Caplis, Silverman attacked Polis as "anti-military," but omitted his reported college ROTC service
Summary: Discussing a Daily Camera of Boulder article reporting on a veterans group's criticism of a campaign mailer from 2nd Congressional District candidate Jared Polis (D), Dan Caplis and Craig Silverman asserted on their January 29 630 KHOW-AM broadcast that Polis is "anti-military." Caplis further labeled Polis "somebody who just despises the military," and Silverman stated that Polis "may have a grudge against the military" because he is openly gay. Neither host mentioned that according to news reports, Polis has said that he served for two years in the Reserve Officers' Training Corps while in college.
After reading from a January 26 article in the Daily Camera of Boulder about Colorado Veterans for America's criticism of Colorado congressional candidate Jared Polis' (D) campaign mailer featuring a doctored image of the American flag being raised during the battle of Iwo Jima, 630 KHOW-AM host Dan Caplis on January 29 characterized Polis as "somebody who just despises the military." Caplis also asserted of Polis, who is openly gay, "[T]here's no indication that this guy ever wanted to serve in the military." Additionally, co-host Craig Silverman later in the broadcast stated, "[M]aybe Jared Polis has always been anti-military before they announced the policy that you can't be openly gay, but that can't help his feelings toward the military."
However, a January 25 Denver Post online article about the veterans group's complaint quoted Polis, who is running in the 2nd Congressional District, as saying, "I was in ROTC [Reserve Officers' Training Corps] as a college student and the 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy of the military definitely played into my decision to not continue my training." Neither Caplis nor Silverman referenced Polis' reported ROTC stint.
A January 28 online Colorado Daily article also noted that Polis stated he served in ROTC:
Polis, a gay man who spent two years in the Army Reserve Officers Training Corps (ROTC) while in college, said he recently spoke at CU about the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy regarding sexual orientation and service.
Additionally, the Colorado Daily online had noted Polis' reported ROTC tenure in a July 19, 2007, article:
Polis said he learned about the nation's armed forces in part by spending two years in the Army Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) while in college. Also, he said Mike Miles, a Colorado Democrat candidate for U.S. Senate in 2004 and a former U.S. Army Ranger, is a supporter of his who helped Polis construct his policy on Iraq.
According to the Post, "A veterans group lashed out at the Jared Polis congressional campaign today for what it called 'offensive' editing 'for political purposes' of the iconic picture of Marines raising the U.S. flag on Iwo Jima." The Post continued:
The Boulder Democrat recently sent a mailer to voters in which the original photo was shown alongside an edited version that featured the logo of the Blackwater security firm superimposed on the flag.
Text with the photos read: "When American troops risk their lives for our freedoms it's heroic. When companies risk American lives for their profits it is anything but."
The Daily Camera reported, "Jim Hudson, vice president of the nonprofit activist group Colorado Veterans for America, said 2nd Congressional District candidate Jared Polis crossed a line by superimposing the banner of Blackwater Worldwide over the image of an American flag being raised during the battle of Iwo Jima."
The Daily Camera and the Post noted that Colorado Veterans for America has endorsed Joan Fitz-Gerald, one of Polis' opponents in the Democratic primary.
Disapproving of the doctored Iwo Jima photograph, Caplis and Silverman both characterized Polis as "anti-military." Caplis declared, "[T]his guy seems to be as anti-military as somebody can get," and Silverman agreed, saying, "I do think that it's fair to say Jared Polis is probably anti-military." Silverman further added, "[W]hen it came to a disrespectful mailer as he put out with respect to the military -- and it was directly disrespectful of the military -- I think part of his motive might be because he's gay." Caplis later stated:
If he truly wanted to serve in the military -- and I would very much doubt that premise, which is why I, with all due respect, think that, you know, any attempt there to explain his motive in some sort of logical way other than just a, "He despises the military," I think is off base. Because there's no indication that this guy ever wanted to serve in the military. If he did want to serve in the military, he knew the rules, and he could have made the choice, you know, to go in under "don't ask, don't tell." But I think it's as simple as, we don't know what this guy truly believes. We have to assume, based upon on his actions, that he's somebody who just despises the military.
