We were preparing our bodies for ritual suicide by syrup at the dreary prospect of John Procaccino filling in back-to-back for the vacationing Dave Ross (KIRO m-f, 9a-12p) and Ron Reagan (m-f 12-1p), when we read in the PI that Jim McDermott, 69, the doddering but heroic Seattle Congressman will do blabber duty for one week on the Dave Ross Show.
According to political writer Neil Modie:
McDermott's first guest Monday will be Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., an outspoken advocate for the military but one who, like McDermott, has become a harsh critic of the Bush administration's Iraq war policy.
McDermott said he is trying to line up liberal House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., as a guest, as well as other congressional colleagues. On Monday and Tuesday, KIRO radio personality John Procaccino will co-host the show to help McDermott ease into the job.
Wow, an innovative programming decision by KIRO! We hope this is the beginning of the renaissance of the big Seattle talker.
The $250-$350 per shift for the KIRO talk-job could be a factor in the Congressman's decision to do the on-air week. His Queen Anne Hill home is in financial jeopardy from legal defense costs from the civil suit filed by Ohio Majority Leader John Boehner over whether McDermott's dissemination of an intercepted cellphone conversation of public officials should be considered free speech.
Bill Clinton will be in town June 3 to help him raise some dough for his defense fund.
But McD is most famous (or notorious) for the ramifications that came raining down like SCUD missiles in 2002, after he stood atop a Baghdad mosque on a Sunday morning and told George Stephanopolis on ABC's This Week, "The president of the United States will lie to the American people in order to get us into this war." He proclaimed there were no weapons of mass destruction.
When no WMD were found in Iraq, the war took bad and lengthy turns, and many of the pronouncements that led us into war by George Bush and his men were proven to have been fabricated- sometimes feloniously- McDermott's pre-war warnings and actions became prescient and vindicating.
His outspokenness put him into Michael Moore's tremendously successful 2004 anti administration documentary, Fahrenheit 911, and made him an icon to national progressives.
It also caused him to be publicly reviled by Republicans and earned him the sobriquet, "Bagdad Jim," although he prefers "Sunny Jim."
In 2004, while leading the House of Representatives in the Pledge of Allegiance, McDermott left out "under God," causing a stink of Biblical proportions after Republicans (who, he says, assigned someone to watch his lips) pounced on this sin of omission. "One more time," intoned former Republican Chairman, Chris Vance, "Jim McDermott has embarrassed Washington."
McDermott’s told us: "The idea that you have to pledge allegiance to your country and say that it’s 'under God,' in my view, is getting away from the separation of church and state. I wasn’t try to stir up trouble, I just [said it] like I always have."
Also in 2004, an embarrassed McDermott had to return $5,000 donated to his legal defense fund by Shakir al-Khafaji, an Iraqi-born Detroit businessman who accompanied him to Baghdad in 2002. Al-Khafaji acknowledged to the Financial Times of London that he received lucrative vouchers for Iraqi oil from the Saddam Hussein regime.
PI columnist and frequent McDermott critic, Joel Connelly, told us the Congressman has a record of "putting wind behind flights of fancy of America's far left." He points to the Congressman's December, 2003 comments implying that Bush had manipulated the timing of the Saddam capture for political reasons. In July, 2004, on a trip to India, he repeated a rumor to a group of Indian businessmen that the Bush administration had already caught Osama bin Laden and that they are "trying to decide what day they should bring him out."
In both cases, Republicans roiled up a coast-to-coast tsunami of outrage. "Again," sputtered Vance, "McDermott has embarrassed this state with his irresponsible ranting."
Jim McDermott can be Jim McDermott because he represents perhaps the safest liberal district in America. These things have caused major or minor kerfuffles in the press but none of them has done anything but endear McDermott to the famously progressive Seattle voters. He's one of the longest lived pols in the state.
A psychiatrist by profession, McDermott served in the U.S. Navy during Vietnam, and later moved to Seattle
After two terms in the State House, McDermott ran for the state Senate, and was re-elected three times, tapering off his medical practice as he got more active politically. Always interested in public health, he is most proud of writing the Basic Health Care Act, which in 1987, made Washington the first state to enact managed medical care for the employed, but uninsured.
