Did Rove screw-up?
From the start it was clear Rove was the source of the leak that lead to the outing of Valerie Plame. Joe Wilson stated it immediately after and now the evidence points to Rove being the source. There aren't many people I dislike more than Rove. He's has been responsible for some of the most disgusting campaign tactics of anyone in US politics. Other countries do it meaner, case in point being Yushenko, but for an American he's quite a prick.
I'll be happy if this investigation goes somewhere and Rove is held accountable. It's amazing how arrogant Rove is to believe he can commit a federal crime without fear of retribution. If DeLay is any indication this may just be a blimp that will quickly fall from media attention.
I'll be happy if this investigation goes somewhere and Rove is held accountable. It's amazing how arrogant Rove is to believe he can commit a federal crime without fear of retribution. If DeLay is any indication this may just be a blimp that will quickly fall from media attention.
posted by mochi at 3:44 PM
15 Comments:
I agree with your whole post, and I am most interested to see how the "federal crime" aspect plays out. Committing felonies may be of no consequence to the Busheviks.
Why does Bob Novak not get a call from the authorities? He knows something, if not everything here.
Mochi, you said: "He's has been responsible for some of the most disgusting campaign tactics of anyone in US politics."
Like what?
Thanks!
-Jack
Neo-Libs!
I have a suggestion. For a couple years now I have surfed liberal blogs and websites. I think I have experience enough now to offer a little bit of a critique.
The large majority of left sites I visit are filled with predictable material. It seems that when an issue rises, one liberal reads it, reacts to it, and all of the rest recycle it over and over again.
Many left sites are high on opinion, rhetoric and reaction, but often little on analysis, problem solving and solution finding. The one thing missing from just about every liberal website I visit and read (and I visit and read many) is education.
If Neo-Libs could engineer such, I think that you would have a unique product to offer!
For example, Mochi, quite some time ago you had written an article on a new tax structure. It was unique and offered solutions. It was not laced with rhetoric or overused mantras. I think that liberals would see more impact if they went back to their roots and began advancing ideas as opposed to reactions.
Keep in mind, guys that I'm not saying most of the right blogs and sites aren't the same--I just wanted to pass along an idea I think would really make Neo-Libs uniquely different from what is offered out there. (And Neo-libs seems to have the talent to pull it together).
-Jack
Jack, when a post is written about a problem that could use, as you say, ideas for solutions, I think the solution is obvious and evident in the post itself. You remember the old joke about the man who tells the doctor, "It hurts when I do that," and the doctor replies, "So don't do that"? The same principle applies here. For example, my last "serious" post was the one about Walmart, "Low Prices at What Cost?" Obviously, the solution to Walmart's exploitative abuses and drain on the taxpayers is for them to stop doing it. Similarly, if I write a post critical of an issue whereupon something can be done, the solution is usually obvious in the subject matter. And keep in mind, these are usually things that I am powerless to effect. Take the Walmart issue, for example. I can boycott them, I can protest them, I can "spread the word" about them... it doesn't matter in the scheme of things, because they are too big, too powerful, and too well-loved by people who don't care about the evil things Walmart does. Still, I will speak out, undeterred by the apparent futility. That's what blogging is really about: speaking out about our concerns, whether we have the solution to a problem or not.
On the other hand, I also write (and will continue to do so) about past injustices that must never be forgotten, and there are no solutions for those because what's done is done and one can't go back in time. What we can so, however, is state (as I usually do) that these things must never happen again. And again, if the means of preventing the problem has already been widely published, or are otherwise obvious, I might not bother to riterate them. Subjects that fall under this category include invading other countries under false pretenses, stealing elections by subverting the electoral process, turning budget surpluses into deficits, congressmen committing shameful ethics violations, etc.
In closing, though, I want to reassert my position that I do not agree that it is necessary to offer solutions. It's nice, but not required, unless that is the stated purpose of the weblog (I also contribute to another blog that tries to take a more "activist" approach). Otherwise, it is simply an online journal, a place to vent, to relieve the burdon of information that torments us daily. Here's to "all things frivolous!"
Jack,
Subscribe to the Atlantic and read this:
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/prem/200411/green
Or watch this:
http://www.bushsbrain.net/
I think I offer up enough solutions to buy myself some whining capital.
