First, what Smith said:Sen. Gordon Smith acknowledged Thursday that diverting Klamath River water to farmers may have played a role in the 2002 death of 77,000 salmon but said it can’t be blamed as the sole cause of the die-off.
The die-off has gained statewide attention recently, following a Washington Post series highlighting Vice President Dick Cheney’s intervention in the decision to restore Klamath River water to 1,000 farmers, after federal agencies decided endangered salmon and suckerfish needed the water to survive.
Smith in recent days has denied a connection between the water diversion and fish deaths. Last week he incorrectly said the die-off happened 18 months after the water diversion and later acknowledged his mistake.
“I’ve never said there wasn’t a connection,” Smith told The Bulletin. “I’m just saying you can’t blame it entirely on the diversion as being the exclusive cause of the salmon die-off.”
Portland activist Steve Novick, one of two Democratic candidates vying for Smith’s seat in 2008, said Smith appears to be shifting positions without saying so.
“When you catch him in a false statement or an untenable position, he simply moves onto a new position without ever acknowledging fault,” Novick said. [emph mine]
Let's first give Novick strong credit for paying attention to the issue but making the larger point that Smith is simply fudging with us when anyone tries to hold him to account. Why is Merkley not commenting, I wonder? I'd accept "not conversant with the issue enough," although not for long. Whoever is the nominee had better mention it. (More on that in a bit).
But the point I want to make here is that to cover up his first lie--there was no connection between water levels and the fish kill--he had to make up a new one: I never said there was no connection.
Oh really? Here's what he told the Register Guard around August 8: "I don't know that there's a connection between water for sucker fish that went to farmers and salmon 18 months later that died of a gill disease," Smith said. "If there is, I am sorry that happened. I am not sorry for fighting for farmers. I have a responsibility for humankind."
Man, does that "humankind" crack bother me; like fishermen and the fish tourism industry doesn't affect "humankind?" But while he's not saying there's no connection, how different is saying "I don't know that there's a connection?" In practical intent, nothing.
No matter; according to The Oregonian three days later, he made it clear in no uncertain terms: "Sen. Gordon Smith argues there is no evidence a massive fish kill on the Klamath River in 2002 was caused by water diversions to farmers." Perhaps Smith will argue with that characterization, but there's no question he is trying to pretend that what he fought for didn't have anything meaningful to do with what happened afterwards. Which is of course poppycock.
Even while admitting that there may have been SOME cause from low water, and that he didn't tell the truth when he said there was an 18 month gap, his spokesperson then claims he hasn't actually changed anything!
Smith’s spokesman refuted the idea that the Republican senator’s story has changed. Spokesman R.C. Hammond said the senator has consistently said the diversion may have contributed to the die-off but wasn’t the sole cause.
“He hasn’t changed what he’s been saying,” Hammond said.
Smith acknowledged that he asked President Bush to intervene after the water was turned off but said he doesn’t regret doing so. He added that he was unaware Cheney became directly involved in reversing the decision to keep water in the river.
Whoops! There's another lie, and wow is that one easy to bust him on. Once more for you who have missed it before, this is what Smith told a group of farmers in 2001, according to the Klamath Herald News:“‘Dick Cheney stopped that order from coming down,’ Smith said. ‘He ordered the biologists back to Washington’ to see if there were some way to get around the conclusion that all available water must go to protect endangered suckers in Upper Klamath Lake and threatened coho salmon in the lower Klamath River. How could he be unaware, if he was telling them exactly what Cheney was going to do? And furthermore, as far as the Washington Post made it seem in their expose on Dick Cheney, the news he was telling them was not necessarily public information.
The other article comes from OPB, which caught up with Smith, Rep. Greg Walden (OR-2) and Sen. Ron Wyden in Redmond. As before, he answers charges that he made shit up, by changing the subject:
The [R-G] said that in a meeting with its editors and reporters, Smith "ignored and omitted" key information about the 2002 decision making process. Smith responded that he thinks his critics forget how unhappy farmers were in 2002 when the water was originally cut off.
Gordon Smith: "There's a lot of revisionism going on. If you look back at the editorial pages and the overwhelming feeling of Oregonians, that when water was cut off to farmers for the first time in 95 years, that was a wrong that needed to be righted."
How does that respond to omitting and ignoring key information? And which editorial pages and overwhelming feeling among Oregonians, that anyone has documented, is he referring to? It's a bullshit answer.
While we're on this article, I think it's time to start pointing the finger at Walden, whose name comes up almost as often when you talk about pressure being put on scientists to change their conclusions in order to satisfy partisan policy. Unashamedly, Walden just tells us to move on. Nothing to see here, people: "The key here is that we should be focusing on the future. You've got the settlement group meeting, they're trying to come up with a basin-wide plan that is backed by the fisherman, farmers, tribes and the agencies. They hope to have their proposal public and ready to go in November. A lot of the noise out their, I think, is designed to blow up that process." Shorter Walden: Pay no attention to the conniving Congressman behind the curtain!
And finally, this dare from Smith. Ohhhh, baby--you're going to regret this one, I promise you: Gordon Smith: "I make no apology for helping with my influence. I didn't make the decision. I encouraged it, I support, and I defend it today."
When asked if he's worried that the Klamath River Basin will emerge as one of the key issues of the 2008 election, Smith said he hoped so. If the current political climate is any indication, he may get his wish. You bet your ass, OPB--you bet your ass. |
RSS Feed: http://www.loadedorygun.net/rss/rss2.xml
