Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed
Here we go again. No sooner had President Bush commuted the sentence of Prisoner 28301-016 (”Cheney’s Cheney” to his pals), and the champagne begun to flow at Mary Matalin’s house, than the media launched into its usual, knee-jerk attempt to analyze the response to the decision in terms of right vs left.
Airwaves and news pages were quickly filled with talk of “outrage from the left,” “criticism from the left,” and how the commutation “will further drive the left crazy.”
It’s positively Pavlovian. Ring the issue bell, and reporters start to drool about right vs left. Even when the facts show that the Libby commutation — like the war in Iraq, like the war on drugs, like global warming — is not an issue that splits along right/left lines.
In a SurveyUSA poll taken immediately after the commutation was announced, 60 percent of those surveyed said they disagreed with the decision, including 35 percent of conservatives. And, in an earlier Time magazine/SRBI poll, 72 percent said they would disapprove of a pardon. So unless “the left” has recently had an incredible growth spurt, a lot of people on the so-called “right” are feeling outraged too.
And if this was so clearly a right/left issue, how come only Tom Tancredo and Sam Brownback offered an unequivocal “Yes” during the New Hampshire debate when asked if they would pardon Libby (the other candidates either said “No,” or took a wait-and-see stance)?
Is it really that hard for the media to address this issue without the left/right crutch? Or, if journalists and pundits insist on hobbling along using that musty terminology, can they at least do a little research and see that there are plenty on “the right” who aren’t exchanging high-fives over Libby dodging the prison bullet?
All they’d have to do is click on this post from conservative blogger Patterico, who said “You do the crime, you do the time… This wasn’t right.” (Double entendre intended) Or they could have checked out Orin Kerr, a conservative law blogger who used to clerk for Justice Anthony Kennedy (and we saw how liberal he is this Supreme Court term). Kerr wrote: “I find Bush’s action very troubling because of the obvious special treatment Libby received.”
And that’s the point. Bush’s imperial chutzpah — commuting Libby without even consulting with the Justice Department — isn’t a matter of right vs left, it’s a matter of right vs wrong.
Anyone who believes in the rule of law, who believes that cronyism is wrong, who believes that all citizens should “stand before the bar of justice as equals.” and who believes that juries should be overruled only in the most extraordinary cases, knows that this decision was flat wrong. (You know, someone like George Bush, who, as Governor of Texas, said: “I don’t believe my role is to replace the verdict of a jury with my own, unless there are new facts or evidence of which a jury was unaware, or evidence that the trial was somehow unfair.” And none of those exceptions applied in this case.)
Can someone please alert the media: not every issue fits your cherished right/left paradigm. Indeed, that way of looking at the world is becoming less and less relevant — and more and more absurd.
Arianna Huffington is the editor of The Huffington Post and the author of many books, including her most recent, On ‘Becoming Fearless….in Love, Work and Life‘.
Popularity: 1% [?]
The quote below including a Bush quote in this case one could contend that Bush was actually being consistent in perfidity, that he did know more than the Jury. What he knew was that he and/or Cheney had directly ordered Libby to out Plame and that the Scooter might not maintain his silence of this fact when faced with an actual prison.
““I don’t believe my role is to replace the verdict of a jury with my own, unless there are new facts or evidence of which a jury was unaware, or evidence that the trial was somehow unfair.” And none of those exceptions applied in this case.)”
It’s not a left right world except in the eyes of recent grads from the University of Missouri and Pretty girlie boy evening news faces.
This is about pond scum in charge. A beast of a Veep kept chained in the bunker when he is not out shooting lawyers.
A playboy Pres too dumb to find his ass with his hands tied behind his back. His fingers deep in the till he shows us the Waffen SS can be mixed with the common thief (”he has the mind of a child.”)
I think it’s against the law for one crook to pardon another. Some call it conspiracy…but not on air.
Of course it is not the job of the press to expose high crimes and misdemeanors our appears to be cheer leading meaningless concepts.
After looking at the list of Bill’s excessive pardons, including his brother, I think the less said by the “left” the better. It’s past time for term limits on senators. There are too many relatives on the payroll with 6 digit salaries. Reid, Pelosi, et al were supposed to clean up Washington, but all I see is deeper muck and mire. Lower ratings than Bush prove the Democrats haven’t offered anything “clean” to the American public. Thank God talk radio is exposing the hypocrisy in both parties.
