Nikolas Kozloff

To read the article, click here.

To read the article, click here.

In a careless slip of the tongue in August, 2006 Virginia Senator George Allen shot himself in the foot and ended his political career. During a campaign rally Allen pointed to a man of Indian descent and remarked “This fellow here, over here with the yellow shirt, macaca, or whatever his name is. He’s with my opponent. He’s following us around everywhere. And it’s just great.”

Allen’s supporters began to laugh.

“Let’s give a welcome to macaca, here,” the Senator added. “Welcome to America and the real world of Virginia.”

The word macaca is an ethnic slur meaning either a monkey that inhabits the Eastern Hemisphere or a town in South Africa. In some European cultures, macaca is also considered a racial slur against African immigrants.

Allen’s infamous outburst was captured on video and circulated widely on the internet after the footage was posted on YouTube. The Senator’s campaign manager dismissed the issue with an expletive and insisted the Senator had “nothing to apologize for.” But once the story started to circulate, Allen sought to salvage his career by claiming that the word had no derogatory meaning for him. He then said he was sorry.

The issue however did not go away. S.R. Sidarth, the man who Allen had slurred, remarked that he suspected the Virginia politician singled him out because he was the only nonwhite face amongst about 100 Republican supporters. “I think he was doing it because he could, and I was the only person of color there, and it was useful for him in inciting his audience,” Sidarth remarked. “I was annoyed he would use my race in a political context.”

Allen’s stunning gaffe contributed to his defeat in the 2006 election when the veteran politician lost against long-shot Democrat Jim Webb. Some Republican strategists believe that Allen might have been a contender for the 2008 Republican presidential ticket if he had not made his macaca gaffe.

Racist Rhetoric in Bolivia

Such ethnic slurs have no place in modern politics and yet the United States continues to openly support backward and racist figures in South America who hurl such insults with wanton abandon.

Take for example the case of Rubén Costas, an opposition figure in Bolivia. Speaking to his followers last month, Costas called indigenous socialist President Evo Morales a “macaca.” Costas has also insulted Morales as an “animal” and a “monkey.”

Fair skinned and European looking, Costas hardly resembles Bolivia’s indigenous president Morales. Elected Prefect of the energy-rich, western department of Santa Cruz in 2005, Costas has become a key advocate for greater regional autonomy and a thorn in the side of the La Paz government.

Costas, like many of his white and mestizo racist followers, regard the Indians in the highlands with contempt. The Santa Cruz politician would like to retain control over the lucrative gas industry and deprive the cash-strapped government in La Paz of much needed revenue.

Following Costas’ election, the right opposition escalated its pressure on the Morales government, organizing protests in the city of Sucre against the President’s proposed Constitution which would have given the country’s indigenous majority a greater say in political decision making. An advocate for powerful business interests, Costas was also one of the right wing politicians who called for a referendum on autonomy for Santa Cruz. When 85% of the residents of Santa Cruz voted for autonomy, Morales called the vote illegal and nonbinding.

A demagogic populist who likes to stir ethnic hatreds, Costas continued to up the ante last month. As a result of Morales’ victory in an August 10 recall referendum, the Santa Cruz politician called the President “murderous” and demanded that Morales cease his “bullying.”

Speaking in a plaza full of his supporters, Costas said Bolivia should say “no to the big foreign monkeys.” It was an obvious racial barb aimed at Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez, a key Morales ally [physically, Chávez has indigenous-African features].

When asked by the Brazilian magazine Terra whether he would retract his statements about Chávez, Costas remarked “I don’t regret it at all.” The Santa Cruz politician said that “monkey” was based on the concept of gorilismo, “a term which is very common in Latin America to refer to soldiers. We can’t forget that Hugo Chávez is a military coup plotter who has turned himself into a neo-populist.”

Our Man in Bolivia

Even as he was escalating the racist rhetoric, Costas sought importantly allies. On August 25th, he met with U.S. Ambassador Philip Goldberg. Though the diplomat claimed that he had met Costas in public while on a routine trip to Santa Cruz, the meeting provoked suspicion amongst Bolivians that the United States was supporting the lowland opposition movement. A portion of U.S. aid to Bolivia is directed towards eastern provincial governments that are the nexus of opposition to Morales.

