Hypocritically Ignoring the Whole Story

There's been a bit of a controversy circling through the blogasphere based on comments made recently by Powerline blogger "Hindrocket" about Jimmy Carter. Hindrocket wrote about Carter that "Jimmy Carter isn't misguided or ill-informed. He's on the other side." Some bloggers on the left have rightfully objected to Hindrocket's treason accusation against Carter. (This type of accustation is occurring with increasing frequency on the radical right, with the recent comparison of Howard Dean and Lynne Stewart by the NY State Republican Chair that even Governor Pataki denounced.)

Rather than just to give a mea culpa, Hindrocket has decided today to try to defend himself further by citing more examples of what he claims are treasonous acts by Carter. (I'm not sure how he can claim that sitting with Michael Moore during the Democratic convention qualifies as treason, or even something wrong. I'd just remind Hindrocket about Bush's visit to Bob Jones University in 2000, but he probably doesn't think Bush did anything wrong there.)

However, my biggest criticism of Hindrocket's argument (as unfortunately is usually the case) is that he is wilfully blind to similar acts to those he accuses Carter of by people on the right. Hindrocket accuses Carter of making overtures to the Soviet Union 1984, during the year of Reagan's reelection:

Conspiring with our chief enemy to try to influence an American Presidential
election: We could have called that treason, but we didn't. You can form your
own opinion.

Hmm. I don't know anything about the book Hindrocket quotes or the accuracy of the allegations. But let's look back at history -- it seems that the only people who have actually been involved in conspiring with our enemy to influence presidential elections are Republicans.

First, and most recently, there is the allegation that the Reagan campaign was involved in making a deal with the Iranians to avoid an "October Surprise" in the Fall of 1980. Boy, I would think making a deal with our enemy in order to win your own presidential election would be even more damning that what Carter is accused of.

But even more damning is what the Nixon campaign did in 1968. LBJ was bugging the Vietnamese embassy and uncovered evidence that the Nixon campaign, fearful that Johnson would make a peace deal that would end the war and help Humphrey, sent Nixon's campaign manager, John Mitchell to lobby the South Vietnamese to not go to peace talks in Paris, with the promise that Nixon would cut them a better deal.

It has since been uncovered how Johnson learned of this information and gave it to Humphrey. Humphrey did not use it, mainly because he was so stunned that Nixon could have been engaged in such treasonous acts. (Johnson was amazed that Humphrey did not use it against Nixon, as Johnson would have in a heart-beat.) The events of Nixon's presidency, however, show that Humphrey should not have been surprised.

So I'll wait for Hindrocket to amend his treason allegations to include Reagan and Nixon, but I won't hold my breath. (He's much too busy getting all worked up about Eason Jordan, while ignoring Jeff Gannon). Instead, I'll just say that those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
- posted by Joshua @ 4:57 PM (0) comments

 
Why Letting People Know About Rice Matters

Here's why not letting Rice run away from her failures as NSA pre-Sept. 11 and concerning the war in Iraq is important. Right-wing bloggers are listing her by an overwhelming majority as their favorite candidate for '08.

So is Dick Morris, who says that Rudy and McCain can't get the nomination and Rice is the only one who can beat Hillary.

So letting people know that Rice ignored Clarke's warnings and spread bogus Iraqi intelligence is important.
- posted by Joshua @ 2:11 PM (0) comments

 
The Obvious Hypocrisy Is Just A Side Issue

I've heard some in the right-wing media say that they don't understand what the big deal is with the Jeff Gannon "Man-gate" story, and thus haven't devoted any time to it. (Yeah, I'm looking at you, Faux News.) This includes a number of conservative bloggers, particularly those who focused incessantly on the Dan Rather document story, all the while conveniently ignoring the fact that even those who claimed that documents were forgeries were at the same time also saying that the information contained therein was accurate.

Well, let me lay out for you what the Jeff Gannon story is all about and you tell me if it's worth covering (better yet, do the shoe-on-the-other-foot analysis and tell me if this would have been covered in the Clinton White House days):

This story is about a gay-bashing, gay male prostitute who, while using a false name and working for a false news organiziation, was given access by the Bush White House to the West Wing apparently in order to lob softball questions to Bush and his Press Secretary while at the same time was also given confidential CIA documents connected with Valerie Plame.

Sounds a little bit more serious than some of those fake Clinton scandals, like Travelgate or the FBI file issue. But the conservative media and bloggers will continue to keep their heads in the sand...
- posted by Joshua @ 11:22 AM (0) comments

 
The Secret Weapon... For Iraqi Democracy Only?

Now that Bush has renominated 20 of his most controversial judicial nominees, the stage is set for another Democratic filibuster and the potential that Republicans might use the "nuclear" option: vote, by a simple majority, to change the Senate rules to eliminate the option to filibuster judicial nominees.

Well, Harry Reid (who is doing a magnificient job so far, BTW) happened to be paying attention, and happened to overhear Republican Senator Isakson's statement on the Senate floor today concerning Iraqi democracy. Here's a video clip of it, which is worth a watch.

But here's Reid's statement explaining the statement, if you don't want to watch it:

SEN. REID: What I wanted to do is read a statement made by Senator Isakson
today on the Senate floor.

He said, with his meeting in Iraq -- about his meeting in Iraq, "And
even though the results of the election were not complete at the time we were
there, we knew they would be in a minority, and we asked, 'Don't you fear that
the Shi'ites inevitably being in the majority, that you'll be overturned?' He
says, 'Oh, no, we have a secret weapon.' Mr. President, this is a Kurdish
leader, of course, in the middle of Iraq, in the 21st century, who said he had a
secret weapon. And we asked what the secret weapon was, and he said,
'Filibuster.'" ...

And why, pray tell, did this Kurdish leader tell Isakson the Iraqis needed a filibuster?

"To ensure that the majoirty party never overran the minority."

So, it's good enough for Iraqi Democracy, but not for American Democracy. Reid rocks. He's a fighter and he's got a bit of Truman in him. I've been an admirer of Reid's ever since he almost single-handedly convinced Senator Jeffords to switch parties, but I admit that I was skeptical of Reid taking over as Minority Leader. So far, given the way that Senate Dems have held together on Social Security and other issues, I have been pleasantly surprised.
- posted by Joshua @ 9:58 PM (0) comments

 
Waxman: Is Condi A Liar or Just Incompetent?

Rep. Henry Waxman picks up on the recent 9/11 news reports and focuses on Rice's statements and 9/11 commission testimony. He requests an investigation of how the documents came to only be declassified 48 hours AFTER Rice was confirmed as Secretary of State and how she could have been a) so deceitful or, alternatively, b) so unaware about what was going on (I'm paraphrasing.) Read for yourself.
- posted by Joshua @ 1:28 PM (0) comments