search forgrantsrecipientsfunderspeoplewebsite
researcharound the webhot topicsissuesconservative philanthropyresources

Cursor.org

MediaTransparency.org sponsor

More stories by Bill Berkowitz

PERC receives Templeton Freedom Award for promoting 'enviropreneurs'

Neil Bush of Saudi Arabia

Newt Gingrich's back door to the White House

American Enterprise Institute takes lead in agitating against Iran

After six years, opposition gaining on George W. Bush's Faith Based Initiative

Frank Luntz calls Republican leadership in Washington 'One giant whining windbag'

Spooked by MoveOn.org, conservative movement seeks to emulate liberal powerhouse

Ward Connerly's anti-affirmative action jihad

Tom Tancredo's mission

Institute on Religion and Democracy slams 'Leftist' National Council of Churches

Media Transparency writers

Andrew J. Weaver
Andrew J. Weaver &
Nicole Seibert

Andrew J. Weaver, et. al.
Bill Berkowitz
Bryan G. Pfeifer
Dave Johnson
David Domke
David Neiwert
David Rubenstein
Dennis Redovich
Eric Alterman
Jerry Landay
Mark & Louise Zwick
Max Blumenthal
Michael Winship
Phil Wilayto
Rob Levine

Fundometer

Evaluate any page on the World Wide Web against our databases of people, recipients, and funders of the conservative movement.

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Bill Berkowitz
April 13, 2006

'Where's the outrage?'

Another fracture in the conservative evangelical movement

Ken Connor, the former head of the Family Research Council, is angry about the 'double standard' on ethical issues that may threaten the credibility of Christian conservative leaders.

The tumultuous reception accorded Tom DeLay at the late-March "War on Christians and the Values Voters in 2006" conference appears to have triggered at least two distinct reactions. For DeLay, the love in the room assured him that there would be life after Congress, so he decided the time was right to announce his resignation from the House. For Ken Connor, the former head of the Family Research Council and the founder and president of the Center for a Just Society (website), the reaction appeared to be a tipping point; a visible indicator that his Christian evangelical brethren had lost their bearings when it came to identifying and criticizing unethical behavior.

DeLay subsequently announced his resignation. Connor wrote a blistering piece criticizing the double standard on ethical issues that Christian evangelical leaders were embracing.

"Where's the outrage?" was the clarion call -- one wag called it a "forlorn cry" -- of Senator Bob Dole's 1996 run for the presidency as it approached the final weeks of the campaign. Staring at defeat, Dole made a final attempt to stir up his conservative base by appearing at rallies, reciting a litany of Clinton Administration misdeeds, and following it with a vigorous cry of "where's the outrage?"

At a late-October 1996 rally in Houston, a frustrated Dole told supporters:

... I don't understand -- Vice President Gore goes to a Buddhist temple where everybody takes a vow of poverty and comes out with $122,000. And so good old Al, he explains it to the media, oh, I was on an outreach program. So that'll be the end of that. Nobody'll look beyond that in the media. That's the end of that one. And then we have the President of the United States sitting down here with 900 FBI files, might be one of yours, might be one of yours. And then we have the President of the United States who won't say he will not pardon somebody who did business with him and might implicate him later on. Where is the outrage in America? Where is the outrage in America? Where has the media gone in America? Where is the outrage in America? Can you imagine former President Bush doing one of those things? No! And you'll never imagine Bob Dole doing one of those things either. So where's the outrage? Where's the outrage?

Despite the possibility of losing movement friends, Ken Connor recently voiced his outrage about Christian conservatives' failure to condemn the ethical abuses of Tom DeLay in a 600+-word essay that appeared on the front page of his organization's website, and was sent out to subscribers of his Ideas in Action e-mail newsletter.

Connor, a Florida-based lawyer and the co-author, with John Revell, of "Sinful Silence: When Christians Neglect Their Civic Duty," maintained that the most troublesome aspect of the DeLay affair "has been the willingness of far too many Christian conservatives to cast a deaf ear and a blind eye toward DeLay's misdeeds. In the midst of ethical scandals swirling around DeLay, Christian conservatives closed ranks and rallied around him.([Marvin Olasky's] World magazine and Baptist Press have been notable exceptions)."