The La Paz government, desperately fighting to keep the country together, expelled Goldberg and accused him of conspiring with the conservative opposition. Having made a blunder and seriously imperiled U.S.-Bolivian relations, the State Department made things worse by retaliating and expelling the Bolivian ambassador to Washington. Coming to the aid of a friend, Chávez ordered the expulsion of the U.S. ambassador in Caracas. Predictably, the State Department again seriously erred, this time by expelling the Venezuelan ambassador.

The diplomatic tit-for-tat brings political tensions to new heights. Last week, anti-Morales sentiment reached a crescendo when protesters burned government offices in Santa Cruz. Anti-government activists also took over several natural gas installations in the east. Morales, who called the protests a “civil coup,” ordered additional troops to the eastern provinces to secure gas and oil installations. The protesters have been fighting Morales supporters with clubs, machetes and guns. In all, more than 30 people have died in the fighting.

Even Virginia Senator George Allen, a politician with a long history of making racist comments, ultimately realized that he had made a mistake and apologized at long last. Not so Rubén Costas, a figure who is unabashed about his views. Far from shunning racist leaders like Costas, the United States has embraced the Bolivian opposition. By doing so, the Bush White House has seriously inflamed U.S.-South American relations even more.

To read the article, click here.

Prior to Sarah Palin’s speech at the Republican Convention, I was preparing an article arguing that John McCain’s VP pick would lead to the implosion of the Republican Party and imminent defeat in the November election. After watching Palin deliver her speech however, I realized I would have to scrap my plans. While Palin certainly didn’t say anything of substance, the Alaska governor was poised on stage and even managed to get in a couple of memorable zingers. Amongst the chattering classes on TV, the consensus seems to be that Palin vaulted over her first political hurdle and overcame initial widespread skepticism towards her candidacy.

This election is fast sizing up as a showdown to see who can effectively capture the votes of the so-called Reagan Democrats, perhaps the most shiftless, fickle, hyper-nationalistic and racist constituency within the U.S. electorate. Geographically located in the Rustbelt and Midwest, they are susceptible to vicious GOP strategizing seeking to paint Obama as a cultural elitist and a highbrow intellectual. Palin, who the GOP wants to cast as a working class hero, could emerge as a major headache for the Democrats in key battleground states.

Roseanne and Palin: A Psychological Analysis

Spunky and scrappy, Palin is akin to Roseanne Barr, an Emmy-awarding comedian who had a hit TV show on ABC between 1988 and 1997. The show portrayed a working class family struggling to get by on limited income in small town Illinois. Roseanne herself was dominant and caustic but had a wry sense of humor. In sheer economic terms Palin bears little resemblance to Roseanne: the Alaska Governor makes a yearly salary of $125,000 and her husband Todd has done quite well for himself as a commercial fisherman and oil production manager.

In a sense however these economic differences are irrelevant since Palin comes off as culturally working class. She didn’t attend elite colleges, which is always considered an asset amongst the Reagan Democrats. What’s more she was an athlete in her youth and earned the name of “Sarah Barracuda” because of her intense basketball play.

Roseanne’s husband Dan, played by actor John Goodman, was a lot more portly than Palin’s husband Todd. In other respects however the Palin household bears some similarity to Roseanne’s family. Take for example the TV character Becky, Roseanne’s eldest child. Like Bristol Palin, who had premarital sex and got pregnant at the age of 17, Becky also ran into trouble when she skipped college and eloped with her boyfriend. She eventually wound up living with him in a trailer park.

Working Class Women in the November Election

On the face of it, Bristol’s underage sex life would seem to undercut her mother’s candidacy as this deviant behavior clashes with the Alaska Governor’s longtime emphasis on Christian morals. On the other hand the reality is that teen pregnancy is a feature of many white working class families. As a result some women might identify with Palin’s situation and see the Alaska Governor as more “authentic” in their eyes.

