Noticing that we have one of those reader-participation surveys on the Scooter Libby commutation on thestate.com today, I thought briefly about what I would say if I responded.
I decided I would need a third option: "Don’t Care." I probably would care if this were a South Carolina matter, because our state prisons are so badly overcrowded and underfunded that I think it’s important that we not lock up nonviolent offenders. By that model, the stiff fines and such the court hit Mr. Libby with seem a far smarter penalty than wasting prison space. But I don’t have quite as clear a position on that with regard to federal prisons, so I end up with a shrug.
To enlarge upon the point, you might say that shrug is what this whole blog is about. It’s a place for people who just can’t get into these never-ending controversies that partisans are into — you know, Whitewater and the like. There are plenty of other blogs where people can go when 24-hour TV "news" gets their party passions going. I prefer they come here for other things.
Related Posts
Hmmm, it’s interesting that you avoid mentioning how the results of the poll break down, namely, 73% against the commutation and a small minority in favor. True, that’s an unscientific survey of self-selected respondents, but those results happen to pretty much mirror the nationwide polling results. About three quarters of the U.S. public – a huge majority – are opposed to pardoning Libby.
Isn’t that statistic of interest to you? It’s true that there is a division of opinion on the matter, but the split is nowhere near even. On one side, is the great majority of the American people, and on the other side are a few 26%-ers and deadenders like yourself.
When you’re the only one left defending Bush, and every single person in the country, other than you, is opposed to him, are you still going to claim that the dispute is nothing but a partisan squabble? Are you going to cast yourself as “above the fray”, when the only obstacle to total unanimity is you?
The three-quarters of the American people who believe that Libby should serve his sentence understand that the issue is one of equal justice, of equal standing before the law. President Bush believes that there should be one set of laws for his friends and one set of laws for everyone else. The division between Americans on this issue isn’t a partisan divide, it’s a division between people who believe in America and people who don’t.
You talk a lot about how the country is divided, even on issues where large majorities are lined up on one side of the issue, with a small fringe on the other side. I notice that on all the issues where you talk about a division, and the need to compromise and work together, you are on the wrong side.
And isn’t that the point of all your talk about how you are opposed to what you call partisan squabbling? Giving yourself and the other members of the deadend fringe an unwarranted ability to keep us from pushing you out of the way so that we can do what’s best for the American people?
Hmmm. I didn’t mention it because I didn’t know. Because I didn’t look. Because I didn’t care.
But if you had asked me to GUESS, and twisted my arm, I would have guessed the breakdown would be something like that. Those kinds of surveys are generally overwhelmed by the people who are ticked off about something. That’s because the respondents are self-selected, and most other people wouldn’t bother.
And thanks for proving my point about how overexcited partisans get about this stuff. I should put up something about whether Hillary Clinton had a hand in that guy’s death — you know, that guy who was tied up in the Rose law firm or one of those other stupid, endless controversies; I can’t remember his name — so the right-wingers can get off on THAT.
Now tell me true, Hal — didn’t you find sounding off at length like that to be far more satisfying that merely clicking on a “yes” button. Don’t thank me. It wasn’t my intention. My intention — and I know I’m working against human nature here — is to let the world know that some of us are neither ticked-off left-wingers nor right-wing “deadenders.”
That simply doesn’t fit into your concept of what is possible, so in your case, my effort was certainly wasted.
You see, the group I belong to is smaller than the 23 percent you speak of. Much smaller. My “group” consists of the tiny minority of people with a sense of perspective about these things who, instead of turning away with a shrug and spending their time on better things, actually tries to engage you people on both sides of this pointless, destructive divide.
Stupid of me, I know, but it’s a sort of compulsion. I just don’t like giving up on people.
If you “don’t care” about Libby getting off Scoot-free (sic), then I guess we can conclude you “don’t care” about “…and justice for all”, either, then?
He did? Oh. I thought all the fines and such were still in place. That’s what they said on NPR this morning.
