ROVE-ING REFLECTIONS

Been thinking about this whole Rove-leak-gate thing.

This is it folks -this is the whole ball of wax. This one slip up by the "turd blossom" symbolizes the entire Bush Administration MO for everything from election 2000 to this: It's the Vince Lombardi theory of American Government: "Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing."

They don't care about anything but "winning" at all costs and give no regard to anything that might arise from their actions .

Look at the 2000 election. They only cared about winning. Forget that a presidential election should be decided by popular vote -let the SCOTUS decide the election . Forget that people would be disenfranchised -stop the recount. Forget that the party had traditionally embraced state's rights -it's a federal court issue. Who cares how it devides the country?

Look at the Tax cuts -they only cared about the political points they'd gain by giving three tax cuts in three years, and paid no attention to anything else, particularly the fact that we were in a war and (at the time) were headed for another one. Who cares how it screws the economy?

Take the war in Iraq -all they cared about was going to war in Iraq i.e. getting troops over there and deposing the Hussein regime. "Mission Accomplished", right? No planning for the aftermath, no thought given to what to do afterward. Who cares how you get there -just get there. Doesn't matter if you make up a reason -just have one.

NO TEARS FOR JUDY

I'm getting a little tired of all the whining from both the left-leaning and right-leaning press about the fate of poor poor Judith Miller.

Save your tears folks, she's deserving of no special treatment for her crime simply because of her job description.

And save your slippery slope arguments for more deserving cases -this one has a clear distinction that will keep it from being used broadly to destroy journalistic privilege:

This is not a case where the journalist was protecting the identity of someone who was revealing wrongdoing, but one where the journalist was protecting the identity of someone perpetrating it.

Change the crime and it makes more sense: it's the difference between for example, a journalist's protecting the identity of someone who'd witnessed a murder vs. her protecting the identity of the murderer.

Criminals, govermental or otherwise, should not be allowed to hide their crimes behind the shield of journalistic privilege. A free press should not mean free to abet crimes by concealing them from justice.

BTW the SCOTUS agrees with me 6-3 (or, rather, I agree with them), as does this guy

Aren't you getting tired of the lengths to which the press will go to protect their cushy jobs?