Mochi.
Shea,
I thought the left were masters at nuance! ha! (Just kidding).
I have to say for the first time in a long time that I don't particularly agree with you. Issues aren't that simple--black and white all the time. That's what conservatives get accused of all too often. On complex issues the answer is rarely "stop doing it" as you mention. For example, if this was our approach then we would, say, ask ourselves the question: "How can we rectify our trade deficit?"
The reply would be, "Oh, lets just stop trading, or buying their products."
I understand what you say about griping, but when I owned my company I always expected my employees to present solutions to the problems they griped about. Anyone can gripe, but figuring out something that can be done about it, providing a course of action to educate others to head in the direction of well-thought out solutions is difficult.
For example, on the Walmart issue, what is a possible solution that is well within your power and others to accomplish? A boycott is one, petitions, etc. are all well and good, but what happens if you were successful in eliminating Walmart? What alternatives are you going to provide low income people who need them? What economic activity are you willing to propose or create that would replace the amount of economic activity that Walmart generates?
Its all well and good to sit back and call people/institutions evil, but Bush called Saddam and Iraq evil, invaded and is now involved in an unanticipated sustained conflict because of it.
Lastly, I wanted to pass those thoughts along to you guys because you seem serious about what you do, and seem to have the talent to do it. I realize this is a blog, and mine is basically the same as yours--but I think you guys are bright enough to actually make a difference. I've read many more, and most of them are just lunatic conspiracy kooks who offer nothing. I wasn't making a judgement so much as a directional suggestion. Mainly because I think of many out there, you have the potential to be an agent of change.
Mochi,
Both of the things you linked to cost money:( Isn't there something free out there I can look into? I watched the trailer and it just points out that he's a brilliant strategist and likes to win. I went to the other link and I don't want to pay for that. I'll keep looking though!
Wolnosc, I use the term liberal because Neo-libs take pride in the label they have assigned themselves. That's what I like about these guys is that they aren't afraid to say what they are. I'll check out your link.
Regards,
-Jack
Jack, I'll stick with the Walmart theme since it's a good vehicle for this discussion. I don't want to eliminate Walmart. It has its place in our consumer culture. However, I would like them to eliminate some of their practices, because they do some bad things that far outweigh the goodness of low prices. Are they really helping low income people by paying their employees so poorly that they have to go on public assistance? Or by selling inferior merhandise that has to be replaced to often that it nullifies the savings those low prices were supposed to provide? I know, we're not here to debate the Walmart issue. But, as far as solutions go, there are organizations mobilized to address Walmart, and I do my part by avoiding Walmart and telling my friends about them. I feel that I have done my part by letting people know about the issue, and then letting them decide how to address it in their own lives. And, in answer to your question "What economic activity are you willing to propose or create that would replace the amount of economic activity that Walmart generates?" my answer is simply this: Fairness. Share the wealth. Let the workers who operate the store share in the profits to the extent that they can earn a living wage. Let those who own the store, who are the richest family on earth, I think, last I heard, make a few billion a year less so that their employees can share in the rewards. Otherwise, they continue to be the sort of place that inspired Marx.
Wolnosc,
Ok, I read the article. Just how much of this is confirmed? If some of this was true, then why hasn't Rove been indicted for slander and libel? I don't think "He's too rich and powerful" would be the right answer unless we do use the same one for Ted Kennedy. There are few more integrated into S.C. politics than myself, and this writer makes assertions I have never even heard:
"Rove's operation proceeded to target McCain with false stories: McCain was a stoolie for his captors in the Hanoi Hilton (this from a lunatic self-promoting Vietnam "veteran"); McCain fathered a black daughter out of wedlock (a despicable reference to McCain's adopted Bangladeshi daughter); Cindy McCain's drug "abuse"; and even McCain's "homosexuality."
I think that if anyone would have been in line to hear such, it would have been me. I heard nothing of the sort? Also, this article is loaded with conjecture--something that really calls into doubt the validity of it.
It seems that when the losing side often accuses the other of evil and call it strategy when they employ it themselves. I think that this is hypocricy on the part of those who do so. Politics is dirty--always has been always will be. Rove is no dirtier than Carville or even Berger--a man who stole classified documents and destroyed them illegally.