On the surface at least one might think that women who work and juggle family and jobs would identify as feminists and not support Palin’s candidacy. However, many feel uncomfortable with the feminist label because they see it as too liberal or secular. Speaking to the Wall Street Journal, Democratic strategist Susan Estrich remarked, “I have been hearing from women, especially women who didn’t go to Harvard or Yale Law School, saying, ‘Hold on, this is a woman we can actually relate to. The very fact that she could go from the PTA to the vice presidency is the story they connect to—without regard to her position on abortion.”

The Democrats should pray that Palin never gets as popular as Roseanne: the TV show became a national sensation. Though the program declined somewhat by the mid- to late 1990s, in its first few years it consistently racked up high Nielsen ratings. In the 1989-1990 Season Roseanne even tied the Cosby Show for #1.

Palin vs. Biden: Will the Real Working Class Hero Please Step Up?

At the convention, the GOP sought to build up Palin and the working class narrative by playing uncool classic rock like John Fogerty and, of course “Barracuda” by Heart. It’s a cultural strategy that the Democrats have sought to counteract when they introduced Joe Biden. When Obama trotted out his running mate in Springfield, Illinois loud speakers played Bruce Springsteen’s “The Rising” in the background.

The song is about a firefighter who gives his life while trying to save others in the World Trade Center on 9/11. The last verse takes place at his funeral, with his wife and kids in attendance. “The Rising” is a good song to be sure but somewhat odd for a campaign rally. It doesn’t really matter though: the reason the Party played the song is that Springsteen is a working class icon and appeals to Reagan Democrats.

With all of the calamitous domestic and foreign policy problems confronting the country, it’s absurd that the Culture Wars should once again figure so prominently in electoral politics. For better or worse however, the Obama camp will have to convince the fickle Reagan Democrats that Biden is more working class than Palin. It’s not an easy task anymore since mainstream media pundits, particularly men, won’t want to be perceived as bullying the Alaska political neophyte.

Shrewdly, Palin herself laid down the gauntlet in her convention speech. “I’m not a member of the permanent political establishment,” she said. “And I’ve learned quickly these past few days that if you’re not a member in good standing of the Washington elite, then some in the media consider a candidate unqualified for that reason alone. But here’s a little news flash for those reporters and commentators. I’m not going to Washington to seek their good opinion. I’m going to Washington to serve the people of this great country.”

Palin’s line drew some of the loudest cheers of the night.

Most Americans don’t make a habit of waking up in the morning, heading straight outside to shoot wild game and then frying up moose burgers. Nevertheless, in this electoral season it has become obligatory for politicians to defend hunters and their so-called “way of life.” Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, John McCain’s vice presidential pick, is but the latest example of this most barbaric and retrograde of American political traditions.

A woman from an exceedingly macho state, Palin takes pride in her hunting skills. She has even gone as far as taking her daughter out with her on caribou shooting expeditions. In passing on the hunting lifestyle to her daughter, Palin is merely following in the footsteps of her father who in turn took her as a child to hunt moose. What is the governor’s favorite food? That would be moose stew, of course! A longtime member of the National Rifle Association, Palin once proudly announced that her freezer was full of wild game.

No friend to wild animals, Palin has offered incentives for people who kill wolves in an effort to boost Alaska’s predator control program which so far has failed to meet expected numbers. The incentives include offering 180 volunteer pilots and aerial gunners $150 in cash for turning in gruesome legs of freshly killed wolves. Outraged by Palin’s predator control program, environmentalists have argued that bounties have no place in modern wildlife management.

By picking Palin as his running mate, John McCain helps to shore up the macho, frontiersman constituency. The Arizona Senator is hardly an avid hunter and has had a rocky relationship with the National Rifle Association. During a speech before the group in May, McCain sought to soothe sore feelings by portraying the Democrats as a common enemy. “They claim to support hunters and gun owners,” he said. “If… Sen. Obama is elected president, the rights of law-abiding gun owners will be at risk.”