While it's true that DeLay "has been a champion of a number of causes near and dear to social conservatives," at the same time, "his excesses in converting power into perks have made him the poster-boy for the Democrat's charges that Republicans are mired in a 'culture of corruption,'" Connor wrote.

Connor is troubled that DeLay has become a major league martyr to many of his fellow Christian conservatives. At the recent "War on Christians and the Values Voters in 2006" conference held in Washington, DC in late March DeLay was treated as a conquering hero.

In introducing the former House Majority Leader, Rick Scarborough, the founder of Vision America and the convener of the conference, said that he believed that DeLay "is a man that ... God has appointed." Scarborough told the crowd that he thought that "the most damaging thing that Tom DeLay has done in his life is take his faith seriously into public office, which made him a target for all those who despise the cause of Christ." After DeLay concluded his remarks, Scarborough laid it on even thicker: "God always does his best work right after a crucifixion," Scarborough bellowed.

"In explaining his decision to leave Congress ... DeLay ... said the moment that 'pretty much clinched it for me' was during a speech he gave" at the "War on Christians" conference, US News & World Report's Dan Gilgoff recently reported. "DeLay received so many standing ovations that he realized he could continue his political career outside Congress, inside the conservative Christian movement."

The overwhelmingly positive reception DeLay received came despite the fact that the soon to be former congressman "is the subject of a state criminal prosecution in Texas involving money laundering and illegal contributions, and a possible Federal criminal investigation involving illegal bribes and gifts," Ken Conner pointed out. "Two DeLay aides have already pleaded guilty to charges of bribery and corruption. Former super-lobbyist, Jack Abramoff, who DeLay once described as one of his closest friends, has pled guilty to a variety of charges involving bribery and corruption, and is reportedly singing like a bird," he added.

"Evangelical leaders have been among DeLay's most outspoken defenders since ethics allegations started swirling around him a year and a half ago, the US News & World Report pointed out. "A Washington dinner last year organized as a show of support for DeLay in tough times featured Family Research Council President and a videotaped message from Focus on the Family founder James Dobson."

"We're saddened by your announcement," Pat Robertson told DeLay during an interview on The 700 Club. " ... You've been a stalwart for conservative causes."

Rick Scarborough acknowledged that not everyone in the Christian conservative community was happy to see DeLay at the "War on Christians" confab. "I received an enormous amount of negative communication," Scarborough said. "But I happen to believe in the old-fashioned adage 'innocent until proven guilty.'"

There are other examples of Christian Right luminaries who have received the velvet glove treatment over charges of unethical/criminal behavior.

Ralph Reed, the former executive director of the Christian Coalition is currently involved in a campaign to win the GOP's nomination to run for lieutenant governor of Georgia. In recent months, the campaign has hit some major bumps as more has become known about his dealings with super lobbyist Jack Abramoff's gambling initiatives. While Reed has been criticized by local Georgia Conservatives, he has yet to be taken to the woodshed by major Christian conservative leaders.

And then there is the case of Claude Allen, the conservative African American icon who was recently forced to resign after revelations that he had devised a scheme to bilk Washington-area big-box stores out of thousands of dollars by claiming refunds on items that he hadn't paid for. Allen, who cut his political teeth at the side of ultra-conservative North Carolina Senator Jesse Helms, was the chief White House domestic policy adviser who had received near universal praise from Christian conservative leaders, including a spokesperson for Focus on the Family, who called him as "a tireless champion of the family and traditional values." Thus far Allen has been given a pass by fellow Christian conservatives.

Some Christian conservatives, such as the editorial staff of World magazine, an evangelical weekly, have not been silent about Reed's relationship with Abramoff: "Some conservative evangelicals may regard the purpose of our magazine to do public-relations work for Christians," editor Marvin Olasky, a former adviser to President Bush, told US News & World Report. "But as journalists, our goal is to tell the truth. God does not need our public relations."