If one is going to attack evil, then attack it where it is--not just when its someone else's party. Being critical of another only when it suites one's purpose is hypocritical.
I'm not defending Rove--I don't know him. I just want someone to offer us some clear, authoritative, substantive, (and free, Mochi) information that would be more of an indictment than the stuff floating around the net. Maybe if Rove is proven the leak for the Plame affair it might be a little more convincing.
-Jack
Liberal or conservative the Atlantic Monthly is well worth the investment. There are plenty of articles out there. Search for information regarding the below and draw your own conclusions, after all I don't want to be viewed as a dispenser of liberal crap:
"The 1986 Texas gubernatorial campaign in which Rove worked for Republican challenger Bill Clements, and against Democratic incumbent Mark White
"The 1990 campaign for Texas Agricultural Commissioner, where Rove represented Rick Perry (later Governor of Texas) against Jim Hightower"
Mochi,
Don't view you as such. Have high hopes for the Neo-Libs!
-Jack
__________________________________
Shea, since we have a good discussion going I'll try to respond to some of your thoughts:
Shea: Jack, I'll stick with the Walmart theme since it's a good vehicle for this discussion. I don't want to eliminate Walmart. It has its place in our consumer culture. However, I would like them to eliminate some of their practices, because they do some bad things that far outweigh the goodness of low prices. Are they really helping low income people by paying their employees so poorly that they have to go on public assistance?
Jack: Shea, I don't understand why people work at Walmart then. Why don't they go get jobs elsewhere where they will be better paid? If there are no other stores in the area, why don't those people move to areas with better paying jobs or better employment? Or...why don't those individuals try to improve their marketability by going to free educational institutions so they can get better jobs? I think that many of the people that work at Walmart work there by choice--either current or past, it is still choices they make that put them there. I think that many of them should be thankful to have a job, which would not be there if Walmart left. In my business I never paid more than what the job was worth. I had people that I paid over $150K a year and others I paid minimum wage. The ones that got the $150K did work commiserate with the salary--as did the minimum wage employees. No one is forced to work at Walmart. (except maybe by circumstance).
Shea: Or by selling inferior merhandise that has to be replaced to often that it nullifies the savings those low prices were supposed to provide?
Jack: Market forces that have been in place since the time of Adam and Eve indicate that lower costs yield an inferior product. This is an economic constant that God himself could not overcome. Also, one's financial condition has always given them only what they could afford. I can't see Walmart as doing anything but providing people what they can afford. And...they take back EVERYTHING! I saw a guy bring a fishing rod that looked 20 years old back to Walmart, no receipt, and they gave him a new one. ha!
Shea: I know, we're not here to debate the Walmart issue. But, as far as solutions go, there are organizations mobilized to address Walmart, and I do my part by avoiding Walmart and telling my friends about them.
Jack: Yeah, I see what you mean. It's not the best example of where we're going on the discussion. But keep in mind that Walmart creates billions in economic activity (for those who are Keynesian, that's a measure of prosperity) and provides many jobs that ordinarily would not be there.
Shea: I feel that I have done my part by letting people know about the issue, and then letting them decide how to address it in their own lives. And, in answer to your question "What economic activity are you willing to propose or create that would replace the amount of economic activity that Walmart generates?" my answer is simply this: Fairness. Share the wealth. Let the workers who operate the store share in the profits to the extent that they can earn a living wage.
Jack: Shea, a couple of questions:
1. What is a living wage? I know a young girl whose parents live next door. She works two jobs at minimum wage and gets by fine! She pays her rent, owns her car, eats. It seems like if she had a husband who did the same they would do fine--even with kids (if they take advantage of the free daycare available through First Steps). I guess I don't understand what you mean by a "living wage"
2. Sharing the wealth-like I mentioned above, there is no way that I would give an individual who aspired to be a floor sweeper who sweeps my floor a wage beyond what they earn. I will hire a high school graduate floor-sweeper to sweep my floor and pay them a floor sweeping wage. I will hire an accountant who went to college for four years, and spends time each year earning continuing education credits an accountants wage for an accountants job. If the floor sweeper would like to take advantage of the free education available to one of his socio-economic status and better himself, earn a degree in accounting, establish his competency then I will pay him the accountants wage for the accountants work.
