Why Do Many UMass Students Oppose Honoring Andrew Card? Why do 31% of readers responding to this poll in The Massachusetts Daily Collegian answer Yes to the question "Should the University of Massachusetts rescind its offer to give Andrew Card an honorary degree?" at its commencement in Amherst on May 26th? Why are hundreds marching to deliver a petition to that effect to Chancellor Lombardi's (empty) office?

The issue is summed up simply in this paragraph from Christine Morretti's May 7 article in the Collegian. After listing many of Andrew Card's accomplishments in and out of the current Administration, she states:

[...] much of Card's political history is mired in the Iraq war, and his association with the White House Iraq Group (acronym - WHIG, but I doubt the Whig party would approve of the Bush presidency at all).

Card was instrumental in the organization of WHIG, which was designed to sell fear and distrust to the American people, and sway our minds toward the war in Iraq. According to a 2002 CNN report, this group was used to push an "escalation of rhetoric about the danger that Iraq posed to the United States, including the introduction of the term 'mushroom cloud.'" Indeed, many people on this campus would have Card labeled a propagandist and a war criminal.

If more people knew about the actions of the White House Iraq Group -- if the New York Times had yet mentioned WHIG's existence and actions in its news pages (Click here to see that there is still nothing but Frank Rich columns about WHIG in the paper of record) -- wouldn't even more University of Massachusetts students (and other Americans) be against bestowing honors on one of the group's leaders?

Labels: Andrew Card, New York Times, University of Massachusetts, WHIG

  ¶ 5/16/2007 01:25:00 PM 0 comments

  The first WHIGgate Presidential Poll in today's sidebar I'm not sure that I've made up my mind yet, but it's never too early to start expressing an opinion. I'm sure that nothing will change between now and November 2008.

In France this week, published opinion polls are illegal [see correction below]. If we lived in Avignon or Tours, we would have to spend this week reading about something other than the constant tracking polls during the final days of the presidential horse race. We would have to wait until Sunday to cast our vote for Ségolène Royal, and to see whether our countrymen had agreed with us or chosen Nicolas Sarkozy to occupy the Élysée Palace for the next five years.

Unfortunately, we can't include Ségolène in our sidebar poll. Being born in Senegal somehow disqualifies her from occupying our Oval Office. You'll have to choose between one of the seven alphabetically-arranged also-rans to your right.

Fortunately for us, there is never a shortage of meaningless horse-race polls in the U. S. of A.!

-------------------------
UPDATE 4 May 2007: The law changed, or I was mistaken, because the French press is full of polls like these today showing Sarko in the lead in advance of Sunday's voting.

Labels: Election, France, Poll, Ségolène Royal

  ¶ 5/02/2007 08:41:00 PM 0 comments