Might Connor’s protest about his silent comrades stem from left over bad feelings from when he resigned as president of the conservative Family Research Council in July 2003. At the time according to Christianity Today, Connor “cited unspecified ‘professional and personal reasons.’”

"Knowledgeable sources told CT Connor resigned in part because of a disagreement with members of the board of directors over the proposed Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA), but FRC founder James Dobson said there was no ill will and that the disagreement did not cause Connor's resignation."

"Ken has said emphatically that this issue was not the reason he resigned as president of FRC," Dobson told CT in a statement. "Good people often disagree on strategy, but that does not have to mean there is resentment or ill will between them. In this case, there was none of which I am aware."

At the time, Connor said that he didn't "want to cause division among the brethren."

Shortly after Connor founded the Center for a Just Society he got into a minor dust-up with the National Review's Ramesh Ponnuru over the issue of tort reform. Ponnuru charged Connor with opposing tort reform -- a no no among conservatives -- as evidenced by Connor's involvement in filing suits against nursing homes. Connor fired back a barbed response that maintained, "testimony of FDA employees suggests that the agency is much more interested in protecting the profits of drug companies than the health of the people who consume their products."

Whatever his motivation, Connor's conservative politics -- he represented Florida Governor Jeb Bush during the Terri Schiavo case -- have not changed. He appears to be motivated by a sincere concern about how Christian conservatives will maintain their political influence. If DeLay, and similar wrongdoers get a free pass, the public might view this as gross hypocrisy and "Christian conservative leaders" will lose their "credibility in the political arena."

Connor maintained "they must not apply a double standard -- one for our friends and one for our adversaries." Conservatives cannot just criticize "the peccadilloes of Bill Clinton and the Democrats and ignore those of Tom DeLay and the Republicans. They must stand on principle and apply those principles equally across the political spectrum.

"When politicians affirm those principles, Christian leaders should affirm the politicians. When politicians violate those principles, Christian leaders should exhort them. In other words, Christian leaders must be willing to be 'equal opportunity' critics. If they fail to do so, they risk becoming indistinguishable from the rest of the political pack."

Printer friendly

sign in, or register to email stories or comment on them.

divider

 

 

MORE ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Bill Berkowitz
March 16, 2007

PERC receives Templeton Freedom Award for promoting 'enviropreneurs'

Right Wing foundation-funded anti-environmental think tank grabbing a wider audience for 'free market environmentalism'

On the 15th anniversary of Terry Anderson and Donald Leal's book "Free Market Environmentalism" -- the seminal book on the subject -- Anderson, the Executive Director of the Bozeman, Montana-based Property and Environment Research Center (PERC - formerly known as the Political Economy Research Center) spoke in late-January at an event sponsored by Squaw Valley Institute at the Resort at Squaw Creek in California. While it may have been just another opportunity to speak on "free market environmentalism" and not the kickoff of a "victory tour," nevertheless it comes at a time when PERC's ideas are taking root.

In a story written just before Anderson's northern California appearance, Truckee Today's Karen Sloan described PERC as an organization that "contends that private property rights encourage good stewardship of natural resources." The story, headlined "'Enviroprenuer' scholar to speak at Resort at Squaw Creek," pointed out that "PERC scholars argue that government subsidies often degrade the environment, that market incentives can spur individuals to conserve and protect the environment and that polluters should be liable for the harm they cause others."

On its website, PERC -- a non-profit, tax-exempt 501(c)(3) organization founded in 1980 -- calls itself "the nation's oldest and largest institute dedicated to original research that brings market principles to resolving environmental problems." PERC maintains that it "pioneered the approach known as free market environmentalism."

Read the full report >

Bill Berkowitz
March 10, 2007

Neil Bush of Saudi Arabia

During recent visit, President’s brother describes the country as a 'kind of tribal democracy'

In late February, only a few days after Saudi Arabia beheaded four Sri Lankan robbers and then left their headless bodies on public display in the capital of Riyadh, Neil Bush, for the fourth time in the past six years, showed up for the country's Jeddah Economic Forum. The Guardian reported that Human Rights Watch "said the four men had no lawyers during their trial and sentencing, and were denied other basic legal rights." In an interview with Arab News, the Saudi English language paper, Bush described the country as "a kind of tribal democracy."