Shea: Let those who own the store, who are the richest family on earth, I think, last I heard, make a few billion a year less so that their employees can share in the rewards. Otherwise, they continue to be the sort of place that inspired Marx.
Jack: Marx was never inspired by capitalism, Shea. I think I know the parallel you are seing, as he believed in the Borgeoise and the Proletariat, but firmly implanted within his philosophy was the sharing of wealth as you suggest. The Waltons didn't become the richest in the world by being humanitarians, they made their money by being shrewd business people. BUT...if this is what you truly believe, then going back to our original query of "doing something about it" or finding solutions, if by analysis you think they are doing something wrong you have done well in pointing it out and advising others not to participate.
THIS is what I'm talking about in terms of the Neo-Libs site. If you think it, can substantiate it, and feel strongly enough about it, provide a light for others to follow and they will follow.
"Neo-Libs - You got problems? We have solutions"
Enjoying the chat...
-Jack
P.S. I do agree that we are on the path to communism like you said, Shea. I'll share more thoughts about that a little later.
Jack: First, did you really read the report in the link from my Walmart post?
I don't understand why people work at Walmart then. Why don't they go get jobs elsewhere where they will be better paid?
Well, duh. Many of them are trying. Many times there are no jobs out there, especially in rural areas. When you cannot take time off from your job to look for other work, what can you do? Don't tell me they should just take the time off and go find other work, because that is an ignorant statement. Looking for better work is a time-intensive, expensive process. I know.
If there are no other stores in the area, why don't those people move to areas with better paying jobs or better employment?
With all due respect, that statement demonstrates a complete lack of knowledge about the situation many of these people face. It would take a lot more space than this to describe the reality to you, so I'll only say that I know from experience that you are not aware of the reality
Or...why don't those individuals try to improve their marketability by going to free educational institutions so they can get better jobs?
FREE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS!? OMFG! What planet do they have those on? AAUUGGH!
I think that many of the people that work at Walmart work there by choice--either current or past, it is still choices they make that put them there.
Only when the choice is, "Become homeless, or go totally on welfare, or work for Walmart and go a on a little less welfare." Really, it's all choices, isn't it? The slaves in the old south chose to stay on the plantations rather than run away, didn't they? It was their choice so it justified slavery, didn't it?
I think that many of them should be thankful to have a job, which would not be there if Walmart left.
WRONG. Walmart has destroyed other, better businesses, largely through unfair market practices. If Walmart were gone, other business would be there. That's free-enterprise business physics that even right-wingers agree with.
In my business I never paid more than what the job was worth.
If you're saying that you paid as little as you could to the most desperate taker, then shame on you.
No one is forced to work at Walmart. (except maybe by circumstance).
Does that justify their horrible, unfair, abusive practices? Their drain on the taxpayers? The lies they tell their customers?
I can't see Walmart as doing anything but providing people what they can afford.
Now you try to justify poor quality products? What are you trying to achieve with that?
But keep in mind that Walmart creates billions in economic activity
Again, that is not a justification for the bad things they do. The Mafia generated a lot of economic activity, too. So does the methamphetimine trade. That doesn't make it right.
...and provides many jobs that ordinarily would not be there.
As I stated before, that is not true. The market void would be filled. It it would not have to be filled by an equally rotten organization.
What is a living wage?
A living wage is one where a family can support itself and afford shelter (a decent little apartment or something), nutritous food, a few decent articles of clothing, maintain an automobile (including insurance), a phone for emergencies, school costs for children if they have them. Is that too much to ask?
I know a young girl...
Yeah, and I know people in their 40s and 50s who apply for job after job and can't get hired at decent jobs because the employers hire those "young girls", so these folks have to settle for crap work and perhaps sacrifice their health care, prescriptions, eyeglasses and god know what else. Lovely society you endorse.
Sharing the wealth-like I mentioned above, there is no way that I would give an individual who aspired to be a floor sweeper who sweeps my floor a wage beyond what they earn.