While the Daily Camera article did not reference the information, the online Post article reported that Polis said he served in the ROTC while in college. After noting that "Hudson, a former solider, took his critique of Polis one step further in a telephone interview with The Denver Post, questioning why Polis, who is openly gay, hasn't served in the military," the Post reported:
"He says that he has to 'tell' that he's gay," Hudson said. "I can tell you, when I served in Vietnam, I served with many gays, and was honored to do so. And they didn't feel compelled to make an issue of their orientation, because, I presume, that they thought it was more important that they serve their country."
Asked to respond to Hudson, Polis said in a statement: "This is the kind of homophobic comment that we have worked so hard to overcome in order to reach some sort of tolerance in America. I was in ROTC as a college student and the 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy of the military definitely played into my decision to not continue my training. I don't feel that anyone -- man or woman -- should have to pretend or hide who they are to serve our nation and I look forward to a time when gay men and women can serve openly in our military."
From the January 29 broadcast of 630 KHOW-AM's The Caplis & Silverman Show:
CAPLIS: I mean, this guy seems to be as anti-military as somebody can get. Now, maybe he isn't really that way. Maybe he's just willing to say whatever he has to say to try to get elected in the 2nd CD.
SILVERMAN: Well, here's the problem with Jared Polis: He does have a motive to be anti-military. If you think about it, he's one of the few candidates ever who has declared himself openly homosexual, and therefore the military has said, you're not eligible to be part of the military. So trying to get into his motive -- and I am a motive guy -- I do think he may have a grudge against the military, because they have a grudge against him.
CAPLIS: Well, two things: First of all, you seem to be somehow excusing his conduct.
SILVERMAN: I'm not at all. I'm explaining --
CAPLIS: -- [unintelligible] you didn't say it.
SILVERMAN: No, not at all. I said what I meant. I'm just a big motive person, and I do think it's fair to say Jared Polis is probably anti-military, and when it came to a disrespectful mailer as he put out with respect to the military -- and it was directly disrespectful of the military -- I think part of his motive might be because he's gay.
CAPLIS: First of all, let's be accurate: Gay people can serve. Gay people do serve. Lots of gay people serve. The question is --
SILVERMAN: Not declared gay.
CAPLIS: Well, critical distinction. So when you say he can't serve because he's gay, that's inaccurate. He can't serve and be openly gay.
SILVERMAN: Well, he can't serve now. If he wanted to join up, it's all over the papers, and he acknowledged that he's gay, and therefore the military won't take him.
CAPLIS: But those are choices he made. If he truly wanted to serve in the military -- and I would very much doubt that premise, which is why I, with all due respect, think that, you know, any attempt there to explain his motive in some sort of logical way other than just a, "He despises the military," I think is off base. Because there's no indication that this guy ever wanted to serve in the military. If he did want to serve in the military, he knew the rules, and he could have made the choice, you know, to go in under "don't ask, don't tell." But I think it's as simple as, we don't know what this guy truly believes. We have to assume, based upon on his actions, that he's somebody who just despises the military.
SILVERMAN: Wait a second; you can't understand why an openly gay person, or any gay person, wouldn't have some feelings against the military and the military establishment for excluding them?
CAPLIS: Well, no. First of all, a lot of gay people do serve. So, again, Jared Polis, if he truly -- and your premise seems to be that Jared Polis wanted to serve in the military. I don't think so at all.
SILVERMAN: No, I didn't say that at all.
CAPLIS: He never said that. Your whole motive is grudge against the military because he couldn't serve because he is gay.