He lost governor races in 1972, 1980, and 1984. In the 1980 race, he won the nomination by beating the incumbent Dixie Lee Ray, the eccentric, conservative Democrat, but was defeated in the November Reagan landslide by Seattle's John Spellman, Washington's last Republican governor.
People often get angry at Sunny Jim McDermott, for what he says, or simply for being the one who says it. But he's no firebrand, no zealot, no Ralph Nader. Grandfatherly and a little plodding, he has a sweet Irish look, a hearty laugh, an easy-going speaking style, and a self-deprecating manner that's, well, nice.
He has some radio experience, having been a guest on KIRO many times, and even did some hosting in the 1990's.
Can someone tell Procaccino to clear the flem outta his throat. It is disgusting to listen to.
Posted by: John Mortensen | May 26, 2006 at 02:44 PM
Ewwww! Hawk up that phlegm, John P! Yuck!
Posted by: Norah | May 26, 2006 at 03:44 PM
That only person I know that truly embarrasses Washington State - besides Dori Monson that is - and Tim Eyeman - is Chris Vance. I think even the republicans are tired of him.
I sure hope that McDermott is successful in these legal proceedings. The article in the Stranger said that if McDermott wins, Boehner doesn't have to pay McDermott's legal fees. But, if Boehner wins, McDermott does have to pay Boehner's fees. Do you get that?
The article also said that this issue was already decided and shouldn't even be revisited. While it should be a no-brainer for McDermott, the fact that we now have a more conservative court makes a win for him a little less secure. Gonzeles is sure doing his best to change the way the first amendment has been viewed.
Finally, I feel kind of sorry for Procaccino having to train all the people that replace him. In places I've worked, that would be a union issue!
Posted by: joanie | May 26, 2006 at 03:48 PM
"and many of the pronouncements that led us into war by George Bush and his men were proven to have been fabricated"
Were they fabricated when Clinton bombed Iraq during "Desert Fox" in 1998, too? You know, when Sec. Def. Cohen said: "We may have delayed his weapons program for about a year."
McDermott is not heroic.
Posted by: SP fan | May 27, 2006 at 05:53 AM
I went to Mike Webb's "two tin cans affair" that constitutes the current incarnation of The Mike Webb Show last night and discovered that he's playing tapes fron the 19th of May show. Apparently he hasn't darkened the door of the top floor studio in the huge Progressive Networks Building downtown(teeheeheeteeheehee)for a week.( I noticed that now he is sayng 'distributed by Progressive Networks' which seems a subtle change, but I can't be sure. When I googled Mike Webb with Santa Cruz, I got no refernce to his supposed radio station there. The only google link I found for him was one for his "internet radio show".) When I punched the show up, one of his interchangeable, whiny-voiced "America is bad, War is bad" psuedointellectual leftist koolaid types was talking ( are you sitting down?) against Bush.
Posted by: Tommy008 | May 27, 2006 at 06:54 AM
Actually now that I remember , he did a show on Monday or Tuesday night of this week.
Posted by: Tommy008 | May 27, 2006 at 06:59 AM
I like Baghdad Jim. I like most anyone who isn't afraid to express their thoughts dispite knowing that they will be condemned for what they say.
Some of you should be thrilled, in fact almost orgasmic over the upcoming week.
But I bet you will be upset. Poor Jim won't be radical enough for you.
Posted by: Ryder | May 27, 2006 at 10:09 AM
SP...Clinton and his penis have not been President for a long time now.
Sorry, but it just doesn't work anymore to blame Bush's foibles on Bill, nor "Clinton did it too." GeorgieBoy wants to be thought of as the Decider, and so the accountabiltiy for the various messes hangs on THIS administration.
Posted by: sparky | May 27, 2006 at 10:25 AM
Also SP:
"You know, when Sec. Def. Cohen said: "We may have delayed his weapons program for about a year."
Thanks SP. I was nostalgic for the memory of an administration which was actually humble enough to tell what they believed would be true. Yeah, Cohen was honest for sure!
