elsewhere .... 
 www.heartlandmurmurs.com

Some elucidation on the administration’s thinking regarding illegal immigration reform courtesy USA Today editorial interview with Secretary of Homeland Security Chertoff, and Commerce Secreatry Gutierrezz

Sec.Chertoff

acknowledged there is "a fundamental unfairness" in legislation that permits illegal immigrants to remain in the United States but said trying to force them to leave would be impossible, USA Today reported.

"We are bowing to reality," Chertoff said.

So there you have it.  As I have pointed out in my Good Fences post this is mostly a question of fundamental unfairness and, while it is refreshing that some higher ups finally acknowledge that reality, the other reality they are “bowing to”, “trying to force them to leave would be impossible” is precisely the problem we enforcement first hold-outs have with the proposal.  Good grief.  Apparently he doesn’t abide the “fool me once” axiom. 

 

What, exactly, has the government done in terms of enforcement before that could possibly engender any good faith belief that they would do any better this time?

 

Here’s another reality for your consideration Mr. Chertoff; had the U.S. Government, under administrations from both parties over two decades, shown even a hint of competence, political will, or even minimal diligence in enforcing old illegal immigration laws, you would be enjoying vastly wider support when introducing new ones.  Until then, that old Heartland horse sense just has me convinced you are trying to fool me twice.

 

And there’s this from Commerce Sec. Gutierrez

The U.S. needs more foreign workers as baby boomers retire, the Commerce secretary said. His department's figures show the population aged 25-54 growing at 0.2% a year while the workforce is growing at 1.2% a year.

A political gaff has been described as when someone from Washington DC accidentally tells the truth.  This may qualify. 

But there you have it, granting amnesty has nothing to do with fairness, security, or anything else.  It’s all about growing the government.  Without illegal immigrants Social Security will go bankrupt. 

When the 800 million pound gorilla of a welfare state gets in the ring on any issue, clean elections, security, constitutional matters, any issue at all, bet on the gorilla.  It must and will be fed, and nothing can interfere with the feeding of the beast. 

If you don’t believe the political ringmasters routinely betray their oaths of office to do so you are delusional.  But hey, don’t feel bad, some of us bought into the notion that George W Bush was a conservative.  Shame on me.  

 

 

 The time is fast approaching when Heartland Murmurs will be taken to a new place and level.  Keep watch.  First post will be an updates of last years Memorial Day, an homage to my father, from the greatest generation.

Oh yeah, why blog?  This quote pretty much somes it up...

"The ordinary man is passive. Within a narrow circle, home life, and perhaps the trade unions or local politics, he feels himself master of his fate. But otherwise he simply lies down and lets things happen to him." 
                                                                            ---George Orwell

Apparently many Senators, and President Bush, either have never heard the above expression, don't get it, or are ignoring the wisdom of it and hoping we all forgot about it.

Only abortion rivals the emotionalism involved in illegal immigration.  From the "Everything I'd Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten" department we learned that our political so-called leaders didn't learn one of life's earliest lessons: NO CUTTING IN LINE!, which, in essence, is the crux of the immigration issue.  

The idea that people who broke the law to get here will get all the rights and benefits of those who waited in line is just fundamentally wrong.  It is about basic fairness, which us dumb old Heartlanders still think means something.  The idea that any rhetorical rationale could possibly justify this travesty only shows how stupid those leaders think we are.   

In the end, if this passes it will be for two very obvious, and very politically self serving reasons:
1) cheap votes for Democrats
2) cheap labor for Republicans.

On point one it boggles the mind to think that Republicans can't grasp how this could well be a dagger to the heart of the party, one that could prove fatal.   It uses one side of the blade to sever the base, and the other to carve out a fresh new contstituency that will vote Democrat, if past history holds, by a ratio of 3 to 1. 

Seems to me that if someone had the charge of destroying the Republican Party their scheme for doing so would look a lot like this.

As for point 2 above, cheap labor, this shows the worst side of captalism, where the short term profits completely obscures long term vision, and basic ethics were never even considered.  This is not to mention the new breath of life into a dying union.

