Jeff Gannon at Rally for Families, Becomes Liberal Gannon Fodder
Click here to remove external frames.
When I saw Jeff Gannon at first on Sunday, I did a double take. Oh sure I’ve seen him around town before, specifically outside of the Tom DeLay support dinner I covered back in May, but this time he was literally standing right next to me when I glanced to my right, and he caught me off guard. “Oh, It’s Jeff Gannon,” I thought, “Big deal.” It was only later in the day when he began calling out to protesters across the street that I felt his presence at the rally was photo-newsworthy.
Well apparently my fellow liberal bloggers are so fascinated by this simple photo of Gannon that they can’t help but make Gannon-fodder out of him. “He’s fat.” “He must be cruising.” “He loves war.” All our Base Are Belong to Him. I suppose this is the political discourse in the age of the Internet, much like Revolutionary politics consisted of slandering opponents over a pint of ale. Personally, I’m kinda sick of it.
I try to approach everything I do fairly and with an open mind. Let me tell you what I observed. Gannon was apparently alone. He didn’t appear to know the young man holding the sign. I never saw him cruising. He stood quietly at the front barrier of the rally, applauded at the speakers, and shook hands of the handful of people who came up to greet him.
After the rally ended, he walked behind the stage to the sidewalk across the street from the 30 or so anti-war protesters, and began taking pot-shots from the gallery of protesters, many of whom were dressed like anarchists (as opposed to the rally on Saturday which brought out every corner of the mainstream). Gannon smiled, waved, and shouted, “Thank you all for coming!” several times. Sure he was a smartass when he said it, but he was saying it to people who were just screaming the nastiest things to him that I’d prefer not to print on this journal.
I just don’t get why people care about Gannon. Really, I mean here’s a guy who was an accidental tourist to the White House and he got caught asking lame questions. I’m not convinced that he was sleeping with anyone inside, nor that anyone in the White House even knew of his alleged past. Gannon surely isn’t the first questioner to suck-up in his queries to the White House. And he’s certainly not the first amateur journalist trying to do something in the age of new media. He may be a symptom of media manipulation by this administration, but he’s not worth getting all worked up over, is he?
I suppose the photo was an easy target to ridicule Gannon and the 400 or so people who attended the “Rally to Honor the Families of the Military.” It sure is easy to grab a photo and paste it next to a sentence or two of insults toward military widows and call it a blog. Bloggers who make a decent commentary or good satire I can appreciate. But sometimes comments from visitors are unworthy of the decent people we are supposed to be.
When I arrived at the rally, the stage was filled with families who had lost a loved one in this war: someone’s father, identical twin brother, son, daughter… Many attendees have a family member at war right now. The rally was filled with genuine and kind people. There was a lot of pain in their eyes. These families of dead service members hurt as much as Cindy Sheehan, and may need something stronger than themselves to cling to. Some parents may have only a triangularly folded flag to cry into. Some of these parents worry about their children every moment of the day, and in their nightmares. You may not agree with their positions, but these are your fellow countrymen in a time of war. They have given their flesh and blood to our country, and they deserve our respect.
LCpl Bryan Patrick Kelly died in Iraq. I shook the hand of his father, Mr. Patrick Kelly, after he told me his son’s name for my notes. And I said thank you and that I was sorry for his loss. Mr. Kelly loves his son and he loves his country, and I can see how he and others who support our actions in Iraq may have genuine anger at many in the left, like the anarchists who reportedly burned an American flag at their counter-protest across the street, or the Left’s extreme speakers who honor communists and anti-Americans.
Why didn’t progressives come out in droves to an event called “Rally to Honor the Families of the Military?” I survived. Truly, progressives would have felt uncomfortable with the speakers and the message of “stay the course.” Some speakers were very angry with Cindy Sheehan especially.
But what if 500 progressives had come out to support the troops, but refused to applaud at a “stay the course” or anti-Sheehan message. What if 500 for-the-troops-but-against-the-war people had come to the rally and started quiet personal conversations with the people there, asking them why they support the war? No preaching. No name calling. No “Bush sucks” T-shirts. No trying to change minds on the spot. Just quiet personal real conversations. Or even to show up and say “Hon, I am so sorry you are worried about your son every day. I have such a tough time supporting the administration, but I want to let you know I want your son’s mission to be successful and for him to come home safely.”