Isn't it nice to know that not all administrations are arrogant and dishonest enough to make up the so-called facts as they go? And then keep repeating them?
Thanks again for a sweet memory.
Posted by: joanie | May 27, 2006 at 11:30 AM
Hey, Andrew! Get oughta bed, tell Rachel to put on some coffee, and answer Postman's question about Murray's vote! I'm curious, also:
"The Northwest Progressive Institute blog says in a message to "all you impractical progressives out there who constantly spend your time online railing against Maria Cantwell" that a no vote on Hayden is a "good vote" and they should quit picking on Cantwell.
What's that mean about Patty Murray's vote in favor then?"
Aren't you sorry to taught me to link? (I know you are, Michael!)
Posted by: joanie | May 27, 2006 at 11:52 AM
Just my own humble observation:
Maria, for all her flaws, seems to be more "current", meaning she seems more aware of and active toward the issues that are currently controversial and important to most of us. Patty seems to have decided to take veterans as her cause, and a noble cause it is. But I wish she would speak out on health care for the rest of us, for the rights of the rest of us..in other words, I guess I wish she were more of a risk taker like Russ Feingold...but I know she never will be. I would be happy if she would just speak OUT on some of the issues. I have been really disappointed in her go-along votes on Alito and now Hayden. I know that since Dems are in the minority, her no vote would not affect the outcome, but that actually means she has nothing to lose by voting no. So, the message that sends to me is she LIKES Hayden and Alito. And that is what will influence my vote when her re-election comes up.
Posted by: sparky | May 27, 2006 at 02:11 PM
Sparky, for what reasons should Murray have voted against Hayden and Alito? Just curious again. Looking for your reasoning here . . .
Posted by: joanie | May 27, 2006 at 02:50 PM
Alito sees nothing wrong with granting the President powers that we usually associate with kings and emporers, thus the term "emperial presidency."
Hayden does not understand the 4th amendment, as evidenced by the argument he got into with senators over the wording needed to snoop on Americans. He does not acknowledge "probable cause."
He is head of the NSA and just this morning the Bush administration asked federal judges in New York and Michigan to dismiss a pair of lawsuits filed over the National Security Agency's domestic eavesdropping program, saying litigation would jeopardize state secrets. Justice Department lawyers said it would be impossible to defend the legality of the spying program without disclosing classified information that could be of value to suspected terrorists.
National Intelligence Director John Negroponte invoked the state secrets privilege on behalf of the administration, writing that disclosure of such information would cause "exceptionally grave damage" to national security.
Hayden says he will work "independently" of the the Pentagon and the White House.
Yeah right.
I could go on and on, but I keep in mind the bandwith issues here.
So Patty votes for both of these guys. Ugh.
Posted by: sparky | May 27, 2006 at 03:01 PM
I appreciate your response. I don't think Michael is overzealous about bandwidth if we're making points . . . better than generalities. I could be wrong . . . I'm sure he'll let me know!
Also, appreciate your points and have to think about them a little. I emailed Maria and told her I'd never vote for her again because of something she did - can't remember right now what it was. But, she took on Ted Stevens and that hit a homerun for me. I think they have to choose their battles . . . sometimes I get a little emotional and blame them for stuff that after thinking about, I'm more understanding. So . . . I'll consider your post. Gives me more to think about. Thanks.
Regarding Hayden, how can he not acknowledge probable cause when it is in the language? I'm thinking he said it wasn't there . . . but it is. He'll have to acknowledge it, won't he? I'll have to check that out. I remember the controversy but truly thought he didn't know about it! Which is kind of funny!
Posted by: joanie | May 27, 2006 at 03:42 PM
Correction...Patty voted NO on Alito. A point for her.
Posted by: sparky | May 27, 2006 at 03:46 PM
emperial presidency = unitary executive, also.
Posted by: sparky | May 27, 2006 at 03:47 PM
It was the Alito vote that I emailed Maria on. You reminded me because I also emailed Murray and praised her for voting no on him! Oh well, I like both of them really! (Maria and Patty!)