All curious beyond my comprehension but, if there is any fairness at all, it does have a silver lining, as the beginning of the end of the McCain Presidential bid.  it is only fitting his career will die along with the party he killed.

 

While researching some quotes for my book I stumbled across this gem: 
"The quickest way to end a war is to lose it".
 - - - George Orwell
I am always amazed at how the most obvious and simplest is so often the most profound. Quite obviously the Democrat leadership has not only read this quote but have adopted it as their strategy. 
 
Here's a supporting thought from Dr. Thomas Sowell musing about Speaker Pelosi and her recent freelance foreign policy trip:
 
"Such a drastic and irresponsible step should remove any lingering doubt that the Democrats' political strategy is to ensure that there is an American defeat in Iraq, in order to ensure their own political victory in 2008."  - - - Thomas Sowell  

 
If you have any doubts, don’t take it from me or Dr. Sowell, take it from the Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid:
 ``We're going to pick up Senate seats as a result of this war.''  

And apparently he just can't wait because late last week he said:

"I believe ... that this war is lost, and this surge is not accomplishing anything, as is shown by the extreme violence in Iraq this week"

Never mind the troop surge has not even been fully implemented yet. That's just one of those dumb old facts interfering with a good story.

Call me cynical but to these gimlet eyes, the Democrat stance has evolved from full support when they voted overwhelmingly to authorize the war, to tepid support when the war was not executed in an error and casualty free manner, to actively agitating for our defeat. The one consistency in this evolution is that in each case they voted in accordance to the windsock of public opinion.

I am through with trying to reconcile the obvious contradiction in how certain people can spew crap like this and still consider themselves patriotic. Logic must exist in the first place, if it is to be found at all. But while the actions speak for themselves, it's the motivations that until now have left me bewildered.

I think I have finally figured it out. It takes more than mental contortion to hold two diametrically opposing thoughts simultaneously - - it takes the mentality of a fundamentalist. Too harsh you say?

Here is the Encarta definition:

1. movement with strict view of doctrine: a religious or political movement based on a literal interpretation of and strict adherence to doctrine, especially as a return to former principles

I didn't read Ann Coulters Godless and am not familiar with her thesis, so I may be covering old ground here; but when you wonder about the motivation of defeatist Democrats, and remember the fundamental doctrine of any political party is to win elections, it all starts to make sense.

Like their radical Islamist counterparts, Dems are perfectly willing to both inflict and endure casualties for their cause. This explains how Reid, Pelosi, Feingold, et. al. have no compunction about aiding and abetting the enemy with their reckless, troop-endangering rhetoric.

If the result of their actions was only political this would not be so bad. As it stands however, the Democrats increasing pursuit of defeat does treble damage; increases the likelihood of higher casualties now, virtually guarantees massively higher body counts, both at home and abroad, in the future, and worst of all, imparts the most grievous insult possible to those who died trying to win.

But apparently this troubles not the fundamentalist mind, because it adheres to the cause of the fundamental doctrine - - winning the next election.

 

This has been such a week from he11 and there really is only one place to start.  A deranged jerk killed 32 people for no apparent reason other than to have NBC air his homemade video.  In one craven, ratings-driven, decision NBC managed to rub tons of salt in fresh wounds while at the same time glorifying the perpetrator in granting his dieing wish.  Lovely.  And that's to say nothing about the encouragement they offered potential copycats.

 

The only possible upside to this horrendously callous editorial decision is the backlash dealt a serious blow to a network in particular, and medium in general.  If actions like these don’t hasten the gushing exodus of eyeballs to better delivered, more reliable, and trusted sources I am not sure what will.   So, in the words of the Carl Spackler, we have that going for us.

 

And of course the massacres resurrected two very predictable reactions described by Neal Boortz at Nealz Newz.  Boortz is perhaps the best, if not only, libertarian personality working today.  His site is always worth a look.  The two predictable reactions; first, the Pavlovian gun control dogs were frothing at the mouth while the bodies were still warm.  Second, the blamethrowers were out in full force.  This is that group whose frustration at their own inability to understand the incomprehensible speculate, in hindsight, at how this might have been avoided and call for someone’s head.  As if… 

 

As to the gun control dogs; had VA Tech was not been a gun free zone, i.e. subjected to strict gun control laws, there would be a lot fewer funerals this week.  Period.  Guns don’t kill people; stupid gun control laws kill people.