Of course, trying to dredge up the Fairplay bill would totally prove the inability of the Democrats to be honest.
and of course those with intellectual integrity believe that the entire process was a farce. cohen form wapo (NOT a conservative) said it pretty well 2 weesk ago. excertped below. but you left that part out didnt you? funny.
With the sentencing of I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Fitzgerald has apparently finished his work, which was, not to put too fine a point on it, to make a mountain out of a molehill. At the urging of the liberal press (especially the New York Times), he was appointed to look into a run-of-the-mill leak and wound up prosecuting not the leaker — Richard Armitage of the State Department — but Libby, convicted in the end of lying. This is not an entirely trivial matter since government officials should not lie to grand juries, but neither should they be called to account for practicing the dark art of politics. As with sex or real estate, it is often best to keep the lights off.
The upshot was a train wreck — mile after mile of shame, infamy, embarrassment and occasional farce, all of it described in the forthcoming “Off the Record,” a vigorously written account of what went wrong, by Norman Pearlstine, Time Inc.’s former editor in chief. The special counsel used the immense power of the government to jail Judith Miller and to compel other journalists, including Time’s Matt Cooper, to suspend their various and sacred vows of silence just so they could, understandably, avoid jail. The press held itself up to mockery, wantonly promising confidentiality, anonymity — what’s the diff, anyway? — and virtual life after death to anyone with a piece of gossip to peddle. Much heroic braying turned into cries for mercy as the government bore down. As any prosecutor knows — and Martha Stewart can attest — white-collar types tend to have a morbid fear of jail.
As Fitzgerald worked his wonders, threatening jail and going after government gossips with splendid pluck, many opponents of the Iraq war cheered. They thought — if “thought” can be used in this context — that if the thread was pulled on who had leaked the identity of Valerie Plame to Robert D. Novak, the effort to snooker an entire nation into war would unravel and this would show . . . who knows? Something. For some odd reason, the same people who were so appalled about government snooping, the USA Patriot Act and other such threats to civil liberties cheered as the special prosecutor weed-whacked the press, jailed a reporter and now will send a previously obscure government official to prison for 30 months.
This is precisely the sort of investigation that Jackson was warning about. It would not have been conducted if, say, the Iraq war had ended with 300 deaths and the mission had really been accomplished. An unpopular war produced the popular cry for scalps and, in Libby’s case, the additional demand that he express contrition — a vestigial Stalinist-era yearning for abasement. No one has yet explained, though, how Libby can express contrition and still appeal his conviction. No matter. Antiwar sanctimony excuses the inexplicable.
Accountability is one thing. By all means, let Congress investigate and conduct oversight hearings with relish and abandon. But a prosecution is a different matter. It entails the government at its most coercive — a power so immense and sometimes so secretive that it poses much more of a threat to civil liberties, including freedom of the press, than anything in the interstices of the scary Patriot Act. The mere arrival of a form letter from the IRS will give any sane person a touch of angina.
I don’t expect George Bush to appreciate this. He is the privileged son of a privileged son, and he fears nothing except, probably, doubt. But the rest of us ought to consider what Fitzgerald has wrought and whether we are better off for his efforts. I have come to hate the war and I cannot approve of lying under oath — not by Scooter, not by Bill Clinton, not by anybody. But the underlying crime is absent, the sentence is excessive and the investigation should not have been conducted in the first place. This is a mess. Should Libby be pardoned? Maybe. Should his sentence be commuted? Definitely.
hey ’steven holt’
a) i didnt know libby “outted” plame, i thought armitage did that
b) i didnt know plame could be outted as she was not a NOC
c) i didnt know anyone ordered the outting on someone who couldnt be outted anyway
d) i didnt know the jury convicted libby of outting anyone, or proving that plame was covert
so where do you derive the fanasies you seem to be invested in? the MSM? or you just really really want it to be true, so you create a reality that does not exist? thats cool, man, humans do that. just dont confuse your false emotionally created reality with the “real” one, dude. cause when the real one eventually wills out, you are in for a train wreck, mentally. peace out!
By Danny Schechter
As millions of homes are foreclosed upon, as unemployment grows and inflation mounts, it is time to understand the origins of the crisis and the need to fight for economic justice.
Written by veteran media critic and Emmy winner Rory O'Connor, Shock Jocks features unsparing profiles of the ten worst conservative radio talkers in America, including Michael Savage, Bill O' Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, Don Imus and the rest.