Daniel Schulman

Senior Editor

Based in DC, Dan covers politics and national security. His work has appeared in the Boston Globe Magazine, the Village Voice, the Columbia Journalism Review, and other publications. He is the author of a forthcoming biography of the Koch family, Sons of Wichita, which will be published in May by the Hachette Book Group. Email him at dschulman (at) motherjones.com.

Get my RSS |

RIP WTF 44

| Tue May. 17, 2011 8:33 AM PDT

GOP Hill staffer Scott Graves is retiring his cheeky license plate, WTF 44, following my story yesterday identifying him as the owner of the apparently Obama-bashing Texas tags. "When I realized the meaning could be misconstrued, I ordered new plates," Graves, the legislative director for Rep. K. Michael Conaway (R-Tex.), told Texas' San Angelo Standard Times in a statement. It seems a bit hard to imagine that Graves was not aware, at the very least, of the meaning of WTF. In fact, he used this shorthand in the appropriate context on his Twitter feed

So, if not a political jab at the president, what did the plate mean? Graves, via Conaway's press secretary, Sam Ray, did not elaborate to the Standard Times. Nor did Ray provide an alternative explanation when I contacted him for comment. Ray did speculate, weakly, that "maybe that was his number in football" after I suggested that perhaps WTF could stand for "West Texas Football." (Hey, I watch Friday Night Lights.) In any event, Ray never got back to me on what WTF 44 "really" meant.

It seems Conaway's staffers have chosen the strategy of just playing dumb on the matter. The Standard Times Washington correspondent, Trish Choate, was accidentally cc'd on some internal correspondence related to the plates issue. She reports:



In an email addressing Ray but also sent to the Standard-Times' Washington correspondent and Graves, Chief of Staff Richard Hudson referred to "KMC"—Kenneth Michael Conaway, saying: "Give KMC a 'heads-up.' When she talks to KMC next and she asks him about it, he just needs to decline to discuss his employees' personal vehicles. Or say something like, I didn't know about the plates, but I understand he's changed them."

There is one remaining question: Now that Graves is trading in his old plates, how should he personalize his new ones?

Advertise on MotherJones.com

Memo to Americans United for Life: Our Questions Still Stand

| Tue Mar. 1, 2011 10:26 AM PST

Last Friday, as Nick Baumann and I completed our reporting on the anti-abortion group behind a nationwide push to broaden justifiable homicide laws to cover killings in the defense of fetuses, I contacted the organization, Americans United for Life, to request an interview. Specifically, I asked to speak with Denise Burke, AUL's vice president for legal affairs and the author of the model legislation, the Pregnant Woman’s Protection Act, that the group has pressed state lawmakers to introduce. An AUL spokeswoman told me that Burke was travelling, and asked me to submit my questions in writing. So I did. AUL never responded. Instead, the group waited until after the story was published to blast Mother Jones on its website for "dishonest" and "intentionally distorted" reporting, complaining that the "anti-life media once again got their facts wrong."

As we reported, AUL-inspired legislation has recently sparked controversy in South Dakota, Nebraska, and Iowa, with critics claiming that the measures are so expansive that they could potentially invite—if not legalize—the killing of abortion doctors. We write:

That these measures have emerged simultaneously in a handful of states is no coincidence. It's part of a campaign orchestrated by a Washington-based anti-abortion group, which has lobbied state lawmakers to introduce legislation that it calls the "Pregnant Woman's Protection Act" [PDF]. Over the past two years, the group, Americans United for Life, has succeeded in passing versions of this bill in Missouri and Oklahoma. But there's a big difference between those bills and the measures floated recently in South Dakota, Nebraska, and Iowa.

While the Oklahoma and Missouri laws specifically cover pregnant women, the latest measures are far more sweeping and would apply to third parties. The bills are so loosely worded, abortion-rights advocates say, that a pregnant woman could seek out an abortion and a boyfriend, husband—or, in some cases, just about anyone—could be justified in using deadly force to stop it.

It's not just anti-abortion groups that think these bills are bad news. Omaha's deputy chief of police recently testified that Nebraska's LB 232 "could be used to incite violence against abortion providers." And a spokesman for South Dakota's Republican governor—a staunch abortion foe—called the version of the bill introduced in that state "a very bad idea."

Thu Jul. 30, 2009 12:45 PM PDT
Thu Jul. 30, 2009 11:59 AM PDT
Thu Jul. 30, 2009 8:33 AM PDT
Wed Jul. 29, 2009 11:56 AM PDT
Mon Jul. 27, 2009 8:11 AM PDT
Wed Jul. 22, 2009 8:30 AM PDT
Mon Jul. 13, 2009 6:07 AM PDT
Wed Jul. 8, 2009 1:42 PM PDT
Wed Jul. 8, 2009 7:02 AM PDT
Mon Jul. 6, 2009 9:57 AM PDT
Wed Jun. 24, 2009 11:55 AM PDT
Thu Jun. 18, 2009 8:32 AM PDT
Tue Jun. 16, 2009 10:09 AM PDT
Fri Jun. 5, 2009 2:27 PM PDT
Fri Jun. 5, 2009 7:37 AM PDT
Thu Jun. 4, 2009 9:07 AM PDT
Fri May. 22, 2009 7:06 AM PDT
Wed May. 20, 2009 8:11 AM PDT
Fri May. 15, 2009 7:21 AM PDT
Mon May. 11, 2009 7:57 AM PDT
Fri May. 8, 2009 11:44 AM PDT
Thu May. 7, 2009 11:19 AM PDT
Tue May. 5, 2009 10:02 AM PDT
Tue Apr. 28, 2009 11:27 AM PDT
Fri Jan. 30, 2009 12:27 PM PST
Fri Jan. 23, 2009 8:28 AM PST
Thu Jan. 15, 2009 9:45 AM PST
Tue Dec. 30, 2008 10:54 AM PST
Mon Dec. 29, 2008 12:44 PM PST
Tue Dec. 16, 2008 11:26 AM PST
Tue Nov. 25, 2008 12:19 PM PST
Tue Sep. 30, 2008 9:54 AM PDT
Fri Sep. 26, 2008 2:58 PM PDT
Tue Sep. 23, 2008 12:11 PM PDT
Wed Jul. 30, 2008 3:00 PM PDT
Wed Jul. 30, 2008 10:44 AM PDT