Mitt Romney: Seeking to Prove Varmint Credentials

It’s not the first time that the issue of hunting has come up in the presidential campaign. During the primaries Mitt Romney was keen to emphasize his hunting credentials and erase the perception that he was some kind of effeminate easterner. “I purchased a gun when I was a young man. I’ve been a hunter pretty much all my life,” he remarked in New Hampshire. “I’ve never really shot anything terribly big,” Romney said. “I used to hunt rabbits. Shooting a rabbit with a single-shot .22 is pretty hard, and after watching me try for a couple of weeks, (my cousins) said, `We’ll slip you the semiautomatic. You’ll do better with that.’ And I sure did.”

The next day however, the Romney campaign said the former Massachusetts governor had gone hunting just twice — once as a teenager in Idaho and in 2007 with GOP donors in Georgia.

But then Romney explained that it was his staff that had gotten it wrong and that he had indeed hunted rabbits and other small animals for many years, mainly in Utah. Taking a “second shot” at the issue, Romney said “I’m not a big-game hunter. I’ve made that very clear. I’ve always been a rodent and rabbit hunter. Small varmints, if you will. I began when I was 15 or so and I have hunted those kinds of varmints since then. More than two times.”

Huckabee Hunts For Votes in Iowa

By waffling, Romney fell right into Mike Huckabee’s trap. Speaking on Face the Nation, the former Arkansas governor said Romney was wrong to suggest he was a lifelong hunter and that his opponent’s comments strained credibility. “I think it was a major mistake,” Huckabee said. An avid outdoorsman, Huckabee had hunted for twelve years, mostly ducks, deer and turkeys.

“It would be like me saying I’ve been a lifelong golfer because I played putt-putt when I was 9 years old and I rode in a golf cart a couple of times. I think American people are looking for authenticity. Match their record with their rhetoric.”

Hoping to cultivate that “authentic” image, Huckabee took an hour and a half to hunt pheasant eight days before the Iowa caucus. Flanked by about a dozen reporters, the former Arkansas governor wore a microphone from CNN as he went shooting with Dude, his 3-year-old bird dog, and Chip Saltzman, his campaign manager, at his side.

In the first half hour, Huckabee, Saltzman and a friend shot three birds. Their last shot flew over the heads of reporters, one of whom cried out: “Oh my God! Oh my God! Don’t shoot. This is traumatizing.” Moments later when Huckabee took a break, a reporter yelled out: “Who are those birds? Romney? Thompson?” “Well,” Huckabee responded, “these three birds all said they would not vote for me on caucus day. You see what happened?”

Connecticut Indoorsman and Lone Vegan

Traditionally the Democrats have not gone as out of the way to court the gun-toting, hunter crowd. During an interview with grist.com, an environmental Web site, Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd was asked “Are you an outdoorsy fellow? When you’re not in the halls of Congress or on the campaign trail, do you like to escape to the natural world?”

Dodd responded, “No. I don’t try to pretend I’m something that I’m not. But I live right on the Connecticut River, I have for 26 years, and the lower Connecticut River Valley is one of the most wonderful environmentally sensitive areas in the world. It’s stunningly beautiful. We do a lot of fishing in that lower valley area. But I don’t pretend to be a great hunter.”

Needless to say, Dodd went on to drop out of the presidential race after the Iowa caucus when he placed seventh.

Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich hardly did much better than Dodd during his own quixotic campaign for the White House. Kucinich has pressed for stronger regulation of pain and distress in animal research, has worked to help protect whales from harmful navy sonar and supports rural sanctuaries to protect farm animals. As early as 1995 he became a vegan and is currently the only vegan member of Congress.

Such progressive stances notwithstanding, Kucinich did not do well in the primaries and withdrew from the race in early 2008.

Hunting Exotic Prey in New Mexico

New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, a good shot who had the prey to prove it, did slightly better than Dodd and Kucinich. Ever since 2004 Richardson had taken up hunting and fellow outdoorsmen praised the governor’s skills.