Rethuglican contributions are covering Libby’s millions in legal costs plus the fine, easily.
He hasn’t had to practice law as a living for decades so that penalty means nothing. Right wing think tanks and pols will line up to hire him.
All you have to do is look at the flourishing careers of Rethuglican criminals Eliot Abrams, John Poindexter (sp?), and Ollie North convicted in Iran-Contra. They respected the GOP omerta and were all “taken care of.” And, don’t forget “tough guy” Rethuglican G. Gordon Liddy who actually kept his mouth shut despite serving time.
Bush’s communation of Liddy’s sentence removes any doubt that he’s obstructing justice to protect his Vice President from impeachment.
Sorry if this bores you, Brad; or, if it seems irrelevant to SC.
Maybe, if President Reagan and Vice-President Bush had been impeached for Iran-Contra then we would have cleaned this nest of vipers out and prevented the current assault on the constitution.
Don’t worry, I’m sure that some nice person will wake you up after the coup d’etat is over.
Oops. Make that “Bush’s communtation of Scooter Libby’s sentence…”
Really Brad, you regard the various issues surrounding the disclosure of a covert CIA operative trivial yet rage on and on and on and on and on and on about the confederate battle flag as if THAT issue is actually important???????????????????
The flag. Golly, I hadn’t mentioned it today, but maybe I should.
Anyway, I would hardly call a $250,000 fine “trivial.”
Finally, why would I care what sort of punishment is meted out to a fall guy? Y’all have probably followed this much more closely than I, but isn’t it generally held — particularly among the most indignant — that Mr. Libby is taking this hit for more culpable parties? In which case, just how many times do you want to strike the whipping boy? We’re talking about perspective here, people.
Speaking of perspective, David Brooks seems to have a healthy one on this subject. Anyone read his piece in the NYT? It will be on our op-ed page tomorrow; that’s where I saw it.
Brad, you totally missed the point on this. The president’s pardon (or whatever they called it) is the issue, NOT Libby’s punishment. There is much unresolved about what the president and VP did regarding Ms. Plame’s outing. The pardon could very well be honoring a promise made to Libby to keep his mouth shut during the trial. This was their ace in the hole to protect their backside. And if you really believe the $250k fine is important to Libby I have some nice bottom land I’d like to sell you.
Brad, the threat of jail time is a marvelous way to focus most folks’ thought process. It’s a rather common tactic prosecutors use to encourage truth-telling.
From the beginning Libby knew that all he had to do was keep his mouth shut and protect Cheney, who directly coordinated the exposure of Plame, and Bush.
There was no downside. His rich Rethuglican allies would foot the legal fees. If he was acquitted then he was off the hook. If he lost– well, Bush would certainly reward his silent protection.
In effect, Bush became an accessory to obstructing the investigation by taking Libby’s incentive to rat out the higher ups in the criminal enterprise that the Bush Administration has become.
Since you’re so disinterested, I’ll bring you up to date. Bush said today that he might ultimately pardon Libby entirely. He just didn’t want Libby developing doubts about who his protectors were while looking out through prison bars.
BTW, you may remember that Bush promised a thorough investigation into the leak and that the offenders would be “taken care of.”
Now, we knew what he really meant.
IOW, Brad, whipping and re-whipping Libby wasn’t Fitzgerald’s goal with this prosecution. Getting Libby to testify against the ring-leaders of this criminal conspiracy was the ultimate plan
The one piece of the puzzle that I don’t understand is why the original “leaker” Richard Armitage, was never prosecuted. Conservatives conveniently point out that fact to defend the whole sordid affair. But why? An undercover CIA operative was still outed by a member of the Bush administration. That is a serious offense that is always glossed over. Something doesn’t add up.
bud, I think that Fitz wanted the entire picture before deciding how to prosecute those responsible for the underlying crime.
Brad, Scooter had such a tough time with his “punishment” that he readily sent down a cashiers check for $250,400.