FREAK(S) OF THE WEEK: Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, Kansas Rep. Lynn Jenkins, and (yet again) Stephen Harper

It was another week full o’ freaks on both sides of the border, with a repeat performance by Canadian Prime Minister to top it all off. So this week, the FredBlog turns its freaklight on a freak trifecta aka a “freak-fecta.”

1. Florida Gov. Charlie Crist

If you’ve seen the documentary “Outrage,” you already know that this Republican closet case has earned his freak stripes. But he added more freak merit points this past week when he said that the reason Florida hasn’t been hit by major hurricanes since 2007 is that God likes him.

Crist reportedly told a group of real estate agents, “In 2007, I took my first trade mission. Do you know where I went?” He went to Israel, where he placed a written request in the cracks of the Western Wall that read, “Dear God, please protect our Florida from storms and other difficulties. Charlie.” Crist then implied that God read the note and followed through to the gov’s request. “Time goes on – May, June, July, August, September, October, November, December – no hurricanes.”

Maybe Gov. Crist needs to realize that his last name does not have an “h” between the “C” and the “r.”

2. Kansas Congresswoman Lynn Jenkins

Lynn Jenkins is either incredibly stupid, racist or both.

While speaking to her constituents at a town hall meeting last week, Jenkins said, “Republicans are struggling right now to find the great white hope” to go up against President Barack Obama.

Here’s the problem: The phrase “great white hope” is a racist term dating back to the early 20^th century. It came into general usage after boxer Jack Johnson, who was black, won the heavyweight title – a victory that didn’t sit well with whites. So many then worked to find a white fighter – a “great white hope” – who could snatch the title away from Johnson. And the phrase is certainly not obscure. Johnson’s story inspired both a play and a movie – both called “The Great White Hope,” both starring James Earl Jones.

So according to Jenkins, the Republican Party is looking for a “great white hope” to take on America’s first black president.

Ms. Jenkins, would you like a hood with that?

3. Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper

The leader of Canada’s Conservative government just can’t keep himself away from freakville. This time, it’s due to a grand case of hypocrisy (Harpocrisy?).

First, the background: Canadian senators are not elected, but appointed by the prime minister of the day (without even hearings like they have for Supreme Court justices in the United States). And senators serve until they are 75 and are currently paid an annual salary of $132,000. The Senate, therefore, is ripe for political patronage.

To Harper’s credit – yes, the FredBlog does give credit where credit is due – he ran on a platform of changing the Senate so that it would be more accountable to voters. And he promised – repeatedly – that he would not appoint senators not directly elected by voters.

In fact, during the 2006 election, Harper’s party promised: “A Conservative government will not appoint to the Senate anyone who does not have a mandate from the people.” And in 2004, before becoming Prime Minister, he blasted the Senate as “a dumping ground for the favored cronies of the Prime Minister.”

So what did Harper do last week? He appointed nine – count ‘em – nine new unelected, unaccountable senators. That’s after appointing 18 unelected, unaccountable senators only days before last Christmas (so no one would notice).

And who did Harper appoint? The latest group includes the party’s director of political operations (Doug Finley), a former Harper leadership campaign co-chair (Judith Seidman), the president of the Conservative Party (Don Plett) and the director of strategic communication for Harper’s office who also once served as Harper’s press secretary (Carolyn Stewart-Olsen).

So glad Harper isn’t in a favor of political patronage and cronyism.

FREAK OF THE WEEK: Washington, D.C., on-air host Doug McKelway

This week, the FredBlog shines its freaklight on Doug McKelway, a TV anchor in Washington, D.C., who makes us wonder if thou doth protest too much.

I know, you’ve never heard of this McKelway guy. I hadn’t either until I learned about his interview on NewsChannel 8’s “Let’s Talk Live” with fellow blogger Mike Rogers. The interview caught my attention at first just because Rogers is talking about the documentary he appears in, “Outrage,” about gay-but-closeted U.S. politicians. (The film is well worth seeing, by the way.)

Although McKelway is on Washington’s ABC affiliate, he was obviously influenced by the Fox News Channel school of interview techniques. He rants at Rogers from the get-go that he is opposed to Rogers’ work exposing closeted-yet-anti-gay politicians. And it escalates from there, with McKelway seemingly taking the whole issue very personally. McKelway even threatens to take Rogers outside and punch him in the face.

This is well worth watching:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4YhlmxUs_s

But that was only the beginning. The next day, when co-host Natasha Barrett (very weakly) tries to take McKelway to task, he very pointedly says he will not apologize. Here’s that video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulZFOz0N6Fg&feature=PlayList&p=E0E8641BDFD49DAC&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=68

First off, there is an issue here that McKelway clearly does not get, which is that reporting on someone’s sexual orientation is NOT the same thing as gossiping about someone’s sexual behavior. It’s pathetic if McKelway holds to the outdated stereotype that sexual orientation is the same thing as sexual behavior.

