. . . Right Now!


Bloviating Nazi

Apropos my previous two posts below, I was suspiciously surprised to hear the Junkie Bigot characterize the secret detention camps we've set up throughout the world as "gulags," just like I did.  The absolutely insufferable thrice divorced blowhard did not disappoint.  He was using his unique gift for satire to attempt the point that folks like me are overreacting to the situation that has Soviet era concentration camps being refurbished, repopulated and used in my name to hide god knows what.

Rather, I should not be concerned that my President is a modern day Torquemada who has officially approved torture chambers, but that some traitor in the CIA must have leaked this fact to the Washington Post.

Gimme a break.  Do you think they'd leak this to Judy Miller at the New York Times?  The story would ever see the light of day? 

Try and fit this into your corpulent noggin Rush, it's all about motive.  When a leak is made to expose corruption, crimes, and just plain Un-American activity by members of our government, especially when there supposedly is an investigation (actually, 12 investigations) to police this activity, that is indeed a "good" leak.  Transparency in a democracy is a "good" thing.

On the other hand, orchestrating leaks based on lies to bolster your feeble rationale to make war and somehow give credibility to claims unsupported by available intelligence is a "bad" leak.  So is leaking the name of secret agents who, once burned, are put in jeopardy along with all their associates just to discredit an administration critic.

Got that you fucking idiot?

BONUS GOP TALKING POINTS THAT WON'T FLY:

I've heard a couple of times that we shouldn't be concerned with Scooter's indictment, after all, who can name the Vice President's Chief of Staff from previous administrations.

Actually, it is indicative of just how disproportionally powerful Dick Cheney is, and what undue influence he holds in this administration that not only was his office completely mired in pushing for war and spreading disinformation to the public, but that we DO INDEED KNOW LIBBY'S NAME.

Remember always, that when the GOPers have nothing, it's all Clinton's fault.  You know they have absolutely no substantive argument when they bring out old Slick Willie.  So when they tell you that Clinton had more scandals than Florida had hurricanes, take one look at the data:  According to the latest CBS Poll which pegs Bush at an all time low of 35% approval, they also ranked the relative importance of recent major scandals.

Naturally, Watergate ranked as the worst one with 53% saying that it was of "Great importance,"  But it was followed closely by the CIA Leak Case currently gaining steam at 51%.  Whitewater and Lewinsky ranked well below those or Iran/Contra on the disgrace parade.  Fittingly so, since the Clinton "scandals" were private, personal incidents while the others involved official abuse of power.  Is it really just coincidental that the GOP scandals were all cases where White House operatives thought they were above the law?  Haven't they figured out that there are so many checks and balances in our system precesely to prevent their kind from taking over?