Neil Mallon Bush, the son of President George H. W. Bush and the brother of President George W. Bush, attended the forum to renew old family friendships and to drum up a little business for his educational software company. "The Jeddah Economic Forum has been very productive," Bush told Arab News. "I have been to this conference four times since 2002. I have seen it develop from the very beginning. There was less participation in the past, now there is more international participation."

These days, Neil Bush is the chairman and CEO of Ignite Learning, a company devoted to developing technology-assisted curriculum. Ignite calls it COW: "Curriculum on Wheels." In an interview with Arab News' Siraj Wahab, Bush talked enthusiastically about his company's mission: "We are building a model in the United States for developing curriculum that is engaging to grade-school kids, and our model is to deploy this engaging content through a device. So it is easy for any teacher to use our device through projectors and speakers. The curriculum is loaded on the device. We use animation and video and those kinds of things to light up learning in classrooms for kids. It helps teachers connect with their kids. We are planning to develop an Arabic version of that model."

A video on Ignite!'s website makes clear the enervating, rote approach to learning taken by the Bush family. While this may not be an advance in actual education, it does serve to enrich Neil Bush and commodify teachers. In concept it is much like Channel One, whereby Chris Whittle enriched himself forcing millions of primary school students to watch repackaged TV News sandwiched between corporate advertising.

Read the full report >

Bill Berkowitz
March 2, 2007

Newt Gingrich's back door to the White House

American Enterprise Institute "Scholar" and former House Speaker blames media for poll showing 64 percent of the American people wouldn't vote for him under any circumstances

Whatever it is that former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has come to represent in American politics, the guy is nothing less than fascinating. One day he's espousing populist rhetoric about the need to cut the costs of college tuition and the next day he's talking World War III. One day he's claiming that the "war on terror" may force the abridgement of fundamental first amendment rights and the next he's advancing a twenty-first century version of his Contract with America. At the same time he's publicly proclaiming how "stupid" it is that the race for the presidency has already started you know that he's trying to figure out how to out finesse Rudy, McCain and Romney for the nomination. And last week, when Fox News' Chris Wallace cited a poll showing that 64 percent of the public would never vote for him, he was quick to blame those results on how unfairly he was treated by the mainstream media back in the day.

These days, Gingrich, who is simultaneously a "Senior Fellow" at the American Enterprise Institute and a "Distinguished Visiting Fellow" at the Hoover Institution, is making like your favorite uncle, fronting a YouTube video contest offering "prizes" to whoever creates the best two-minute video on why taxes suck. Although the prizes may not be particularly attractive to the typical YouTuber, nevertheless Gingrich recently launched the "Winning the Future, Goose that laid the Golden Egg, You Tube Contest." According to Newt.org, participants are to "Create a 120 second video explaining why tax increases will hurt the American economy, leading to less revenue for the government, not more. Or in other words, explain why we shouldn't cook the goose that laid the golden eggs (the American economy) by raising taxes."

Although he hasn't formerly announced his candidacy -- and he probably won't anytime soon -- Gingrich definitely has his eyes on the White House. He's just still figuring out how he will get there. Over the past several months Gingrich has been ubiquitous on the media and political scenes.

Read the full report >

Bill Berkowitz
February 25, 2007

American Enterprise Institute takes lead in agitating against Iran

Despite wrongheaded predictions about the war on Iraq, neocons are on the frontlines advocating military conflict with Iran

After doing such a bang up job with their advice and predictions about the outcome of the war on Iraq, would it surprise you to learn that America's neoconservatives are still in business? While at this time we are not yet seeing the same intense neocon invasion of our living rooms -- via cable television's news networks -- that we saw during the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, nevertheless, a host of policy analysts at conservative think tanks -- most notably the American Enterprise Institute -- are being heeded on Iran by those who count - folks inside the Bush Administration.