And I’ve said it before, but I guess it needs to be said again. Sexual orientation, if relevant to a story, is not a matter of invading privacy – it’s a matter of reporting truth, which is what journalism is supposed to be about. In an age when politicians’ and celebrities’ divorces, remarriages, affairs and sex tapes are fair game, why is it unfair to ask Florida Gov. Charlie Crist if he is gay?

Secondly, regardless of your personal bias, no respectable journalist has a right to be so disrespectful to an interview subject – and you certainly shouldn’t be threatening a guest with physical violence. McKelway should be suspended or fired – not allowed to use his show to make a point that he won’t apologize.

But lastly, Mr. McKelway, why is it exactly that this issue hits such a nerve? Just asking.

MORE CHENEY FREAKINESS

Since when can’t former Vice President Dick Cheney carry his own water? Well, this week, it seems, since the Republican Party has trotted out his daughter, Liz Cheney, as a “Republican strategist” to defend her father’s apocalyptic blubbering.

Since when is Liz Cheney a “Republican strategist”? All of a sudden, she is showing up on news chat shows, perhaps because the GOP is finally realizing that Dick “Darth Vader” Cheney is a terrible messenger for whatever ridiculous argument the party is now making.

ABC News’ “This Week with George Stephanopoulos” even put Liz Cheney on its round table to be part of the discussion of Dick Cheney’s dire predictions about national security under the Obama administration. Yeah, because, there was really a possibility that Liz Cheney would break out of the Cheneyland spin.

And while the party is forcing one Cheney daughter upon us, where’s the other one? That would be Mary Cheney, the public-when-she-wants-to-be lesbian daughter of Dick who famously worked for her father’s team but would not challenge her father on gay issues.

Then again, Mary Cheney has proven that she has a revolving door on her closet, and while the party has no problem with Liz Cheney, Mary is hiding in the shadows once again.

Jindal the Louisiana loser

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal is showing himself to be an ideological demagogue who is more interested in playing partisan politics with his state’s economic future than helping the residents of his state.

As if his pathetic Republican response to President Barack Obama’s address the other night wasn’t bad enough, Jindal has said that he will refuse some federal economic stimulus money – funds his state and its residents desperately need.

Worse yet, he is not the only Republican governor who is saying no to Obama’s big stimulus package. Joining Jindal are South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford and Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour.

So why are the governors of these relatively poor states refusing federal money? Well, even though they are denying it, they are all thinking of running for president in 2012. In fact, there are no higher-profile potential Republican contenders than Sarah Palin and Jindal.

In order to run for president as a Republican, you have to have the archconservative right wing of the GOP on your side (John McCain learned that a while back). And the Rush Limbaughs and Sean Hannitys of the world see Obama’s economic stimulus – regardless of how popular it is – as a political demon.

So Jindal had a choice to make – take the money to help his state OR refuse the money and help his own political ambition. What a surprise that he chose the latter.

But for Jindal, refusing the money wasn’t enough. He also has to go around lying about what exactly is in the economic stimulus bill. During his Republican response Tuesday night, for example, Jindal said the stimulus bill includes “$8 billion for high-speed rail projects, such as a magnetic levitation line from Las Vegas to Disneyland, and $140 million for something called ‘volcano monitoring.’”

First of all, there is nothing at all in the stimulus bill about any high-speed rail project, “magnetic levitation” or otherwise, from Las Vegas to Disneyland. Secondly, why is Jindal dissing what he calls “volcano monitoring”? He said, “Instead of monitoring volcanoes, what Congress should be monitoring is the eruption of spending in Washington, D.C.” Actually, the federal government should be monitoring volcanoes to prevent deaths and ensure that the government is ready to respond to a natural disaster. Does Jindal not remember Hurricane Katrina, a natural disaster that destroyed parts of New Orleans in his own backyard?

Oh wait, he does remember Hurricane Katrina. In his speech Tuesday, he said, “Today in Washington, some are promising that government will rescue us from the economic storms raging all around us. Those of us who lived through Hurricane Katrina, we have our doubts.” So Jindal is pointing to the disastrous response of fellow Republican George W. Bush as an example of why the federal government should just give up on keeping Americans safe.

Interestingly, while Jindal goes around damning the stimulus package and making a big deal about refusing funds, he is indeed silently taking some of the stimulus money. Funny that he’s not making an equally big deal about that.

To their credit, Republican Govs. Arnold Schwarzenegger of California and Charlie Crist of Florida have said that they are willing to take whatever money Jindal and his ilk are refusing.

I say, give Crist and the Guvernator all of Jindal’s stimulus funds. Yes, Jindal’s state will be hurt by his dogmatic stupidity, but then hopefully Louisiana voters will wise up and throw him out of office as soon as possible.