 

As to the blamethrowers; get a life, or at least grant the courtesy of a grieving period to rethink the notion that firing someone in the heat of raw emotionalism is any kind of salve for the survivors.  While you are at it, try to grasp the reality that some things are, and will remain, inexplicable.  With that in mind recognize this will not be the last horrible tragedy and focus your passions more on preventing future events instead of condemning innocent bystanders at this one.    

 

I am not sure why but my hunch is that a study of this group would reveal it to be disproportionately secular.  Maybe because it seems consistent with those who require verifiable proof to believe something.  But that, as we say here in the Heartland, is a whole “nuther” matter.  

When we first moved to Milwaukee nearly 10 years ago Don Imus was on one of the two bigger stations during the morning drive time.  Perfectly fine for drive time, don't want to have to think too much and fairly reliable for a good chuckle.   The Richard Nixon and George Patton interviews were particularly funny. 

Soon thereafter he was replaced by a local duo who were equally entertaining.  Haven't really missed him and judging from occasional look-ins on MSNBC he hasn't changed much, or if he did, it wasn't for the better.   His shock jock act finally caught up with him.  So what.  I happened to see the game he was referring to and also commented on the appearance of the Rutgers team, though much more charitably of course.  I was amazed at all the tatoos and remarked it looked like they were getting ready for the NBA.  Was that racist?  I don't think so. 

A celebrity who abused their free speech got a deserving rebuke.  That would be fine if it stopped at the suspension and a personal apology to the Rutgers Women's Basketball Team.   But nooooo, the race pimps brought out the long knives to make an example of him, destroy his career, completely ignore the millions he's raised for charities.  Why?  Because he's white.  But how can you say that?  Well, because black guys, lots of them, mostly in the comedy and music, if you call rap music that is,  business, say much more repugnant things than this on a regular basis and none of them are losing their jobs, in fact many of them only have their jobs because of this shtick. Visit Michelle Malkins Hot Air site for her list showing lyrics to the top 5 rap songs on this weeks charts to see what I mean.  

And how much more completely upside down could it be than to have Al Sharpton, a convicted libeler, sit in judgement on public commentary?  This is a guy who ruined who knows how many lives by championing the false rape accusations of Tawana Brawley.   And his style was hardly the restrained and reasonable tenor he feigns to advocate now.  This courtesy Ben Stein:

...when the Central Park Jogger rape case was in court, Sharpton picketed outside the office of the New York sex crimes prosecutor, Linda Alice Fairstein, in Manhattan. "Day after day," Linda -- a dear friend -- told me, "he would shout out to me and call me a 'Jew b!tch.' He never even remotely apologized." For this man to be sitting in moral judgment on anyone at all is incomprehensible. For the media to take Sharpton seriously is unbelievable.

If we are looking for a word to describe something way beyond irony maybe we could use sharpton.  The disproportionate response to this is so over the top it is almost laughable, and would be, if it wasn't used as a bludgeon to destroy an otherwise good guy.  I may not like his politics but he doesn't deserve this.  Al Sharpton, on the other hand, does.  One wishes the equality and justice he's always harping about would come into play about now. 

Looks like the Bug-Eyed Sack caught a lot more unflattering attention than mine.  And for those who were unsure of my Logan Act reference, I think the Wall Street Journal fact checkers should put the matter to rest..


 WSJ: 'Pelosi may well have committed a felony in traveling to Damascus'...
USA TODAY: Pelosi steps out of bounds...

Have a nice holy day.

 

The British hostages are free.  What about the rest of us?  Not so much.  No, obviously we are not being held captive, paraded in front of cameras in a hostile country, being forced to wear silly headwear and say silly things. (Nancy Pelosi doesn’t count because she does all those things voluntarily).  We are captive in our economic vulnerability.  If we were not energy dependent this could not have happened.

 

This whole episode is a perfect microcosm of the relationship between the West and the Mideast.  The only reason significant parts of Iran are not smoldering piles of rubble is because Western leadership decided it prudent to keep the supply line to 20% of the worlds oil in tact - - this time.