Yeah, I understood the "emperor" comment. He is the decider, afterall. :)
Posted by: joanie | May 27, 2006 at 04:00 PM
yep I got them turned around on the voting.
as someone pointed out to me, we will continue to vote for these women because a republican in their places would hardly get us where we want to go, but it is disappointing that noone else can afford $$$$$$ to take them on.
Posted by: sparky | May 27, 2006 at 05:00 PM
Michael, the June 3 event with President Clinton has been postponed until sometime later this summer. Not that he's dissing Jim -- far from it. Bubba won't be here to raise money for Cantwell either.
Posted by: Neal Traven | May 27, 2006 at 09:20 PM
Did anyone else hear Frank Shiers making an insulting remark about Dave Ross last night? It happened between 9:15 and 9:30.
What an asshole.
Posted by: Dana | May 28, 2006 at 08:05 AM
what did he say
Posted by: sparky | May 28, 2006 at 08:27 AM
I tried to listen to Frank last night - the first time in months! - and when he fell on the floor laughing about Jefferson and the $100,000 in his freezer, I switched to a replay of Mike Malloy. I think I listened for about an hour during which time he took about five calls.
What did he say about Dave?
Posted by: joanie | May 28, 2006 at 11:31 AM
He insinuated that Dave Ross would use the incident of Marines killing Iraquis, including women and children helpless in their beds, as an excuse to make political hay and criticize the war, and called that "treasonous".
He should be required to publicly aplogize to Dave, and then be fired.
Posted by: Dana | May 28, 2006 at 01:19 PM
Not only does he offer nothing intelligent as a response to anything, he has absolutely no class.
Posted by: joanie | May 28, 2006 at 02:08 PM
Why does anyone listen to him?
Posted by: sparky | May 28, 2006 at 03:49 PM
I heard Frank Shiers call Jim McDermott "Baghdad Jim" on his Saturday night show.Quite frankly I wish Kiro would fire this son of a bitch for being such a vile little chickenhawk.He tries to pass himself off as an Independant, but don't let that fool you-this is one cowardly little neo-con.Talk about being unprofessional-I wonder what the other hosts at Kiro this about this
Posted by: Edward Prentice | May 28, 2006 at 05:57 PM
I imagine working at KIRO is not easy right now...As long as people listen to Frank, management will keep him. Same for Dori. Controversy creates listeners. The antidote is not to listen, I guess.
I would also guess that the on-air talent stick to themselves, do their jobs and then go home.
Posted by: sparky | May 28, 2006 at 08:57 PM
Has anyone else noticed that Shires waited till Dave Ross is on vacation to take a snide swipe at him? Maybe he thinks Ross won't hear about it but I'm guessing he will.
What a chickenshit little turd.
Posted by: Bob | May 29, 2006 at 07:29 AM
Hmmmm...kinda makes you wonder why Shiers isn't in the classroom any more....any problems with his being around minor children? especially little girls?
Kinda makes you wonder why he's pointing the finger at other people...is he trying to divert attention from his own ... situation?
Posted by: Shawna | May 29, 2006 at 07:59 AM
What is Frank Shiers' record of military service?
I'll bet Jim McDermott is laughing his ass off at Shiers. Who is Shiers, anyway, compared to Representative and vetern Jim McDermott, MD?
A part-time talk show host and failed teacher who's not allowed in a classroom any more.
Posted by: Dana | May 29, 2006 at 09:21 AM
Remember one of Michael's commentaries said that Shiers was a brown-noser? I think I'm remembering that right . . . that he hung around the place kissing up to Tom?
Teachers who think they are right all the time don't make very good teachers. A little humility and lots of humor are required!
Posted by: joanie | May 29, 2006 at 11:12 AM
Frank Shiers is your typical Conservative Coward, who never did serve this country(by his own admission he is too cowardly to be in a war)yet he likes to call others names.He would be about my dad's age-in his late 50's and would have been eligible for the 'Nam draft.I hate people like Frank Shiers everytime I recall seeing what happened to my dad after his second tour.The Army asked my family just to remember him as he was and we had a closed -casket funeral for him.
Posted by: Edward Prentice | May 29, 2006 at 08:38 PM
Sorry about your dad
Posted by: sparky | May 29, 2006 at 09:08 PM