's "sleazy" tactics per se, or were merely a retraction on the issue of the factual issues surrounding the outing story.

But assuming that there are still critics of John & Ken's tactics out there, let me offer this unsolicited defense -

John & Ken had on the author of an article in LA Weekly regarding stories surrounding David Dreier's sexual orientation.

John & Ken did not "out" Dreier - they merely reported the fact that stories were now being printed that "outed" him.

Some may feel that such a distinction shouldn't matter and that John & Ken should not

have had the guest on at all and ignored the issue. But I ask them to look at it from their perspective -

Since they spend everyday bashing Dreier over his substantive positions on illegal immigration, John & Ken felt that they had to address the fact that the story is being reported in other outlets. LA Weekly, KPFK, and various blogs.

Since they are on a crusade to boot Dreier from office over illegal immigration, they of course had to speak about this other issue which has the potential to affect voting patterns in the Congressman's district - even though they clearly think the sexual orientation issue would be a distraction to the larger cause.

Even Boi From Troy previously "reported on the reporting" as John and Ken did yesterday. I frankly fail to see the difference, even if John & Ken let the Weekly reporter have air time to repeat his assertions.

While John & Ken accepted the thrust of the reporter's contention as a hypothetical, they also challenged him as to why this story is being printed now after Dreier's 24-years in office. They also challenged him as to why a gay Congressman would necessarily feel obligated to vote for what is euphemistically referred to as the "gay agenda".

True - John & Ken did nothing to forcefully challenge LA Weekly's Doug Ireland regarding his proof. Nor did they explicitly criticize him for printing the article in the first place. They, along with many listeners, did in fact express understandable curiosity as to why Dreier pays his chief of staff so much.

However, John & Ken also made it quite clear that the issue is irrelevant as to why Dreier should be fired from office. It is also notable that they have not referenced the issue at all on their blog site which posts much of the damning evidence needed against Dreier on the immigration issue.

John & Ken have been deluged with hundreds of e-mails regarding stories of Dreier's sexual orientation for weeks on end. Other's have attempted to call into the station to inform John & Ken about various rumors regarding Dreier that are irrelevent to the issue of illegal immigration. Such callers never made it on the air.

John & Ken rightfully ignored the issue until yesterday when they devoted 30 minutes to it simply to acknowledge that a report was coming out in the LA Weekly about the issue. They gave the article's author his say and then went back to concentrating on the illegal immigration issue as they have been for weeks. To continue to simply ignore the very existence of the story in other media outlets would have seemed strange in the eyes of John & Ken listeners who already knew about the issue from other sources. This way, the hosts acknowledged it, let the air out of it so to speak, and then moved on.

They feel (as I do) that kicking out Dreier over an issue such as sexual orientation would be a tragedy when its so important to send a clear, direct, and unfiltered message that the reason he needs to go is simply and purely based on his stance regarding illegal immigration.

The point of John & Ken's interview yesterday was neither to challenge nor endorsing the LA Weekly author's contentions. It was simply to acknowledge the story's existence as an objective fact. (Not the story's contentions as fact - merely the story's existence.)

So let's quickly reiterate why Dreier needs to go:

Some (including the head mistress of this very site) have suggested that its important to keep Dreier since he is a powerful committee head and thus very influential within the GOP.

I have nothing but respect and gratitude for calblog's head mistress, but it is this very fact that argues in favor of firing Dreier. The fact that he is head of the Rules committee and the 3rd most powerful Congressman in the House absolutely guarantees that nothing will get done about illegal immigration since he will be able to kill any legislation that moves us in the right direction when the heat is off of him after the election.

It is better to fire him and replace him with another Republican as committee chair that has a better track record on the issue.

Meanwhile, Dreier is showing just how sleazy he is by blatantly trying to jump on the illegal immigration bandwagon only after John & Ken turned the heat on him over the issue.

Dreier even has the gall to suggest that it's not John & Ken who are responsible for getting him to submit his latest bill, but rather the recent Time magazine article that magically made him aware of this issue for the first time in 24-years.

All intellectually honest readers who have followed this issue must acknowledge this unassailable fact: Dreier wouldn't even be paying his current lip-service on the issue if it were not for John & Ken's efforts.

For that alone, these hosts deserve support - not criticism.

Money quote:

Groups that favor stricter immigration policies and those that support legalization measures agreed that a bill by Rep. David Dreier, R-Glendora, is a transparent election-year attempt to appease his right-wing critics.

"It's not something I would have expected from Congressman Dreier, who has just not been a champion of immigration enforcement and immigration restrictions,' said John Keeley, director of communications at the Center for Immigration Studies, which wants tighter controls on immigration. "It's conspicuous that Dreier is offering it. The timing is striking.'

You tell me if Dreier's Democratic opponent would really be worse than him on this key issue regarding virtually every quality of life issue throughout Southern California -

"It's really intriguing to me that this seasoned congressman has waited 24 years to do this, and he's doing it during an election year when he's losing ground,' said Cynthia Matthews, Dreier's Democratic opponent in the upcoming election.

Calling the congressman "slimy,' Matthews said Dreier is using the proposal as a red herring to hide his true colors on immigration. His continuing support for a guest worker program - which critics equate to amnesty - is out of step with most Californians, she said.

Bear in mind that Matthews will know full well if she wins the election that the only reason for her victory would be the fact the her Republican constituents want action on illegal immigration.

She knows that if she doesn't deliver, then she will be easily ousted in 2 short years. With that knowledge, voters who care about this issue have nothing to lose by trying her out.

Meanwhile, Dreier does a transparent 11th hour about-face in order to appease the gathering storm - knowing full well that after the election, he can bottle up his own legislation with some obscure House procedure that would ensure its defeat in such a way that he can claim that it was somehow "out of his hands" despite his "best efforts" as a lone Congressman. We all know (or at least should know) how the game is played. All lawyers know that the only time you have leverage in a negotiation is if you demonstrate that you are willing to walk away. Supporting the GOP at all costs by using the "Democrats are worse" excuse takes away that leverage.

There are times when you have to consider the bottom line - Do you want action taken on illegal immigration or not?

Of course there are no guarantees that anything will get done if Dreier is kicked out of office. But the salient fact is that it will be guaranteed that absolutely nothing will be done about the issue if Dreier manages to survive this latest election.

You can take that to the bank.

Posted by Justin Levine at September 23, 2004 01:49 PM | TrackBack