 

That begs the ever more troubling question; what about next time?  Good question, and nowhere posited more eloquently than by Dr. Victor David Hanson, to paraphrase; “if the west is so easily manipulated now, what’s it going to be like once Iran goes nuclear?”

 

A little fascist in a leisure suit has just showed us he has the nutsack of the global economy in his hand, and he gave it a squeeze.  This was only a test.  Is there any doubt that with atomic backup this twerp won’t squeeze until the whole planet turns purple in the face?  

They keep marching to their goal of worldwide Sharia law or nuclear Armageddon, indifferent to which comes first.  We, bless our well-intentioned, economy-preserving, humanitarian hearts, believe they can be dissuaded from their goals through appeasement disguised as diplomacy.  We dawdle in this approach, at most only delaying their march, when we should be getting about the business of destroying their path.  

If we’ve learned nothing else, we have learned every aggression not responded to in kind is seen as a sign of weakness and virtually guarantees more aggression. 

 

So long as our addiction to oil goes untreated we remain vulnerable and can only expect more squeezing.   We are left to trust the good faith of a holocaust denier to handle the global family jewels with care.  Call me squeamish, but somehow I am not altogether comfortable with this arrangement. How long before the sleeping giant, only dreaming those jewels are being coddled, wakes to find them missing altogether? 

Sadly most of Europe and far too many here consider this fate deserved.  That truculence translates into total indifference to the fate of democracy in the Mideast, you know the little “d” democracy that is allegedly the philosophical foundation of big “D” Democrats.  It’s no wonder why so many of us think so many of them are crazy.  But hey, I’m open-minded; maybe I’m the crazy one, I keep expecting coherence from Democrats.  

 

 

 

 

I just love when the planets align with a scheme so simple in its elegance that it borders genius presents itself.  This one has the added appeal of solving two problems at once, the Alberto Gonzalez problem and the Nancy Pelosi problem.

Say what?  Two words "Logan Act" which reads as follows:

§ 953. Private correspondence with foreign governments.

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply himself, or his agent, to any foreign government, or the agents thereof, for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.

18 U.S.C. § 953 (2004).

As for fines or prison or both, I like both, and just to be fair, fine the Republican Congressmen who went along a couple hundred bucks each too.

Now, for legal language this is pretty straightforward.  So straightforward that even a heartland dunderhead like me can see Nancy Pelosi written all over it.  The way I see it the one possible loophole she has to slime through is that this law applies to "citizens" not royalty er, I mean legislators.  Trouble is, you bug-eyed sack, in this particular government, so far at least, the legislature is comprised of citizens.  

Another possible loophole is the private correspondence caveat.  Fine.  Subpoena her for records on every syllable uttered, footstep taken, meeting attended, etc. etc. etc.  Everything she fails to deliver should be spun as something she is trying to hide - you know the old Democrats tactic of guilty til proven innocent, or as in the Scooter Libby fiasco, keep badgering until contradictions materialize and nail her on perjury.  Yeah, that's the ticket!. 

I have no doubt that if Attorney General Gonzalez were to file charges, personally but under his authority, while it lasts, as the chief law enforcement officer, not only would his problems with the firings non-scandal be swept off the front pages but her exposure as a traitor, even if only alleged, would be cemented in history.  Beautiful.  One can dream.   Too bad Republicans insist on playing nice.    

I once shared a rather large apartment with two other guys above the establishment we owned and operated.  We were relatively flush at the time and decided our time was too important to clean our own house, so we hired someone to do the job. 

As is the case with most roomies, some are more, and some are less slovenly.  Ours was no different but the lopsidedness in this case is almost legendary.  Basically the help would come in and clean the whole place, two bedrooms, kitchen, dining room, living room and bath, in one day.  After all that is it took another full day just to clean the other guys bedroom.

That isn't the funny part.  Bear with me.  The humor, dripping in irony, is that on this guys wall there was a placard that read:

NEVER WRESTLE WITH A PIG;

1)     YOU'LL GET ALL DIRTY and...

2)     THE PIG LIKES IT.

What on Gods green earth does that have to do with anything going on politically you might ask. 

