« I'm a Linux Bigot |
Main
| Busy, but... »
July 20, 2004
Sandy Berger: "Plumber"
The Sandy Berger thing seemed ripe for comment, especially since I know a thing or two about handling highly classified documents, but I remain rather busy with the Parental Unit in town.
I figure the parallels to Watergate are obvious enough. I bet Berger's parents would be so proud that he has chosen a career as a "plumber."
And besides, Steve has everything you need to know on the matter.
Posted by Russ at 05:52 PM, July 20, 2004 in Politics
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.emersons.net/mt/mt-pingback.cgi/527
Comments
Decent, ethical behavior isn't as complicated as a certain unamed political party (and its stable of operatives, pundits, journalists, and other hacks) would have us believe. Do not lie, cheat, or steal, nor tolerate those who do. There, I've said it. What's so complicated about that? Sandy Berger lied to the 9/11 commission (and to John Kerry), he cheated by ignoring or otherwise circumventing all of the major rules for dealing with classified documents and information, and he stole classified documents with a direct bearing on the continued security of this country. Why? Apparently to cover up for his own malfeasance/negligence in dealing with terrorist threats and also to cover up Clinton's similar malfeasance/negligence. Unfortunately, the only misdeed for which Berger is likely to be punished at all is his lie of omission to Kerry (he conveniently forgot to tell Kerry he was under investigation when Kerry tapped him as an advisor), and that "punishment' consisted of mere dismissal by the Kerry camp. Of course, we'll now have to endure the usual DNC propaganda attack: 1) lie big, lie loudly, and lie long enough (at least until enough people believe you); and 2) turn the tables by making outrageous, baseless attacks against the people who caught you red-handed (remember the vast, right-wing conspiracy?). No doubt that great bastion of ethical journalism, the New York Times, will continue to run a nauseating series of editorials decrying the "timing" of the story when they even get around to acknowledging the very existence of a real story. They may even find a way to insinuate that Karl Rove shoved the missing documents in Berger's pants and socks. The only encouraging aspect will be that no one outside their party faithful takes them seriously anymore.
Posted by: secarr at July 30, 2004 02:12 PM
Imperial Department of Hegemony By Force
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.emersons.net/mt/mt-pingback.cgi/527
Comments
Decent, ethical behavior isn't as complicated as a certain unamed political party (and its stable of operatives, pundits, journalists, and other hacks) would have us believe. Do not lie, cheat, or steal, nor tolerate those who do. There, I've said it. What's so complicated about that? Sandy Berger lied to the 9/11 commission (and to John Kerry), he cheated by ignoring or otherwise circumventing all of the major rules for dealing with classified documents and information, and he stole classified documents with a direct bearing on the continued security of this country. Why? Apparently to cover up for his own malfeasance/negligence in dealing with terrorist threats and also to cover up Clinton's similar malfeasance/negligence. Unfortunately, the only misdeed for which Berger is likely to be punished at all is his lie of omission to Kerry (he conveniently forgot to tell Kerry he was under investigation when Kerry tapped him as an advisor), and that "punishment' consisted of mere dismissal by the Kerry camp. Of course, we'll now have to endure the usual DNC propaganda attack: 1) lie big, lie loudly, and lie long enough (at least until enough people believe you); and 2) turn the tables by making outrageous, baseless attacks against the people who caught you red-handed (remember the vast, right-wing conspiracy?). No doubt that great bastion of ethical journalism, the New York Times, will continue to run a nauseating series of editorials decrying the "timing" of the story when they even get around to acknowledging the very existence of a real story. They may even find a way to insinuate that Karl Rove shoved the missing documents in Berger's pants and socks. The only encouraging aspect will be that no one outside their party faithful takes them seriously anymore.
Posted by: secarr at July 30, 2004 02:12 PM