Jack, again, I am talking about a company that pays them so little they cannot pay rent, afford healthcare, etc. AND HOW DARE YOU INSULT THE WORKERS I AM DEFENDING WITH THAT "ASPIRED TO BE A FLOOR SWEEPER"! How condescending!
I will hire a high school graduate floor-sweeper to sweep my floor and pay them a floor sweeping wage. I will hire an accountant who went to college for four years, and spends time each year earning continuing education credits an accountants wage for an accountants job.
Right. Maybe the floor sweeper has ten times the integrity that your accountant will ever have, but he never was able to afford to go to college because his father died and he had to go to work to help support his familty and he's struggled ever since and now he's 45 and can't catch a break BECAUSE HIS BOSS WON'T PAY HIM ENOUGH THAT HE COULD TAKE CONTINUING EDUCATION CLASSES LIKE THE GOLDEN BOY ACCOUNTANT!
If the floor sweeper would like to take advantage of the free education available to one of his socio-economic status...
There is NO SUCH THING. I dare you to show me that anything like that exists. I'm waiting.
Marx was never inspired by capitalism - Wrong.
I do agree that we are on the path to communism like you said, Shea. - How dare you put those words in my mouth! I NEVER SAID THAT! I HATE when people do that. Those are YOUR words, Jack, not mine.
PS - Jack, sorry if I sound too confrontational. It's just that I'm passionate about what I see as a social injustice.
Shea,
First of all no apology needed at all! I like passion, and I appreciate someone who believes strongly in something. Our nation was built on the backs of such individuals. This string is getting a little long, so I'll try to respond in maybe a narrative instead of inside your text. Hope it makes sense.
Issues raised:
1. Challenge on free education. Shea, from 1992-1996 I was in education. First I taught in the Penn State system and then later I accepted a job as executive director of a small private junior college call Forrest Junior College. When I was at Forrest the large majority of our students paid $0.00 toward their education. Yes, they sometime had to work to pay for living expenses, but many of the students from Georgia (through a women's services group) even had those paid for. The agencies available for people who can't afford an education but want one are too numerous for me to number here. I have no idea what state you live in, but if you were to contact any struggling private institution who needs students, they can provide plenty of information on who will pick up the tab for you. I'm not sure about the "dare" part. But for you to say this there is no such thing as free tuition and books suprises me. There are more than 50,000 grants, fellowships and scholarship programs, many based on I&R.
2. Inability to secure other work. Americans are soft. Americans are spoiled. I understood this from living overseas where I had friends who lived in cardboard boxes. Jishua, walked 11 miles to work every day, one way-barefoot, in order to feed his family.
Americans often sicken me with their entitlement mentality. Our definition of poor is far different from the rest of the world's, Shea, and what we call "hardship" has no basis for worldly comparison.
In America we are "owed" a job. We are "owed" a "living wage". If no one will hire us, then we are "owed" welfare. If we don't drive two cars and own a 2000 square foot house, we call it "social injustice". And then we wonder why the rest of the world looks at us with disdain.
Shea, this is something that I am passionate about. We live in a nation where food is given away, shelter is available to those who refuse to work, and there is opportunity on every corner--even for our infirmed and handicapped. But instead of gracious thanks, we live in a nation of whiners, people who gripe because they don't have as much as the Smith's. I just wish that for a second those who feel so entitled could go to Africa or New Guinea and live for even a year.
You need to think about this statement, Shea:
"Only when the choice is, "Become homeless, or go totally on welfare, or work for Walmart and go a on a little less welfare." Really, it's all choices, isn't it? The slaves in the old south chose to stay on the plantations rather than run away, didn't they? It was their choice so it justified slavery, didn't it?"
3. Unfair market practices
I need a few more specifics on "unfair market practices". Lower prices, purchasing power, market share--none of these are unfair practices, but simply doing business. Is competition an "unfair practice"? I need a bit more clarification on that.
4. My business and what I paid my employees.
Shea, we had 60 employees. When I sold (my partner and I had built it from the ground up) we had turnover of almost 0. Two people left the business in the 6 years I was with it. Both who left, had to because their spouses relocated. Everyone I hired stayed there because they wanted to, and they were paid for what they contributed. But, I reiterate, I did not pay the guy who cleaned our building the same thing I paid the guy who oversaw our consultants.