I am talking specifically about White House lawyer Monica Goodling and her taking the fifth in refusing a congressional subpeona on constitutional grounds.   Can any honest person really blame her?   

Good on her for calling the Dems out, openly questioning their motives, and helping shed light on their scalp hunting excursion.  Had Democrats demonstrated, ever, any modicum of good faith with this White House, the lack of cooperation would not be justified.  Instead their policy by BDS (Bush derangement syndrome) has finally garnered an appropriate response.  None.  Well played.  

At least someone on that end of Pennsylvania Avenue learned something from the Scooter Libby scalping.
Up to now, when it comes to political hardball, this White House plays a pretty mediocre game of beanbag. 

Ms. Goodling is a breath of fresh air who has the good sense not to wrestle with pigs.  In doing so she not only manages to stay clean but enjoys the added bonus of denying the pigs their pleasure.   

       

Not a lot of time for well thought out column this week but here are a few headlines that caught my eye - - along with the customary smart assery, of course. 

Climate scientist sees cover-up

By Eric Pfeiffer
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
March 20, 2007

A NASA scientist who said the Bush administration muzzled him because of his belief in global warming yesterday acknowledged to Congress that he'd done more than 1,400 on-the-job interviews in recent years.

That crushing of dissent can sure be brutal.  Man, the government under Bush can't even get that right.  I found this one particularly smirksome.  It explains a lot about DC.
Study Finds One-Third in D.C. Illiterate

AP
Mar 19 11:50 AM US/Eastern  WASHINGTON (AP) - About one-third of the people living in the national's capital are functionally illiterate, compared with about one-fifth nationally, according to a report on the District of Columbia.

First of all, I just cut and paste, the typo isn't mine.  The national's capitol?  What is that, the government seat of a major league baseball team?

Now we already know that as a matter of routine the folks in congress don't read the bills they vote on, but up til now it never occurred to me 1 in 3 of them couldn't if they wanted to

So that would be 1 in 3 Congressman and Senators, 1 in 3 bureaucrats, 1 in 3 diplomats.  Like I said, explains a lot about the product we see coming out of there..


And there's this affirmation of my comments from earlier this week.  Looks like WSJ editors have been lurking herabout. 

Subpoena Assault
Congress's real goal is crippling the Bush Presidency.
DUH!

Wall St Journal Editorial March 22

As for Congress's subpoenas, they are being issued largely for the political melodrama they create. ....ya think?
...The point of this stunt isn't to learn what Karl Rove knows, or else Congress would accept the White House offer to interview him in private. The exercise is all about creating an aura of "cover-up" and "illegality," never mind the lack of any evidence.

...But no one should be under any illusions that their political sacrifice at the current moment would appease Democrats. Their real target is Karl Rove, and ultimately the crippling of the Bush Presidency. Whatever benefit Mr. Bush would gain by giving GOP Members a ritual sacrifice would be offset by the costs of putting even more Administration blood in the water.

Here here! Couldn't have said it better myself, oops, already did.


But the always worth a read Charles Krauthammer begs to differ in his column titled

An Unnecessary Scandal

It's not a question of probity, but of competence. Gonzales has allowed a scandal to be created where there was none. That is quite an achievement. He had a two-foot putt and he muffed it.

Not to be mean but this shows how much a guy in a wheelchair knows about putting... sorry Doc.

But seriously, if competency were the standard in Washington there would be an awful lot of empty positions and office space. (think CIA, FBI / 911, FEMA / Katrina, DOD / Walter Reed Hospital etc etc) 

I rarely part company with Dr Krauthammer and it grates on me when self proclaimed conservatives are so willing to toss allies under the bus.  Especially when doing so will only embolden the purgers to continue the scalp hunt.  Why wouldn't they when we make it so easy? 

Caving in is nothing short of unmitigated appeasement, and Democrats who, like the terroists they tend to emulate, tactically that is (although I am sure more than a handful would dance in the streets at Bush's beheading) will just step up the attacks at any sign of weakness. 

What is to be gained by not fighting back at least as hard as they are?  Even if it is only for the sake of doing so on principle it still has the benefit of exposing their depraved politics.    