Relaxed in his Capitol office and dressed in blue jeans, cowboy boots and a silver bolo tie with turquoise — Richardson told the Associated Press that he began hunting because he “wanted to go one step beyond” the skeet shooting he’d done in the past. With skeet, clay targets are flung into the air at different angles.

The politician had bagged traditional game such as elk and turkey but also stalked the exotic: he shot an oryx, a long-horned antelope native to Africa, during a guided outing in 2005 on a New Mexico ranch owned by media mogul Ted Turner. Richardson said it was his most memorable hunt.

The governor downed the oryx with one shot from at least 100 yards. He had the oryx head mounted and kept it in a downstairs room at the governor’s mansion. Richardson’s other hunting trophies are displayed in the building: a set of bull elk antlers and a stuffed wild turkey.

And what happened to the elk meat? “We ate it — at the mansion,” said Richardson.

Richardson owns a 12-gauge Browning over-and-under shotgun, which he uses for hunting birds including quail and dove. He borrows rifles to hunt big game such as elk, deer and the oryx. During campaign appearances, Richardson proudly mentioned how he had been endorsed by the National Rifle Association.

Early during the primaries in Iowa and New Hampshire, Richardson aired a TV commercial filled with western images. The ad opened with New Mexico landscapes and included scenes of Richardson hunting with two other people and riding horses with his wife, Barbara.

Being Macho in a Man’s World

Once Richardson exited the race three contenders were left in the race: John Edwards, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Edwards hunted when he was young and grew up in rural areas where owning a gun was part of a way of life. In an interview with the Associated Press Edwards said he grew up hunting deer, rabbits and birds but didn’t hunt any longer. “I think it’s important for us to respect the right to own firearms and to use them for protection,” he said. “I don’t think, though, that it means anybody needs an AK-47 to hunt.”

Edwards didn’t seem to connect as well culturally with poor whites as hunter Mike Huckabee. Once the former North Carolina Senator was out of the race, Clinton sought to court hunters by playing on her own personal history. By February, having already been roundly defeated by Obama in a slew of primaries, she told a crowd pleasing tale about shooting a duck when she was Arkansas First Lady.

“I’ve hunted. My father taught me how to shoot,” she told a crowd at the Labor Temple in rural northern Wisconsin. “I remember standing in the cold water. It was so cold, you know, at first light. I was with a bunch of my friends, all men. And they all were playing a trick on me, and said, ‘We’re not going to shoot, you shoot,’ cause you know what they wanted to do. They wanted to embarrass me. So the pressure was on. So I shot, and I shot a banded duck.”

Clinton lost the Wisconsin primary but continued to hark on the hunting issue.

“I disagree with Senator Obama’s assertion that people in our country cling to guns and have certain attitudes about trade and immigration simply out of frustration,” she began, referring to the Obama comments on small-town Americans that set off a political tumult.

She then introduced a fond memory from her youth.

“You know, my dad took me out behind the cottage that my grandfather built on a little lake called Lake Winola outside of Scranton and taught be how to shoot when I was a little girl,” she said. “You know, some people now continue to teach their children and their grandchildren. It’s part of culture. It’s part of a way of life. People enjoy hunting and shooting because it’s an important part of who they are. Not because they are bitter.”

Obama on Animal Rights

Unlike much of the Republican field and some of the Democratic contenders, Obama has shown a bit more compassion towards animals. During a candidate’s town hall meeting outside Las Vegas, a woman shouted out at Obama, “What about animal rights?” Obama responded that he cared about animal rights very much, “not only because I have a 9-year-old and 6-year-old who want a dog.”

Obama added that he sponsored a bill to prevent horse slaughter in the Illinois state Senate and had been repeatedly endorsed by the Humane Society. “I think how we treat our animals reflects how we treat each other,” he said. “And it’s very important that we have a president who is mindful of the cruelty that is perpetrated on animals.”

To his credit Obama has not gunned down animals with television crews in tow, as in the case of Mike Huckabee. Nevertheless the Illinois Senator supports the right to hunt wild game.

In April 2007 he said: “I don’t hunt myself, but I respect hunters and sportsmen.”

