Tuesday, July 05, 2005

Two questions from the e-mails and Pataki's son wants a deferment while Karl Rove is silent

Good evening. I want to note something from Democracy Now! today:

Report: Karl Rove Linked to Outing of CIA Agent
In Washington, speculation is growing that President Bush's chief advisor Karl Rove may have played a role in the outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame. Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin, has admitted that Rove personally spoke with Matthew Cooper from Time Magazine about Plame but Luskin insists that Rove did not disclose her identity. Disclosing an undercover agent is a federal crime. Cooper -- along with Judith Miller from the New York Times -- are both facing up to four months in jail for refusing to disclose their sources about the story. However Cooper's employer -- Time Magazine -- last week agreed to hand over a copy of Cooper's notes. in those notes it reportedly reveals that Cooper spoke with Rove. On Sunday New York Senator Charles Schumer called on Rove to personally deny leaking the name of a CIA official. Up until now the Bush administration has claimed Rove had no role in the case. On October 10, 2003 White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Rove was "not involved in this."

This is a big thing. Karl Rove's always 1 to wave the flag and talk about how other people aren't in the 'mainstream.' Like there's a story about how some Howard Dean supporters, during the primaries, were walking past him or something and he starts cheering 'Go Dean!' because he thought Bully Boy could beat Howard Dean real easy because Howard Dean's not as American or Godly as Bully Boy. In Karl's mind.

So how in Karl's mind is it okay to be part of this outing of Valerie Plame?

I got to help Third Estate Sunday Review with their editorial "Karl Got Fingered" this weekend.

Right now, the way I understand, Karl's old defense was "I didn't leak." But he did say Joseph Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, was "fair game." Sounds like maybe he might have confirmed a leak. So wouldn't that make him a leaker?

If I'm reading Robert Novak's column outing Valerie Plame, I might just think, "Oh Mr. Bad Teeth is always getting something wrong." So if Karl confiermed it and only did that, I think it would still be just as bad.

But it's looking worse right now.

He was having contact with Matthew Cooper of Time and who knows who else?

Here's what Third Estate Sunday Review concluded with in their editorial:

Us, we think things are getting very interesting as they heat up. The body can't even scare the public anymore and the "brain" is somehow involved with the leaking of Valerie Plame's name.And as this story unfolds, don't you think that already on the record "fair game" comment is going to haunt you? "Fair game?" From the flag waving administration? How's that going to play, Karl? We're sure you've already polled on that.
We're wondering if the next announcement will be that you've left the administration to "spend more time with my family."
But it doesn't matter. You're a historical footnote now. This is how you'll be known: the "brain" forced to testify before the grand jury in an investigation to the leaking of the name of a CIA agent. Doesn't play very patriotic, does it, Karl?

I don't know how much help I was but I tossed out stuff during the writing of the editorial. I know I feel like I got some ideas about blogging from it.

Now we'll go to the e-mails to note Heather's e-mail.

Her boyfriend cheated on her for six months and she just found out. They've gone together for two years now. And she just found and wants to know what she should do?

They both start college this fall and it's the same college. Heather says she found out when she found some love letters. She confronted her boyfriend and he said it was true but it didn't matter because he ended it, after 6 months, in April. She's wondering what to do and says she'd talk to her mother but her mother already hates him.

Heather, you wanted my advice, so here it is. Dump him. This wasn't a one night stand that maybe you could talk about and figure out whether this was something you could live with.
You say you love him a lot. You probably do. But he cheated on you for 6 months with 1 person and you only found out when you found the love letters. Has he cheated on you other times?
You don't know. But you will wonder. And you'll also wonder if he'll cheat on you again.

So spare yourself the grief and teeth grinding and go ahead and move on. I also wonder about you not wanting to tell your mother. It seems like it's more than not wanting to hear "I told you so." If you two have a difficult relationship then that makes sense. But if it's because you know your mother would tell you the same thing I am then you need to think about talking to her.

Donnie's is the other e-mail will talk about. He writes that he's been dating a girl from his school. They are both 16 so I think it's okay to call her a girl because I would call Donnie a boy. He wants to see her when school starts but he's worried because she's told him that it would be at least 3 months of dating before she'd even consider having sex. Donnie says he thinks he's loving her but he can't wait three months.

Donnie, you love her or you don't. If you think you might, you probably don't. You say you've been together every day for two weeks now. That's enough time to figure out how you feel about her. If you read this and get mad, hey, maybe you do love her. If you read this and nod your head, then maybe I'm right. But regardless, you've written me so I'm assuming you got at least 1 hand. If you do love her, one hand should be able to tide you over for three months.

Now let's go to CounterRecruiter. This is from "Like Father, Like Son:"

From the NY Press:
"With supreme guts and righteousness, President Bush went into Iraq," Gov. Pataki told the Republican National Convention last August. The place erupted with applause. It was all very stirring.
Almost one year later, Pataki's son Teddy is, with supreme guts and righteousness, seeking a three-year law school deferment from the Marines, which last week commissioned the recent Yale grad as a second lieutenant.
The governor, who himself received a medical deferment during the Vietnam War because of poor eyesight, has said he hopes his son is granted the deferment. Of course he does. No doubt all the parents of New York's nearly 100 war dead also wish their children could have gotten deferments. But they couldn't. They got killed instead.

So it's important and it's okay to go as long as it's not your child? That's real interesting.

And it made me think of this thing at BuzzFlash that C.I. noted today. Cindy Sheehan lost her son in the occupation and she's written "Not Worth It: Larry King, Part 2:"

I sat through an entire hour in the CNN studio in DC hearing not one person say that the invasion was a mistake and if it was a mistake, then our troops should be brought home immediately. Even the "Democratic" Senators (Kerry and Bayh) that were on the program just gave their recipes for "success" in Iraq, which did not include any exit strategies. The guest host for that hour was Bob Costas and he asked one guest, Sen. John McCain, an intriguing question: "If you could push Button One and have an eventual wonderful outcome in Iraq, or if you could push Button Two and never have had it happen, which one would you pick?" Of course, Sen. McCain chose Button One. He hasn't had a loved one killed in this enormous tragedy of a war, nor does he have a loved one in harm's way. It has not affected him personally one bit. What skin is it off McCain's teeth if our troops remain for a highly unlikely rosy outcome at the cost of thousands of more lives? I would push the button that would bring back my son, Casey, and the tens of thousands of the other victims who have been killed for nothing but outright lies and bald-faced betrayals. I would push the button that would give Iraq back its power, water, and their infrastructure.

That's something to think about so think about it.