Last week most assumed the Attorney General would be gone by the end of this week.  I admonished the White House to show some spine and the President, much to his credit, through down the gauntlet on subpoenas. 

You suppose the White House is lurking Heartland Murmers too?  Maybe I'll get 1400 interviews too..... 

 

I plead guilty to cherry picking quotes out of context to prove a point, but this is such a rich example of the cognitive disconnect between feelings and facts that I just had to share it with you. 

 

It is not so much an indictment of the media for casting negative light on what appears to be good news, as if that would be noteworthy.  But it mostly evidence of how poor of a grasp people, or at least those who answer polling questions, have on how the economy works.

 

What a country, while the economy steams along the people affected by it turn their attentions to the latest on American Idol or who sired Anna Nicole Smith’s most recent offspring. 

 

 

The Headline in the AP article reads…

(my comments in blue) 

Unemployment Rate Drops to 4.5 Percent

By JEANNINE AVERSA
AP Economics Writer

 

This is an AP article chocked full of good economic news.  For example

 

 

From the first paragraph:

• Wages grew briskly.

 

And this from further down

 

• job gains in the previous two months turned out to be stronger than previously estimated

 

And of course we need the obligatory expert commentary…

 

• “…the labor market is still in good shape," said Joel Naroff, president of Naroff Economics Advisors. "The job market is still tight enough to drive up workers' wages."

 

And then there’s this…

The Dow Jones industrials were up 12 points in morning trading.

Sensing a pattern yet?  Bear with me…

There are these tidbits of positivism . . .

 Workers' wages grew quickly last month.

 Over the 12 months ending in February, wages grew by 4.1 percent.

I don’t mean to pile on but …

 

• The economy expanded by 3.3 percent last year, the best showing in two years.

 

And of course it wouldn’t be a worthy economic report without mentioning that nasty old trade deficit, but, wait, could it be?  It’s not as bad as we thought…

 

• the trade deficit narrowed to $59.1 billion in January as U.S. exports climbed to an all-time high.

 

AND YET we get this…

Just 41 percent of the public approves of the president's handling of the economy, compared with 57 percent who disapprove, according to an AP-Ipsos poll.

 

Huh? 

So there you have it.  The economy is doing well yet Bush gets more fault for its mishandling than credit for its success.  You might believe negative advertising doesn't work but you'll never convince me.  And this story is a perfect example of why.

I have always believed that good marketing outperforms a bad product every time.  This is a twist on that theory which bears it out in spades.  To wit; A steady marketing campaign in the form of negative, competence-questioning, news against this President on everything from the economy to the war has successfully created, nurtured, and perpetuated the perception that he is incapable of doing anything right, even when the facts prove otherwise.

This is also as good of example as you’re likely to find showing exactly what they mean when they say that in politics, perception is reality.    For another just notice how anti-war types have already declared our defeat in Iraq.  they understand that so long as they get that narative established the reality of an actual victory will be rendered moot.

I gave a lot of credence to those who claimed the Democrats won last November without offering a cogent agenda.  It was clear they had no intention of showing their hand, or didn't have one to show, but decided their best bet was the steady and prolonged anti-Bush agenda, hoping to convince 50% plus 1 that even no agenda at all would be better than this.  It worked. 

Give them credit for political acumen in using the depth of American impatience for electoral advantage proving yet again that  when it comes to conquering by division no one does it better than Democrats.

That, as they say, is history.  Now we get their agenda as seen from the driver's seat and the all important power of the subpoena.  Now that Scooter Libby  is old news, one scalp collected, NEXT!  Enter Alberto Gonzalez..  When it comes to political gamesmanship this White House is sometimes like Elmer Fudd up against the Democrats Bugs Bunny.

For any president other than this the firing of District Attorneys wouldn't even be news.  At will employees in the private sector can be fired with or without cause anytime.  So, supposedly, can District Attorneys.  But now that Rahm Emmanuel is leading Democrat strategy we can count on a steady stream of conflated charges, hearings, and subpoenas.  Trained in the art of political sabotage at the elbows of Bill Clinton and his wife, Emmanuel will ply the craft of gotcha politics with renewed vigor.  They will trumpet, and with the help of their lapdogs in the mainstream media, headline even the hint of incompetence of the White House.

