• three blind mice

    this is sad and pathetic. it proves to us that you have to spoon feed red meat to the american press before they will smell blood.

    investigative journalism is dead and this influx of viagra isn’t going to wake it up. karl rove dropping dime on a CIA agent is a big story? please. bush started a war based on complete and total lies. bad lies. inconsistent lies. easily disproved lies. and the flaccid press let him get away with it.

    rove will survive, bush will survive, and the rest of the world will continue to suffer.

  • Bruce

    TBM, I really hope you are wrong about that.

    Prof. Lessig, yes this is as rare as you think it is. With the exception of the esteemed Helen Thomas, the gaggle almost never presses any issue to such an extent as they did the Rove matter yesterday. I, for one, hope this presages a new dynamic between the gaggle and the White House. We shall see.

  • three blind mice

    bruce, we hope we are wrong too – although we rarely are :).

    it was very encouraging reading professor lessig’s link and seeing how the press “pressed” scott mcclellan – that weasel – but dammit why didn’t they press him on non-existent WMDs in iraq, non-existent ties between saddam hussein and terrorists, the downing street memo, etc. etc. etc.?

    why karl rove? just because a fellow “journalist” is sitting in jail over the story?

    the white house made as many unequivocal statements about iraq as they did about karl rove and the press corps just accepted the administration lies. maybe this will presage a new dymanic, maybe rove is being offered up as a sacrificial lamb, maybe this is to take focus away from the pending appointment of joseph goebbels to the supreme court, but a re-invigorated press seems too much to hope for.

  • Max Lybbert

    Yes, I’ve been on hiatus, and I may not be able to respond to any responses to this post.

    While I’m too young to remember Watergate, I have seen many scandals since then and I have to say my gut feeling is the press’s reaction is unusual. However, my gut feeling is also that most Americans aren’t too informed on this issue, and this will play out more like Iran-Contra or Abu Ghraib than like Watergate. The only difference is this involves the press personally, but Americans have stopped really believing the press. And the President has shown the willingness to play hard ball. Think the Qu’ran, Guantanamo Bay, Newsweek, and the toilet.

    On the other hand, both parties are guilty of being “morally outraged” so often that people have stopped believing any of it is sincere. Rove is the political strategist, and would not have consented to the revelation without having some kind of plan in place.

    As a very conservative person, I feel the need to say that I never voted for Karl Rove (or Tom DeLay, but that is another matter), so I don’t feel much loyalty toward him. Paul O’Neill was fired even though he was never accused of doing anything wrong, so I wouldn’t mind seeing others being fired when they are actually accused of bad things. Think Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Gonzales and Rove. I don’t think any of these guys are irreplaceable, and I think the appearance of house cleaning would go a long way in the Republican strategy of (perceived) moral superiority. Even so, I expect the President will see where the chips fall before doing anything. This will be interesting to watch.

  • raoul

    Rove is guilty. Although if he is convicted he will be convicted on erroneous facts. TBM is right . . . for a change. Anyone who continues to support these people will have a rough go of it with St. Peter at the heavenly gates. They are war criminals who thrive on a twisted culture built on lies and death.

  • Joseph Pietro Riolo

    To Raoul,

    Last time I checked, St. Peter lied not once but
    thrice.

    Joseph Pietro Riolo
    <riolo@voicenet.com>

    Public domain notice: I put all of my expressions in this
    comment in the public domain.

  • Ed Lyons

    I think this stuff about Rove is amusing. We don’t even know for sure what the prosecutor is really investigating and if there was a crime committed. But that isn’t what the 41 questions were about….

    The “press” (hate lumping them all together) seems to feel guilty that the Bush agenda rolls on and that they should be doing more to hold the White House reponsible for things. They haven’t had much success going after Bush himself, and while many people don’t support much of the Bush agenda, they like him as a person. But Rove….. he *is* the agenda personified. Many people feel like they can finally strike a fatal blow against Rasputin, the man responsible for this creepy, crypto-fascist nightmare and they are excited!

  • http://zedfaction.blogspot.com zedfaction

    Put me in the mind of ol’ Ronnie Ziegler, too.

    One can only hope that Helen Thomas lit a fire under her peers’s
    as**s and let them know that this is what is required of a free press in a democracy.

    One can also only hope that Rove goes the way of John Erhlichman.

    http://zedfaction.blogspot.com

  • Max Lybbert

    Raoul, the interesting part of all of this is that there are so many odd facts that it will be easy for anybody with half a brain cell to argue “what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.”

    For instance, Rove admitted being the source for Cooper, but the investigation is who was the source for Novak. More than that, the CIA was trying to hide their agent in plain sight; her cover was that she had a desk job at the CIA. I haven’t seen what Cooper handed over to the investigation, but the media is characterizing it as “Rove stated she worked for the CIA, but not that she was an agent.” Hmm. Could somebody argue that Rove was only going along with the CIA’s story? OK, maybe it’s a stretch, but what do you bet that we won’t hear it that way?

    And it isn’t like Bush jailed somebody for saying too much. Instead, somebody investigating Bush jailed somebody for saying too little. Of course, Bush did give him that ability, but then again, if he hadn’t what would the press have said?