SILVERMAN: I'm just saying that if I was a gay person and the military said, you're not welcome -- it's just like, OK, I'm a Jewish person. If they said, "No Jews are welcome," then that would give me a bad feeling toward the military.
CAPLIS: You can't even begin to compare it, because in the case of a gay person, there is some logic there. And so, I think there are an awful lot of gay people who can completely understand why the military would feel that they could not manage a situation where they would have men who are sexually attracted to men, sleeping with men in intimate quarters like that, bathing with men, et cetera. There's real logic there. There's no similar logic that applies to Jewish people.
SILVERMAN: Well, let me try with [caller]. All I am asking you, [caller] is, can you conceive how an openly gay person would have a negative thought about the military as a result of not being allowed in -- excluded from them?
CALLER: Well, [Craig], I think it speaks to a more underlying disrespect for the military in general. There are women and men both serving in the military, and the picture that he used goes all the way back to World War II.
SILVERMAN: I've already said it's disrespectful, and I don't like it. I don't like the picture. But I'm just saying -- maybe Jared Polis has always been anti-military before they announced the policy that you can't be openly gay, but that can't help his feelings toward the military.
[...]
CAPLIS: What I see is that it makes perfect sense that you can't have people serving openly gay in the military because of those practical realities. So you try to strike this "don't ask, don't tell" balance. And, sure, is it predictable that one of the costs of that policy, that you really need to have, is that you might have some gay people with resentment? Sure. But to then suggest that somehow this is Jared Polis' motivation when there's no indication that this guy would have served, ever wanted to serve, to me is just way, way off base. And to suggest that anything approaching a general feeling, anti-military feeling among gays, because of a "don't ask, don't tell" policy I don't think is supported.
SILVERMAN: Well, somewhere in that long paragraph you uttered was an agreement with my basic point. I do agree -- I do agree that it's a tough call for the military, and there are reasons why they don't want openly gay people in the military. But you acknowledged that one side effect of that is that some gay people are not going to be pleased with the military because of that policy.
CAPLIS: Right, but it is light years from there to a conclusion that Jared Polis holds a grudge against the military 'cause he couldn't get in, when there's no indication this guy ever would have wanted to serve. In fact, every indication is to the contrary. [Caller], really appreciate your call. Thanks so much. We'll come back, get some calls.
—C.H.
to listen to this audio clip
Comments (6) Show
1 - 6 |
Is there any indication draft evader Clapplis wanted to serve in the military during Viet Nam? Clapplis, Beauprez, Cheney, Bush, and Tancredo all draft eligible college students evaded the draft during VietNam. Clapplis is a sad sack moralist who's cowardice is obvious. The sad state of predominantly right wing talk radio in this town is a sham. Guys like the Clapp, Boyles, Rosen, Caldara, Newman, and their putrid commentary is about to become so much shi. in the wind. Limbaugh is about to gag on his own anti McCain vomit and the sooner the better. Our local righty loudmouths with their racist, homophobic bigotry will soon follow.
This does seem to speak to the hypocrisy of the conserve mindset. Personally I believe a person's sexual orientation is a non factor. Period. End of story. I do however feel that, in a life or death combat situation, I would prefer to be with a person, sexual orientation be damned, who wants to be there, over a person who doesn't. Mr. Polis cared enough about my country to do ROTC. sniffer on the other hand was kicking and beating young girls over the heads with flagpoles when he was of military age. He never considered the military. Now sniffer paints himself as pro-military and Mr. Polis as anti-military. The "sniffer is a brave, pro-military red" dodge is one dog that just aint gonna hunt. The flagpole incident gave him away.
'
Box of Chocolates, part 1
Well, well. To Dan Caplis, who is indeed the Forrest Gump of Denver, life is a box of chocolates--and valentine flowers, too. Especially this time of year. To others less fortunate, maybe life includes injustice—from the forced labor of children in cocoa fields to the flower workers in Latin and South America.