One thing I did notice is that the rally for the families was very white, middle aged, military type people. The anti-war rally was all ages, every race but mostly white like the make-up of America, with a lot of different religious representation. And yes, the reports are true. There was no unity in message. But what the march lacked in unity, it made up in size. Surely most of these people were on the same track, and will likely bring that message back home.
So Gannon sightings are like the “Runaway Bride” of the blogosphere. There you go. There’s two new pictures of Gannon. Do we all feel more satisfied or are we tired of it yet? There was so much pain on display in Washington this weekend. When will we get away from this shit-for-discourse and begin having real conversations with people?
Forget the paparrazzi photos. Visit my photos of the rallies. I virtually surfed a wave of protesters this weekend to get some cool stuff. If you haven’t seen the pictures, visit:
Friday: Camp Casey DC
Saturday: Huge Anti-war March
Sunday: Honor Military Families
Sunday night: Prayer Revival
Monday: Prayer and Disobedience
September 29th, 2005 at 1:37 pm
How on earth can you have a sensible conversation with someone who calls your principled oposition to an illegal war ‘traitorous’?
If you can’t understand why it’s wrong for an avowed male prostitute with no journalistic credentials, (connected to and salary paid by an Administration associate and friend of the President) to gain entrance to the WH press pool under false pretences and a false name, simply to lob softball questions for the Administration to field and make it look like real journalism, then you haven’t any idea of what real democracy and accountability means.
As for supporting the troops, the best way to do that is to take them out of harm’s way, ie withdraw from an illegal war before any more young people are mutilated and/or killed.
If you think this war is right and the troops are doing a fine job, why don’t you enlist and go over there yourself?
September 29th, 2005 at 2:27 pm
Hey Joe. Excellent - good stuff. When i remember to do it I’ll blogroll you. It’s nice to know also that you’re a DC area dude. There may come a time when i need a professional photographer, particularly one who is familiar with photographing bands.
September 29th, 2005 at 3:03 pm
Republic…,
Thank you for your comment. You have demonstrated my point.
Both sides call each other traitorous. It’s only when we can get past that abusive dialog that both sides can truly understand each other.
I never said that Gannon’s stint at the White House wasn’t wrong. I just don’t understand why he’s still a hot topic today. He’s no longer at the White House. Is it any surprise he’d be at a “support the troops” rally? I just don’t see why he’s so damn newsworthy at this point.
You’ve also assumed that because I’m willing to listen to opposing opinions, I must be on the side you oppose. Don’t make assumptions.
You’ve made my point. If you want to change people’s minds, you have to engage them, not just tell them to enlist. That’s an easy, cheap, and completely ineffective argument.
Thank you for reading the site.
September 29th, 2005 at 4:08 pm
Joe,
“He’s fat.” “He must be cruising.” “He loves war.”
Hey, don’t forget “His teeth are yellow.”
Look, about Jim/Jeff, what you are missing is that this attention whore’s 15 minutes are way up and he is doing almost everything and anything he can (short of naming the name of his “cuckold” in the administration) to keep the clock ticking. Examples: his op-eds in the Washington blade; his Real Time “coy” interview; his media (well, gay media) pop-ups here and there at events where he will be noticed; the rant at the protesters above, etc. He is STARVED for attention. Most prostitutes AND journalists usually are, whether currently employed or not. I wouldn’t doubt his next move is to shop around a reality show.
BTW, I currently consider myself a progressive (with an edge) who not only supports our troops but, up until about a month ago, totally supported the war. My problem with it now is that we basically have lost it and need to pull out for that reason alone (I could elaborate but it would take forever - hmmm, maybe that will be the post I reopen my blog with). As for Sheehan, I find her disingenuous, manipulated and a little nutty. I was never a big fan and now she just makes me queasy.
But Joe, c’mon man, do NOT give Guckert/Gannon a free ride. The guy is a sleaze ball. Why do all right leaning gays feel the need to become apologists for him. He’s the moral equivalent of Anne Coulter with a penis. Ummm, well, uhh, wait a sec, she probably has one, so let’s say he’s Ann Coulter without the hair. Yeah, that’s the ticket!!
The more right leaning that 25% of the gay community becomes, the more left of center I find myself becoming out of necessity.
Ciao!
September 29th, 2005 at 4:18 pm
Papa,
GREAT comment, but you miss my point. I am not giving Gannon a free ride. I agree with you completely. His 15 minutes should be up. But he didn’t wave to the demonstrators seeking publicity, I just happened to take the photo. And look how people have reacted to this photo. I just can’t figure out why people care.
