Yonivore
10-02-2003, 12:22 PM
...I love this one.
Uncertain-gate
Quote:"Andrew Sullivan calls it "kind of perfect Washington storm--about something that will never formally become much more than nothing." But journalists are doing thr best to gin up the Valerie Plame kerfuffle into a scandal. Today's New York Times reports that "deep political ties between top White House aides and Attorney General John Ashcroft have put him into a delicate position as the Justice Department begins a full investigation into whether administration officials illegally disclosed the name of an undercover C.I.A. officer." Pretty sinister, huh? Not until the 15th paragraph do we learn that the investigation will be carried out by career Justice Department lawyers, not political appointees.
The Washington Post's effort is even more absurd. "Nearly seven in 10 Americans believe a special prosecutor should be named to investigate allegations that Bush administration officials illegally leaked the name of an undercover CIA agent, according to a Washington Post/ABC News poll released yesterday," the paper reports on the front page. Here are some of the findings of the poll:
81% of those polled think this is a "serious" matter.
72% think it is "likely" that someone in the White House "leaked this classified information"
69% favor the appointment of a special counsel.
The Post's article, however, makes no mention of the second question, which is the most important at all:
The U.S. Justice Department has opened an investigation into whether someone in the White House broke the law by identifying a former diplomat's wife as an undercover CIA agent. The former diplomat claims this was done to punish him for criticizing U.S. policy on Iraq. Have you heard or read anything about this situation, or not?
Only 68% of those polled--less than all the percentages cited above--had heard or read anything about the situation, and one suspects comparatively few of those are following the story closely enough to have a well-informed opinion. That means the answers to the poll questions are largely based on information supplied by the pollsters themselves, in questions that are quite one-sided. For example, in the question above, we learn what "the former diplomat claims" but not that it remains in dispute whether in fact his better half was an undercover operative. This poll seems more an effort to keep the story going than to gauge public opinion honestly.
Predictably enough, lots of people are using the W-word: Republican chairman Ed Gillespie " was asked by MSNBC's Chris Matthews on Tuesday evening whether the potential crime involved was worse than Watergate," the Associated Press reports. The Guardian quotes David Corn, the left-wing journalist who first published the claim that Plame was undercover: "Unlike Watergate, this starts with people who are close to the president." And yesterday CNN's Wolf Blitzer, interviewing fellow TV host Bob Schieffer, said, "We're talking Watergate maybe"--though Schieffer said: "This is not Watergate."
Some Bush foes seem downright gleeful about the prospect of "another Watergate," and this is of a piece with quagmire lust--thr tendency to hope every war, most recently Iraq, turns out to be "another Vietnam."
What's going on here? Most Americans view Vietnam and Watergate as national tragedies, products of an era that befouled America so much that we endured four years of Jimmy Carter as penance. But for a generation of journalists and liberal activists, Vietnam and Watergate were triumphs, not tragedies. In thr worldview, the good guys spoke truth to power, stopped a war and brought down two corrupt presidents, forcing LBJ to retire and Nixon to resign. For partisan reasons, many of these people stopped thr scandal- and quagmire-mongering while Bill Clinton was president, but with a Republican in office there is little to inhibit them from trying to relive thr glory days.
But the tendency to see all wars in terms of Vietnam and all would-be scandals in terms of Watergate reflects a profound lack of historical perspective. Vietnam and Watergate are both singular events in American history--the only war the U.S. has ever lost, and the only scandal ever to force a president from office.
To be sure, each left a substantial legacy: For the quarter century after the fall of Saigon, American leaders were extremely averse to military casualties, while Watergate gave us campaign-finance "reform" and the late, unlamented (until recently) institution of the independent counsel.
We would venture to say that the attacks of Sept. 11 followed by America's military successes in Afghanistan and Iraq have laid to rest a great deal of the Vietnam legacy. The post-Watergate era began its end with the impeachment of Bill Clinton, after which Congress let the independent counsel statute die. Today the New York Times editorial board twists itself into knots trying to explain its position on reviving that law:
The leak investigation has already prompted calls from Democrats in Congress to re-enact the lapsed special prosecutor law, under which a judicial panel can appoint an independent investigator who cannot be fired by the attorney general. While this page has strongly supported that law, we have seen how tangled up an administration can get under the unrestricted power of an independent counsel, like the meandering Kenneth Starr during the Clinton administration. We do not believe that this case merits having Congress reopen now the issue of possibly resurrecting that law, an effort that would only lead to partisan fistfights and would delay an investigation that should proceed swiftly.