Hunting and the American Psyche

Needless to say hunting in American politics is hardly a new phenomenon. In Rough Rider in the White House: Theodore Roosevelt and the Politics of Desire, Sarah Watts writes:

“In 1885, returning East after a bighorn hunting trip to Montana, Roosevelt had another studio photo made. This time he appeared as a self-consciously overdressed yet recognizable Western cowboy posed as bold and determined, armed and ready for action. ‘I heartily enjoy this life, with its perfect freedom,’ Roosevelt wrote, ‘for I am very fond of hunting, and there are few sensations I prefer to that of galloping over these rolling, limitless prairies, rifle in hand.’ Though himself a New Yorker, Roosevelt enjoyed demeaning the tame outdoor pastimes of Easterners. He preferred his Western life of wild horses, wild terrain, and wild game to Eastern foxhunting, he wrote in 1884 to Lodge, an Eastern patrician and foxhunter. Western hunting required natural buckskin shirts, rifles, and rugged cow ponies, Roosevelt said, rather than tailored red coats worn during scripted jumps over fences chasing a ground-dragged scent. ‘A buffalo is nobler game than an anise seed bag,’ and one could kill buffalo only in the West. In 1883, when he had killed his first buffalo, Roosevelt spontaneously danced a ‘war dance’ that he repeated thereafter in a lifetime of famous hunting. In the aristocratic gentility of the hunt club, no member would ever have allowed himself such freedom.”

It’s remarkable to consider that more than a hundred years after Teddy Roosevelt donned his cowboy outfit politicians are still falling all over themselves to prove their backward and retrograde hunting credentials. On the other hand, with the entrance of Sarah Palin into the presidential race the country has the opportunity of holding a long overdue debate about hunting and animal rights in wider U.S. society. Unfortunately, the media seems more intent on talking about the Alaska Governor’s pregnant daughter.

It’s no secret that John McCain has been a longtime friend of the telecom industry. Indeed, the Arizona Senator has had important historic ties to big corporations like AT&T, MCI and Qualcomm. In return for their financial contributions, McCain, who partly oversees the telecommunication industry in the Senate, has acted to protect and look out for the political and economic interests of the telecoms on Capitol Hill.

Such connections are well known, yet few have paused to consider how Iraq fits into the wider jigsaw puzzle. Prior to the war in Iraq, McCain was one of the biggest boosters of the invasion. While it’s unclear whether the telecoms actually lobbied McCain on this score, they certainly benefited under the subsequent occupation.

To get a sense of the sheer scope of McCain’s incestuous relationship with the telecoms, one need only log on to the Web site of the Center for Responsive Politics. In the 1998 electoral cycle, AT&T gave $34,000 to McCain. In the 2000 cycle, the telecom giant provided $69,000, in 2002 $61,000, in 2004 $39,000, in 2006 $29,000 and in 2008 $187,000. Over the course of his career, AT&T has been McCain’s second largest corporate backer.

What’s more, AT&T has donated handsomely to McCain’s International Republican Institute (IRI), a private/public organization that carries out the far right’s foreign policy agenda in Iraq and elsewhere (for more on McCain and his relationship with the IRI, see my previous column, “Promoting Iraqi Occupation For ‘a Million Years,’ McCain and The International Republican Institute,” June 9, 2008. In 2006, the company gave the IRI $200,000. AT&T spokesman Michael Balmoris declined to elaborate on why the international telecommunications provider wrote a big check. “AT&T contributes to a variety of charitable organizations," he said flippantly.

If all that money was not enough to secure the Arizona Senator’s allegiance, AT&T may also count on an army of lobbyists who are now allied to the McCain campaign. Take for example campaign adviser Charlie Black, whose lobbying firm BKSH has represented AT&T for the past decade. Then there’s Mark Buse, McCain’s Senate Chief of Staff, who worked as a lobbyist for AT&T Wireless from 2002 to 2005.