Long before the Bush Administration began escalating its rhetoric and upping the ante about the supposed "threat" posed to the US by Iran, well-paid inside-the-beltway think tankers were agitating for some kind of action against that country. Some have argued for ratcheting up sanctions and freezing bank accounts, others have advocated increasing financial aid to opposition groups, and still others have argued that a military strike at Iran's nuclear facilities is absolutely essential. For all, the desired end result is regime change in Iran.

If President Bush plunges the U.S. into some kind of military conflict with Iran, you can thank the Washington, D.C.-based American Enterprise Institute (AEI), a key player in the current debate over Iran.

President Bush acknowledged as much when he recently appeared at the AEI for a much-publicized speech on his War on Terror, which focused on the front in Afghanistan.

Read the full report >

Bill Berkowitz
February 18, 2007

After six years, opposition gaining on George W. Bush's Faith Based Initiative

Unmentioned in the president's State of the Union speech, the program nevertheless continues to recruit religious participants and hand out taxpayer money to religious groups

With several domestic policy proposals unceremoniously folded into President Bush's recent State of the Union address, two pretty significant items failed to make the cut. Despite the president's egregiously tardy response to the event itself, it was nevertheless surprising that he didn't even mention Hurricane Katrina: He didn't offer up a progress report, words of hope to the victims, or come up with a proposal for moving the sluggish rebuilding effort forward. There were no "armies of compassion" ready to be unleashed, although it should be said that many in the religious community responded to the disaster much quicker than the Bush Administration. In the State of the Union address, however, there was no "compassionate conservatism" for the victims of Hurricane Katrina.

The other item that didn't get any State of the Union play is a project that was once envisioned to be the centerpiece of the president's domestic agenda: his faith-based initiative. As Joseph Bottum, editor of the conservative publication First Things -- "The Journal of Religion, Culture, and Public Life" -- pointed out, Bush "didn't mention faith-based initiatives, which...[he] once claimed would be his great legacy."

The president's faith-based initiative is facing several tough court battles.

Read the full report >

Bill Berkowitz
February 10, 2007

Frank Luntz calls Republican leadership in Washington 'One giant whining windbag'

On the outs with the GOP, legendary degrader of discourse is moving to California

He doesn't make great art; nothing he does elevates the human spirit; he doesn't illuminate, he bamboozles. He has become expert in subterfuge, hidden meanings, word play and manipulation. Frank Luntz has been so good at what he does that those paying close attention gave it its own name: "Luntzspeak."

In a 10-page addendum to his new book ""Words that Work -- It's Not What You Say Its What People Hear," Luntz, formerly a top political pollster for the Republican Party, may have written so critically of the party's recent efforts that he has become persona non grata. Luntz used to be one of the party's go-to-guys for political guidance and strategy, a counselor to such GOP stalwarts as former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, former New York City Major Rudy Giuliani and Trent Lott.

"The Republican Party that lost those historic elections was a tired, cranky shell of the articulate reformist, forward-thinking movement that was swept into office in 1994 on a wave of positive change," Luntz wrote. According to syndicated columnist Robert Novak, Luntz went on to say that the Republicans of 2006 "were an ethical morass, more interested in protecting their jobs than protecting the people they served. The 1994 Republicans came to 'revolutionize' Washington. Washington won."

Read the full report >

Bill Berkowitz
February 4, 2007

Spooked by MoveOn.org, conservative movement seeks to emulate liberal powerhouse

Fueled with Silicon Valley money, TheVanguard.org will have Richard Poe, former editor of David Horowitz's FrontPage magazine as its editorial and creative director

As Paul Weyrich, a founding father of the modern conservative movement and still a prominent actor in it, likes to say, he learned a great deal about movement building by closely observing what liberals were up to in the late 1960s and early 1970s.

Flash forward some 30-plus years and an Internet entrepreneur believes that it is time for a new conservative movement. He too has seen an entity on the left he admires enough to want to emulate: MoveOn.org.

"The left has been brilliant at leveraging technology," said Rod Martin, founder of TheVanguard.org, "and so have we to a point: our bloggers and news sites are amazing, and the RNC's get-out-the-vote software is unparalleled. But no one on our side has even begun to create anything like MoveOn. And after 2006, if we want to survive, much less build a long-term conservative majority, we better start, and fast."