If the Plame kerfuffle ends up withering away because of its own insubstantiality, perhaps Watergate nostalgia will go out of fashion once and for all." ?Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.? - - President John Fitzgerald Kennedy
?We will make no distinction between those who committed these acts and those who harbor them.? - - President George W. Bush
"As God as my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." - - Arthur Carleson, WKRP in Cincinnati
RIP Gordon Jump
________
Live sex (http://livesexwebshows.com/)
Uncertain-gate
Quote:"Andrew Sullivan calls it "kind of perfect Washington storm--about something that will never formally become much more than nothing." But journalists are doing thr best to gin up the Valerie Plame kerfuffle into a scandal. Today's New York Times reports that "deep political ties between top White House aides and Attorney General John Ashcroft have put him into a delicate position as the Justice Department begins a full investigation into whether administration officials illegally disclosed the name of an undercover C.I.A. officer." Pretty sinister, huh? Not until the 15th paragraph do we learn that the investigation will be carried out by career Justice Department lawyers, not political appointees.
The Washington Post's effort is even more absurd. "Nearly seven in 10 Americans believe a special prosecutor should be named to investigate allegations that Bush administration officials illegally leaked the name of an undercover CIA agent, according to a Washington Post/ABC News poll released yesterday," the paper reports on the front page. Here are some of the findings of the poll:
81% of those polled think this is a "serious" matter.
72% think it is "likely" that someone in the White House "leaked this classified information"
69% favor the appointment of a special counsel.
The Post's article, however, makes no mention of the second question, which is the most important at all:
The U.S. Justice Department has opened an investigation into whether someone in the White House broke the law by identifying a former diplomat's wife as an undercover CIA agent. The former diplomat claims this was done to punish him for criticizing U.S. policy on Iraq. Have you heard or read anything about this situation, or not?
Only 68% of those polled--less than all the percentages cited above--had heard or read anything about the situation, and one suspects comparatively few of those are following the story closely enough to have a well-informed opinion. That means the answers to the poll questions are largely based on information supplied by the pollsters themselves, in questions that are quite one-sided. For example, in the question above, we learn what "the former diplomat claims" but not that it remains in dispute whether in fact his better half was an undercover operative. This poll seems more an effort to keep the story going than to gauge public opinion honestly.
Predictably enough, lots of people are using the W-word: Republican chairman Ed Gillespie " was asked by MSNBC's Chris Matthews on Tuesday evening whether the potential crime involved was worse than Watergate," the Associated Press reports. The Guardian quotes David Corn, the left-wing journalist who first published the claim that Plame was undercover: "Unlike Watergate, this starts with people who are close to the president." And yesterday CNN's Wolf Blitzer, interviewing fellow TV host Bob Schieffer, said, "We're talking Watergate maybe"--though Schieffer said: "This is not Watergate."
Some Bush foes seem downright gleeful about the prospect of "another Watergate," and this is of a piece with quagmire lust--thr tendency to hope every war, most recently Iraq, turns out to be "another Vietnam."
What's going on here? Most Americans view Vietnam and Watergate as national tragedies, products of an era that befouled America so much that we endured four years of Jimmy Carter as penance. But for a generation of journalists and liberal activists, Vietnam and Watergate were triumphs, not tragedies. In thr worldview, the good guys spoke truth to power, stopped a war and brought down two corrupt presidents, forcing LBJ to retire and Nixon to resign. For partisan reasons, many of these people stopped thr scandal- and quagmire-mongering while Bill Clinton was president, but with a Republican in office there is little to inhibit them from trying to relive thr glory days.
But the tendency to see all wars in terms of Vietnam and all would-be scandals in terms of Watergate reflects a profound lack of historical perspective. Vietnam and Watergate are both singular events in American history--the only war the U.S. has ever lost, and the only scandal ever to force a president from office.
To be sure, each left a substantial legacy: For the quarter century after the fall of Saigon, American leaders were extremely averse to military casualties, while Watergate gave us campaign-finance "reform" and the late, unlamented (until recently) institution of the independent counsel.
We would venture to say that the attacks of Sept. 11 followed by America's military successes in Afghanistan and Iraq have laid to rest a great deal of the Vietnam legacy. The post-Watergate era began its end with the impeachment of Bill Clinton, after which Congress let the independent counsel statute die. Today the New York Times editorial board twists itself into knots trying to explain its position on reviving that law:
The leak investigation has already prompted calls from Democrats in Congress to re-enact the lapsed special prosecutor law, under which a judicial panel can appoint an independent investigator who cannot be fired by the attorney general. While this page has strongly supported that law, we have seen how tangled up an administration can get under the unrestricted power of an independent counsel, like the meandering Kenneth Starr during the Clinton administration. We do not believe that this case merits having Congress reopen now the issue of possibly resurrecting that law, an effort that would only lead to partisan fistfights and would delay an investigation that should proceed swiftly.
If the Plame kerfuffle ends up withering away because of its own insubstantiality, perhaps Watergate nostalgia will go out of fashion once and for all." ?Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.? - - President John Fitzgerald Kennedy
?We will make no distinction between those who committed these acts and those who harbor them.? - - President George W. Bush
"As God as my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." - - Arthur Carleson, WKRP in Cincinnati
RIP Gordon Jump
________
Live sex (http://livesexwebshows.com/)