Other companies such as MCI and Qualcomm have also played a role in the Arizona politician’s Senate career. Take for instance Tom Loeffler, McCain’s campaign co-chairman and former Congressman of Texas. Loeffler, through his lobbying firm Loeffler Group, has represented Qualcomm since 1999. All told, Qualcomm employees, spouses and political action committees have given tens of thousands of dollars to the McCain campaign. Meanwhile Kirck Blalock, a McCain campaign fundraiser, lobbied MCI from 2002 to 2005 through his firm Fierce, Blalock and Isakowitz.

Though McCain routinely derides the influence of "special interest lobbyists," his ties to the telecom lobbyists undermine any such claims. Of the 66 current or former lobbyists working for the Arizona senator or raising money for his presidential campaign, 23 have lobbied for telecommunications companies in the past decade.

McCain is a senior member of the Senate Commerce Committee, which oversees the telecom industry and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The Arizona Senator has repeatedly pushed industry-backed legislation. McCain’s efforts to eliminate taxes and regulations on telecommunications services have won him praise from industry executives. In the late 1990s, the Arizona Senator wrote the FCC, urging the agency to give serious consideration to the idea of allowing AT&T and MCI to enter the long-distance market. Four months later, AT&T wrote a check for $25,800 to McCain.

If that was not enough, high-up McCain officials such as Charlie Black secretly lobbied Congress to approve a measure wiping out all private lawsuits against the telecoms for assisting the U.S. intelligence community’s warrantless surveillance programs. McCain himself became an “unqualified” supporter of telecom immunity, claiming in a statement to the National Review that “neither the Administration nor the telecoms need apologize for actions that most people, except for the ACLU and the trial lawyers, understand were Constitutional and appropriate.” Needless to say, McCain voted in favor of granting amnesty to AT&T and other telecoms at exactly the time that his close adviser Black was taking money from AT&T to influence Congress on its behalf.

Making a Killing in Iraq

Even as McCain was lobbying hard for the Telecom industry in the late 1990s, the Arizona Senator worked overtime to build up the case for war in the Middle East. McCain served as the “honorary co-chair” of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, a group which helped push for official government as well as public support for the invasion of Iraq after the 9/11 terror attacks.

In the aftermath of the invasion, the telecoms scrambled to get a piece of the action as Iraq was opened up for business. Cellular giant Qualcomm managed to exert political influence over the Pentagon which in turn pressured the Coalition Provisional Authority to change an Iraqi police radio contract to favor Qualcomm’s patented cellular technology.

What’s more, the Pentagon hired MCI—the former World Com, which had declared bankruptcy amidst an accounting fraud scandal in July, 2002—to build a small wireless phone network in Iraq. Incensed, Democratic Senator Ted Kennedy urged major federal agencies to stop doing business with bankrupt telecom giant MCI and explain why its record $9 billion accounting fraud should not disqualify the company from receiving lucrative government contracts.

As it turned out Kennedy was right to harbor suspicions about the dodgy company. After the Coalition Provisional Authority issued MCI cell phones to U.S. personnel in Baghdad’s Green Zone, problems arose. Reportedly, cell phone owners received monthly bills as high as $10,000. The individuals had never received bills, leaving the impression that the phone calls, which cost $1.25 a minute, were free. The U.S. State Department subsequently decided to shut the phone calls down.

AT&T, McCain’s second largest corporate backer, also fell into controversy. After the invasion, the telecom giant received an exclusive contract to provide pre-paid calling cards to military personnel stationed in Iraq. But U.S. soldiers quickly complained about the exorbitant prices they had to pay under the arrangement.

According to the Newark Star Ledger, many pre-paid AT&T cards bought in the United States and shipped to soldiers in Iraq allowed only a fraction of the minutes promised on the cards. Even the cards bought in Iraq, which an AT&T spokesman said were a better bargain for the troops, cost between 19 and 21 cents a minute for a call.

House Representative Frank Pallone, Democrat of New Jersey, was disturbed by the price gouging. “AT&T should be required to provide a clear and straightforward system of calling time that will make it easier for our troops to call home,” Pallone said in a statement. “It disturbs me to think that companies are more interested in making a buck on our soldiers in Iraq than providing the quality services they have been paid to provide.”