Though not very apparent lately, the bully pulpit does have its advantages but one of them isn't  the luxury of deciding what is and what isn't a scandal.  If he hasn't figured it out by now a scandal is deterrnined by the press and their political division the Democrat party. 

This strategy is not so much a distraction from their complete lack of progress on more pressing issues as it is merely the implementation of their agenda to get Bush.   They are simply keeping the only thing resembling a campaign promise.  There is nothing more important, Iraq, health care, the environment, terrorism, illegal immigration, nothing is more important to the Democrats  than destroying this Presidency.

Many of us foresaw a Democrat victory  rendering an intensified version of their usual gutter politics and it is unfolding week after week.  I personally predicted some sort of impeachment hearings by March.  So far I am wrong but the writing is on the wall.  If you don't think they have a hit list  filled out for the next two years and beyond you haven't been paying attention.  When Gonzalez goes, or even if he doesn't,  it's on to the next scalp.  The strategy is to kick him while he is down so relentlessly that by 2008 we will be so sick of Bush anybody even remotely connected will have a snowballs chance in Alabama of getting elected.  Failing that, if some of them get their fondest wish, the people will get so angry they will demand impeachment hearings. 

The sad part is that, even in spite of the obvious cynical depravity, the strategy is pragmatic and will probably work.   Sadder still is the Republicans, lead by the White House,  insistence in staying above the fray rather than engaging on their terms.  I ask again as I have in the past, Mr President, how's that new tone thing working out for you?  Your chances of winning a gutter fight are pretty poor when you fail to recognize, or refuse to admit, you are in one. 

Seems to me if the White House continues to admonish that we steal our resolve in the war abroad we should expect the same from him regarding the war at home.  


 
 

Well it looks like the liberal media and Democrats got their scalp.  Scooter Libby found guilty on 4 of 5 charges.  I wasn't following this all that closely.. Being in the Heartland here we know our place and this particular production of political theater is more Washington exclusive.  That being said there are a few thoughts and questions about this whole show trial...
questions first:

1. When the trial started one of the first things I wondered was, other than an easier commute, what was the reasoning behind not requesting a change of venue?  Did they actually believe they'd get a fair shake in a Democrat town like Washington?
2. How is it that time and again Republicans operate on the good faith assumption that the press is "only doing its job"?  
3. Are they so naive as to not know the press thinks their job is to destroy them? 
4. Why was the administration so cooperative in this whole charade? 
5. Did they actually believe if they made a show of cooperation they might be treated fairly?
6. Is this the result of President Bushes new tone? and if so..
7. Considering the hatchet job on Tom Delay, and now this, how's that new tone working out for you?

Comments:

1. Scooter Libby is as guilty as OJ is innocent.
2. Even if he is guilty Libbys crime compared to Sandy Bergers is a joke.  If it ever gets to sentencing and he serves a single day in jail it will be colossal miscarriage of justice.
3. This does nothing to change the fact that Joe Wilson lied and those infamous 16 words in that SOTU address are just as true today as they were then.
4. Valerie Plame was not a covert operative, and therefore was not outed, and therefore no crime was committed.  
5. it was the yammering press and Democrats who insisted on this investigation.  The likelihood of these combined forces coming up empty-handed was virtually non-existent.
6. If Bush has any nads at all he will issue a pardon.  What's the worst that could happen, his ratings go down?

Somehow, a jury decided Libby lied.  Now the question remains as to why.  Of course the Dem and press, I know sometimes a simple "they" would suffice, will be regurgitating the same old narrative about manipulating pre war intelligence and quashing dissent yada yada yada.

As a common sense Heartlander I can only belabor the obvious: any time there is a high profile investigation into allegations of a crime, and it is determined none was committed, one will be neccescarily manufactured to justify the investigation.  If the Martha Stewart fiasco didn't prove that theory this should.  

In the end it was about a loyal staffer fending off a cabal of bloodthirsty witch hunters and then falling on his sword for his boss, all because he sincerely, and correctly, felt the boss had much more pressing matters to deal with.

Technically, though I doubt it personally, he may be guilty, so far - - but that doesn't make him wrong.