It is so amusing when Caplis steps in his own BS so consistently. When a person is as sanctimonious as he is, Caplis exposes his hypocrisy, double standards, and even some creepy pretense very regularly.
Now, Caplis goes after Jared Polis and said he’s shown no indication of military service or support of the military, when we later learn from CMM of Polis’ ROTC activities. This means Polis was active a couple years more than chicken hawkish Caplis ever was. I wonder if a correction and apology will be upcoming by Caplis to Polis? Yeah, right.
But it gets even better, when Caplis touts his due diligence regarding commercial endorsements. In the case of Proflowers.com, Dan says he wouldn’t endorse Proflowers if Jared Polis was still involved with the company. Uh, oh, Dan, you’ve stepped in it again, big time. Caplis is saying if you disagree, dislike, or otherwise disfavor someone’s political views and activities, you should take action. Caplis endorses withholding commercial approval of an entity for political reasons. Is Caplis endorsing the boycott of his own show and sponsors, should any listener do their due diligence and dislike the views and politics of Caplis? By Dan’s own standard, the answer is yes. The former Caplis tactic was for Dan to waver and dodge about favoring boycotts, but he really did it this time. Dan is giving everyone the green light to use their pocket books and their voices to call for sanctions against companies if you don’t like someone associated with the company. Well done, Dan.
And Caplis, the ‘civil rights activist’ and even a farm worker activist (cough) and soldier for ‘yuman’ dignity says he checks companies out before endorsing them. Oh, really? Let’s look at Proflowers, now part of Liberty Media’s assets, and also Ralston Purina, part of the Nestlé Corporation. Both are major, Danectote/anecdote-infested endorsements of flowers for his wife and dog food for his dog.
No matter why Polis sold off his interest in Proflowers, including profit, of course, it is Caplis who is endorsing their products now, even emphasizing their direct cut-from-the- fields freshness. That puts Dan’s endorsement in even closer proximity to the ongoing controversies regarding human rights and justice for cut flower workers, especially in Latin and South America. Has Dan checked this out? He should. Has Dan also researched the domestic flower farms they ship from, and checked their use and treatment of immigrants and others? Get busy, Dan. By the way, it seems in major cities, the trend of Proflowers is to use local florists to satisfy orders, so you may want to tone down the fresh-off-the-field angle if that continues.
jmoBox of Chocolates, part 2
As important as it seems to Caplis as to who owned a company in the past, and as much as he may try to parse his way out of ownership concerns now, it certainly matters more as to who owns it now. Caplis has constantly preached that corporations must act morally, just a people should. Now Caplis himself should walk the talk for a change. Because, oops, Dan. You also forgot that the Proflower’s parent company, Liberty Media, is also knee deep in the on-demand porn business, sending porn movies to many hotels, and probably a hotel a lot closer to your home than any strip club you pontificate against. Caplis was an on-air proponent of groups in opposition to on-demand porn, and said activist are doing ‘noble’ work when they oppose Liberty and others in the pay-porn business. Caplis said he supports those exercising choice who would forgo hotels (read commercial boycott) that offer porn. Caplis says he hopes people will opt for ‘clean hotels’, and porn hurts families, and ‘…porn always exploits women’. This is therefore an important issue to Caplis, even though this is also the same guy who watched porn in his single days. Dan would stop endorsing a business because of an owner’s politics, but he ignores the porn business the new owner engages in? What a poseur.
And Proflowers is offering valentine chocolates too? Well there is controversy here as well, and that also brings us to Nestlé, the parent of Caplis’ Purina endorsement. A company the size of Nestlé will obviously have some controversies. Since the late 1970s, Nestlé has attracted criticism for its artificial baby milk marketing in developing countries, and apparent recommendations for breastfeeding mothers to use infant formula, which can lead to the deaths of babies when formula is mixed with contaminated water. Some of Nestlé’s consumer products are being questioned about containing genetically modified organisms. Has Caplis checked into these and if they are still occurring?