Shea, there is one thing that you seem to miss in your whole narrative. Choice. People choose to shop at Walmart. If they didn't it wouldn't be there. People choose to work at Walmart. If they didn't it wouldn't be there.
Lastly, I think I understand where you are coming from, Shea, when I read your definition of "living wage". Only rich and fat Americans have that sense of entitlement (I am speaking from the perspective of a foreigner--this is the way they refer to us overseas). If this is what most Americans believe and feel, then I can understand where Walmart is a pox to society. I only wish that every American could live anywhere else in the world. The French, British, Asians, all of those nations out there have justification for their contempt.
No, Shea, I am not coming from a position of condescension, I am coming from a position of disbelief in a people who have more in their poverty than many of the world in their riches.
Lastly, a brief biography. Shea, I am the son of a missionary. My father made less than $15,000 a year at the height of his earnings. We were poor people by American standards. When we came back to the United States, I had finished high school and I decided I wanted to go to college. At the time I was eligible for pell grants and low income scholarships, but I was determined to have none of it. I worked a full time job at McDonalds (40+ hours a week) and paid every cent of my college tuition. Near my senior year, I didn't have enough for food and my education, so the University let me make payments my final year. I worked every evening until 1 in the morning, and double shifts on the weekend. Most of the time I took over the maximum allowed credit hours and graduated with two degrees. No one gave me anything. I did it myself. This opportunity is available to anyone, Shea. I am where I am today because I refused to sit still and whine about what this nation wasn't giving me, and was too busy taking advantages of the opportunities that it provided. That's the fundamental difference between me and a Walmart employee(who doesn't want to be a Walmart employee), Shea. I'm not insulting them, I'm just saying that many of them can do better but are content with what they have. These aren't "victims" you have to defend, Shea. Many are people with every ability to do more and be more. You don't help them by reinforcing their victim mentality, but rather by empowering and inspiring them to reach higher. And, I am not saying I am better than any of them--coming from a poor background and having a poor family would never allow me to do that.
Sorry about the communism remark. I thought that "Otherwise, they continue to be the sort of place that inspired Marx" was indicative of the way you saw things going giving your statements about Walmart and the "big business" inferences.
P.S.
Shea, I know you are passionate about some things, and I respect that. I appreciate your candor and honesty!
Kindest regards,
-Jack
Wolnosc,
Sorry I didn't reply earlier. I agree--if Rove is guilty of the Plame affair (and we're still not sure if she really is a CIA operative are we?) and he purjured himself, then he deserves to be punished by the law just like anyone. (Of course, our friend Bill Clinton purjured himself and walked away scott-free didn't he!)
I guess the thing that gets me about people who start pointing self-righteous fingers (and I'm not saying that you are) is that they are often inconsistent. I ran into a lot of anti-war protestors back when we entered Iraq under Bush, and asked them if they had protested back when Clinton had invaded Haiti and when he used the U.S. military to kill people in Iraq, Afghanistan, Sudan, Bosnia, Somalia, Iraq and Kosovo. Of course none of them had. You see, the majority of these people weren't anti-war, but anti-Bush and everything he does. These people are unprincipled, because they are tied more to an ideology than a conviction. Clinton bombs we justify and look the other way, Bush bombs we go into a frenzy and march on Washington.
It all comes down to an issue of credibility, and the rantings on the left are as credible as the rantings on the right. You get my drift I'm sure.
Anyhow, I learned what many "leftists" were like during the Ken Starr investigation. Ken had an impeccable record. (This is the singular issue that pretty much lays to rest any personal destruction leveled against him) He was given a job to do, and he did it. His reward? They tried to destroy him personally. They tried to fabricate, lie, do anything the could to a guy just doing a job he was given.
I demand equal justice across the board for everyone--that's the reason, even though I bend conservative, I am against the death penalty, because if you're not going to punish the like of Ted Kennedy appropriately, then you shouldn't hold someone of less political and socio-economic stature to a harsher standard. That's the reason when I hear the "Rove is evil" stories and conspiracy kooks I do like you and take it with a grain of salt.
Good to chat,
-Jack
Post a Comment
<< Home