/b

Twitter Updates

What People Say:
"I never thought I'd read the phrase Crazy Politico's Rantings in the NYT. I'll bet they never thought they'd print anything like that phrase either." TLB

Blogroll Me!

My Blog Rolls

American Flag Bloggers

American Flags

Saturday, October 29, 2005

David Brooks Weighs in

David Brooks of the NY Times has weighed in on the Libby indictments, and Democrats reactions to it.

He has two great quotes in his piece:
"Leading Democratic politicians filled the air with grand conspiracy theories that would be at home in the John Birch Society."

Which is about right. They are getting as bad as the GOP during Clinton's years, when we were all getting turned over the UN, remember the markings on your road signs?

His summary is perfect, just take a trip around the left end of the blogosphere and you'll see how right on he is, or read Kristof's editorial in the same paper demanding Cheney explain.

"So some Democrats were not content with Libby's indictment, but had to stretch, distort and exaggerate. The tragic thing is that at the exact moment when the Republican Party is staggering under the weight of its own mistakes, the Democratic Party's loudest voices are in the grip of passions that render them untrustworthy."

He's pretty well on target with that remark. Hillary, John and Ted are making their usual noises, but not making any sense. Maybe if they'd come up with an actual game plan other than "Bush Lied" people would be listening to them.

I'll have to watch Joe Wilson's interview tomorrow night on 60 Minutes and see what he has to say, it should be pretty funny. Drudge has a preview if you are interested. The CBS spin out to be great.

2Comments:

Anonymous asacan said...

I really don't see the correlation I keep hearing between Mr. Libby's indictment and (ex-Prez) Bill Clinton's impeachment. Clinton, the Commander-in-Chief and head of all Federal departments including the DoJ at the time, had been accused of certain illegal acts that were sexual in nature. He lied to the courts and he lied to the country (on national TV) regarding his habits while in office. He was attempting to deny another American citizen her rights, the ones he took an oath to defend.

If Mr. Libby is convicted of perjury (and the other crimes he is accused of), then he should be punished as such. Perjury is a serious crime. However, I'm trying to figure out what right(s) Mr. Libby (if guilty) was attempting to deny.

Trying to see from the eyes of a liberal (as I once was), if he is convicted, I wonder how the punishment would stack up for perjury, when Sandy Berger never spent a day in jail, and it was all kept pretty "hush-hush", for removing (and probably destroying) classified documents from the National Archives.

12:34 AM  
Blogger Crazy Politico said...

The correlation is really in the fact that both the investigations started looking at a specific crime or incident, but ended up with perjury charges for something else. That was the actual charge BC was impeached on.

Cisneros is probably a better one to look at than Clinton. He was indicted on 18 felony counts of obstruction of justice and perjury, and copped a plea for 1 misdemeanor count and a $10,000 fine.

5:44 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home