Regarding Nestlé’s chocolate business and alarmingly, there has been a controversy about very large numbers, up to around a quarter million children, who may have been forced laborers on cocoa farms in West Africa. Nestlé signed an agreement to assure that by July 2005 they would certify and no chocolate will be produced by ‘underage, indentured, trafficked, or coerced labor’. As a self-proclaimed farm worker activist, has Dan checked this out?
Caplis also shows even more moral selectivity in the organizations he supports. Caplis has lashed out viciously against Planned Parenthood, but has shown nothing but support for the Susan G. Komen Foundation. While it is very agreeable to many of us in support all of Komen’s activities, it is widely known that at least one Catholic archbishop and pro-life groups are squarely against Kohmen due to Komen’s financial grants to Planned Parenthood, supporting embryonic stem cell research, and dismissing a link between abortions and breast cancer. Shouldn’t Caplis be walking the talk and renouncing the Komen Foundation, or at least this part of the charity group? If he was consistent, shouldn’t Caplis be disavowing himself from radio station-sponsored foundation events where he shows great support, or at least explain his displeasure with some important parts of the foundation? After all, stem cell research and especially abortion are the cornerstones of Caplis’ zealotry! It goes to show you that Caplis moral high ground as well as his indignation are all equally up for sale to the highest bidder, in my opinion, and especially when his version of morality meets the dollar. Caplis even gives charlatans a bad name.
jmoBox of Chocolates, part 3 of 3
Caplis even removed a hot tub/Jacuzzi from his own home, by huge crane, as I recall him saying, out of concern for his infant kids and the drowning danger spas can create. At the same time, he has endorsed a spa and hot tub seller or sellers and continues to over the years. Did Caplis ever walk the talk and warn against buying spas if listeners had small children, when he endorsed a patio furniture/spa company? Never, that I’m aware of. What a hypocrite, in dealing with the lives of others, and it is not very good form for a plaintiff’s lawyer, and not good form for any consistent, caring, decent human being if it was such a concern of his own. Where was his concern for human welfare over the almighty dollar?
One more amazing fact about Caplis inserting himself into commercial enterprises: Caplis has talked about forming an organization to interfere into the Nielsen Ratings System. Yes, you read right. Caplis wants or wanted to form an organization to ferret out and find the otherwise secret and closely guarded names of the Nielsen families/viewers. The purpose was to intervene or contact them, in tying to sway higher TV ratings for what ever Dan’s group finds wholesome, and slant and manipulate other content to lower ratings. This is a paraphrase of Caplis’ intent, and I don’t know if he is still promoting this harebrained idea, or if he took the program underground, or what. But this is the creation dreamed up by the strange theocrat, Caplis, who wants to be your US Senator? Scary. I’m sure Nielsen & Co. can do just fine in determining accurate and scientific results without Dan’s intervention into commerce and media. And this is coming from Caplis, a guy whose broadcast job depends on accurate ratings data? There he goes again, manipulating and tweaking things to his liking. Scary, indeed. It is not surprising that he doesn’t mention this much anymore, but this is one the menacing activities that Caplis is really all about, in my opinion. Thought police and inquisitors, move over, because Dan is on the job, with his slick façade, questionable ethics, and all.
Let us never forget the depths of Caplis’ insidious intents and hypocrisy, and never forget that politics and affiliations matter. Making commercial and buying decisions because of them are fine, according to none other than Dan Caplis. Caplis has thrown the door wide open to criticize and scrutinize his endorsements and non-endorsements, and to bring commercial pressure upon his advertisers, if listeners are so inclined. Just like all his religious pap over the years, there’s no turning back on this subject and the ability to take him to task over it—and it is all due to Dan’s own drivel.
Just my opinion.NEWMAN...........Absolutely. Key point here is "no turning back on this subject and the ability to take him to task for it - and it's all due to dan's own drivel". Great work, sir.
1 - 20 |