Heck maybe I’m wrong, and there is compelling evidence that Libby did it on purpose because the VP told him to, and “Libby Did It On Purose”TM wouldn’t destroy conversations between the left and right if only the right could see/hear/understand this evidence.

Also: humanity will not be free until the last capitalist is strangled with the guts of the last Stalinist.

Yes, that about covers it.

So then you agree with me? In a post pointing out the ridiculous things X is saying, it is perfectly acceptable to also point out the ridiculous things Y is saying?

I started on this thread trying to figure out why it was okay to bash X with stupid things from Y. It is good to see you agree they can both be pointed out at the same time.

“It’s absurd to demand the removal of the toxic waste dump from your back yard when transnational capitalism is the real menace!”

That is so true. And yet folks often want not to have toxic waste in their back yards. Go figure! There is just no reasoning with people, sometimes.

I only started commenting because the post was about Republicans/Conservatives saying stupid things, but Democrats/Liberals were doing the exact same thing by saying Libby was part of some Bush conspiracy to out Plame. Where is the evidence? Because the evidence we do have (notes and testimony from reporters) would directly contradict this. The only evidence “the left” has is Bush sold a war he wanted based on the CIA’s (and others’) intelligence, that was shoddy (Yay Wilson and Plame, great job on Niger), hard to believe, and distorted. So he must be evil and thus Libby had to have done it on purpose, whilst poor old innocent Armitage just happened to make the same mistake at roughly the exact same time. So the next time a soldier for “the left” has legal troubles, the right will feel completely justified in the same treatment. Are there no grown ups left in this country?

Scott McLemee should follow Joshua Holmes’ line that Libby&trade is just a symptom of a much sicker problem.

Like frik’n debating retarded 8 year olds who’s parents told them “the truth”.

Whatever happened to “Don’t feed the trolls”?

By the way, in my opinion Mr. Libby’s sentence was considerably too light. He was, effectively, committing treason for party-political purposes, presumably because some high-up commanded him to. Sentence the bugger to death, I say, and let him blurt out the truth to save his sordid skin as he walks to the lethal chamber.

Then strap him down and flip the switch.

It’s hard to decide which was worse, the ignorance of the pundits, the craven fear of the pontificators in chief (ZOMG: smoking gun = mushroom cloud) or their complacent complicity in the nationalist narrative (the cool crowd is down with kicking ass, only dirty FN hippies + San Fran pansies protesting).

What we have now is cognitive dissonance piled upon cognitive dissonance. It could not have been wrong to have gone to war, it could not have been wrong to discredit those who pointed out it was wrong to go to war, it could not have been wrong to lie to protect those who lied to discredit those who pointed it out, and so on ad infinitum.

Save Scooter! Our leaders can have done no wrong, no matter how big a mess they made.

Not that I care much about secret agents and ambassadors (dog eats dog, fair enough), but isn’t it a proven fact that Mr. Cheney personally suggested that perhaps Mr. Wilson’s wife “sent him on a junket”?

It seems that it would indeed discredit Mr. Wilson and his advocacy if they could make it look like his CIA wife got this gig for him to enjoy free airline food and tea in Niger. I thought that was a common knowledge.

July 5, 2006, the AP reports: Bush Told VP To Rebut Wilson

(CBS/AP) President Bush told the special prosecutor in the CIA leak case that he directed Vice President Dick Cheney to personally lead an effort to counter allegations made by former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson that his administration had misrepresented intelligence information to make the case to go to war with Iraq, according to a published report.

Mr. Bush also told federal prosecutors during his June 24, 2004 interview in the Oval Office that he had directed Cheney to disclose highly classified intelligence information that would not only defend his administration but also discredit Wilson, sources told the National Journal.

[...]Fitzgerald has not ruled out calling Cheney as a witness. It has been previously reported that the vice president cut out Wilson’s article with a pen knife and scrawled questions on it wondering whether Plame sent her husband on a “junket” to Niger to determine the accuracy of allegations that Iraq had tried to buy material to make a nuclear weapon, Plante has reported.