Read the full report >

Bill Berkowitz
January 29, 2007

Ward Connerly's anti-affirmative action jihad

Founder and Chair of the American Civil Rights Institute scouting five to nine states for new anti-affirmative action initiatives

Fresh from his most recent victory -- in Michigan this past November -- Ward Connerly, the Black California-based maven of anti-affirmative action initiatives, appears to be preparing to take his jihad on the road. According to a mid-December report in the San Francisco Chronicle, Connerly said that he was "exploring moves into nine other states."

During a mid-December conference call Connerly allowed that he had scheduled visits to Arizona, Colorado, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, Oregon, South Dakota, Wyoming and Utah during the upcoming months to get a handle on how many campaigns he might launch.

"Twenty-three states have systems for putting laws directly before voters in the form of ballot initiatives," the Chronicle pointed out. "Three down and 20 to go," Connerly boasted. "We don't need to do them all, but if we do a significant number, we will have demonstrated that race preferences are antithetical to the popular will of the American people."

"The people of California, Washington and Michigan have shown that institutions that implement these [affirmative action] programs are living on borrowed time," Connerly said.

Read the full report >

Bill Berkowitz
January 25, 2007

Tom Tancredo's mission

The Republican congressman from Colorado will try to woo GOP voters with anti-immigration rhetoric and a boatload of Christian right politics

These days, probably the most recognizable name in anti-immigration politics is Colorado Republican Congressman Tom Tancredo. Over the past year, Tancredo has gone from a little known congressman to a highly visible anti-immigration spokesperson. "Tancredo has thoroughly enmeshed himself in the anti-immigration movement and with the help of CNN talk show host Lou Dobbs, he has been given a national megaphone," Devin Burghart, the program director of the Building Democracy Initiative at the Center for New Community, a Chicago-based civil rights group, told Media Transparency.

Now, Tancredo, who has represented the state's Sixth District since 1999, has joined the long list of candidates contending for the GOP's 2008 presidential nomination. In mid-January Tancredo announced the formation of an exploratory committee -- Tom Tancredo for a Secure America -- the first step to formally declaring his candidacy. While his announcement didn't cause quite the stir as the announcement by Illinois Democratic Senator Barak Obama that he too was forming an exploratory committee, nevertheless Tancredo's move did not go completely unnoticed.

While voters' concerns over the war in Iraq and the GOP's "culture of corruption" predominated in the 2006 midterms, Tancredo will be doing his best to make immigration an issue for the presidential campaign of 2008.

Read the full report >

Bill Berkowitz
January 18, 2007

Institute on Religion and Democracy slams 'Leftist' National Council of Churches

New report from conservative foundation-funded IRD charges the NCC with being a political surrogate for MoveOn.org, People for the American Way and other liberal organizations

If you prefer your religious battles sprinkled with demagoguery, sanctimoniousness, and simplistic attacks, the Institute on Religion and Democracy's (IRD) latest broadside against the National Council of Churches (NCC) certainly fits the bill.

For those who remember a similar IRD-led attack on the World Council of Churches two decades ago the IRD's latest blast appears to be -- to borrow a phrase from New York Yankee great Yogi Berra -- "déjà vu all over again."

The IRD excoriated the World Council of Churches (WCC) for allegedly being tools of the anti-American left over its support of the Nelson Mandela-led African National Congress in South Africa, and its opposition to President Ronald Reagan's contra wars in Central America; wars that destabilized governments and were responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilians. And now it is doing a similar job on the NCC.

"The institute, a Washington-based think tank, is allied with conservative groups on issues such as same-sex marriage. From its founding in 1981, its primary effort has been to challenge what it calls the 'leftist' political positions of mainline Protestant denominations, such as the United Methodist Church and the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)," the Washington Post recently reported.

Author and longtime right wing watcher Frederick Clarkson recently described the IRD as an "inside the beltway, neoconservative agency [that] has waged a war of attrition against the historic mainline protestant churches in the U.S."

Read the full report >

View All Original Reseach >