I guess he’s like the grave-digger of politics. He’s comic relief.
September 29th, 2005 at 8:13 pm
Why is it even news that he attends a rally? Who the hell cares anymore?
September 29th, 2005 at 9:56 pm
“Both sides call each other traitorous.”
Yes, but only one is.
And why do you refer to him by his fake-reporter psuedonym? Does simple reality not mean anything anymore?
“You’ve also assumed that because I’m willing to listen to opposing opinions, I must be on the side you oppose.”
Personally, I just assume that you’re wasting your time and, possibly, engaging in a fringe form of starfucking.
“And look how people have reacted to this photo. I just can’t figure out why people care.”
And yet it was you who took and posted the photo and who responds to the comments posted here that were provoked because of what you did.
Maybe you should spend less time repeatedly telling the readers who disagree with you that they’ve made your point and more time actually understanding that, indeed, you have made theirs.
Enjoy your blog. I came here through a link, but I won’t be back.
September 29th, 2005 at 10:42 pm
Anonymous (5:56) you’re an idiot!! When a notable figure starts yelling at protesters, it’s newsworthy in a paparazzi sort-of way. Joe didn’t even post the pic here until it became an internet phenomenon on its own — and then he only posted it as a commentary to question idiots like you who care so much about Gannon/Guckert (who cares what you call him?).
Why don’t you do something useful and not just troll blog comments on sites that actually are pretty cool and not just the same old circular bloggy bullsitshit? Why be so full of hate dude? It looks like you’re making joe’s point too.
And its your loss if you don’t come back. These pics are awesome!! Thanks Joe!!!
September 30th, 2005 at 5:17 am
Joe, I’m glad you took and posted the photos of Gannon, whose name is actually James D. Guckert. He advertised himself on the Internet as “Bulldog,” a former Marine who would leave “no marks, only impressions” at a rate of $200 an hour or $1,200 per weekend.
That’s why he’s as famous as he is. It’s not a lot different than Monica Lewinsky, except that Jim portrayed himself as the kind who’d stand while the other party knelt.
Now, regardless of what permutation of hooking someone does, growing a beer gut tends to be bad for business although I suppose there’s a sub-sub-niche of people who want their Bulldogs well padded.
So that explains the snarky comments. The photos were great because, well, the guy’s a minor celeb and we’re all curious. I just wonder why he wasn’t wearing camouflage. Must have been his day off.
September 5th, 2006 at 8:05 am
Gannon makes great fodder because he represents what the “anti-american anarchists” loathe: manipulative snakes in the media and government. The corporate media doesn’t report on the current plight of civil activists in an increasingly fascist society. It throws a few crumbs that summarily say “The war isn’t perfect, but it’s doing it’s best,” but won’t let you have a real peek at the depth of the anti-war world. A world where the war is an implicator of a horrendous abuse of power, one of the most vicious acts of greed they’ve ever seen, and a premeditated attack on a freedoms we cherish as Americans. Republicans and Democrats alike have turned their government into a place where profit margins rule, and the citizens are just a means to that end. They watch day in and out as the pro-war population makes their ideas fully and freely known in the media, while they must sit and simmer in their anger for the way the media paints them.
The flag burning is often a statement that America is dead, not that it’s hated. It’s more like creating a reenactment rather than expressing an anti-American view. I’ve also known some people who burned it because they just don’t believe in flags- period. They see them as a symbol of being divided from the rest of the world, rather than a part of something larger.
Some people are anarchists, but anarchy has some intelligent aspects to it that hardly anyone ever considers who isn’t an anarchist. The Dalai Lama once made a comment about bee colonies. Bees have no constitution, police, laws, or moral training. Nature’s law alone dictates that they work efficiently together. He said, in some respects, we’re poorer than the bees. That said, not everyone is the pillage-and-raid variety anarchist. I doubt many at the war protests are. Also, some people mask themselves (and are thus prejudged as “anarchists”) after being illegally profiled at peace rallies by the police. These are just smart people, and may or may not be actual anarchists.
I think it would be great if we could all stand on a common ground, as you say. But I don’t think that’s going to be so easy since everyone has their own version about what’s really going on.
A final word: please become aquainted with VeriChip before the media gets to you. Don’t let anyone butter-up or scare you into getting chipped like a dog.