Right Thinking From The Left Coast
Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one. - Albert Einstein

So Much for Fitzmas
by Lee

After masturbating furiously for two years, in the end the liberals got nothing more than a tingle.

Well, that was much ado about nothing. I don’t really think the indictment of the man who served as the Vice President’s Chief of Staff--and whose role in the administration was in fact much larger than that--is no big deal. It is. But the way Democrats were talking about this case leading up to the indictment, this has to come as a letdown. After all, liberals believed that Patrick Fitzgerald was going to cripple the Bush administration and reveal the lies and deceptions behind the Iraq war. There was speculation that Fitzgerald would shine a bright, unflattering light onto the inner workings of the White House Iraq Group. There was talk that he was going to name a “Constitutional officer"--namely Cheney--as an unindicted co-conspirator. And there were rumors that he was seeking to empanel a second grand jury to investigate who ginned up the fake “Niger documents.”

Maybe Fitzgerald just has a very impressive poker face, but it sure seemed from his press conference that none of those things is now going to happen. Even the talk, earlier in the day, that Rove was now in an excruciating legal limbo seems like it was overblown. The five indictments against Libby appear to be the only indictments Fitzgerald is going to bring. It seems there’s a good chance Rove is off the hook and an even better chance that everyone else is, as well. And since Fitzgerald’s such a stickler for rules, it’s doubtful we’re ever going to get much of an accounting of what else, besides the charges he’s laid out against Libby, he learned about the Bush administration’s shenanigans in the course of this investigation. In other words, the whole notion that the Fitzgerald investigation was going to reveal how the Bush administration led us into Iraq now seems to have been completely wrong. Democrats wanted their own Ken Starr--a prosecutor who let his investigation metastasize and whose operation leaked like a sieve. Instead, they got Elliot Ness.

It’s true.  It’s interesting that the lefties were referring to today as Fitzmas, meaning that Fitz was going to give them the political equivalent of Christmas Day.  But Christmas is an illusion, presented to willing children all-too happy to buy into the myth of a mystical man who comes into their lives and gives them rewards for being good little boys and girls.  This is exactly the state of the American left: overemotional, fantasy-driven, mythology-believing children who were just convinced that today their rank hatred of Bush was going to be rewarded.  But instead of the latest version of Bonestorm they woke up to find a copy of Lee Carvallo’s Putting Challenge.  (If you don’t get that joke see here and search the page for 3F07.)

Posted by Lee on 10/28/05 at 05:46 PM (Discuss this in the forums)

Comments


Posted by on 10/28/05 at 07:16 PM from United States

HEY! LIBS AINT GOT NOTHIN ON SANTA! >:O YOU WATCH YO MOUF!

Other than that, absolutely right on. Blown WAY out of proportion by the liberals.

Posted by West Virginia Rebel on 10/28/05 at 07:41 PM from United States

Anybody else see Bush’s short speech on the subject? Boy this thing lit a fire under his ass.

Posted by on 10/28/05 at 07:50 PM from United States

Democrats wanted their own Ken Starr--a prosecutor who let his investigation metastasize and whose operation leaked like a sieve. Instead, they got Elliot Ness

Hello I guess he aint been paying attention to this thing leaking like a depends

Posted by on 10/28/05 at 08:15 PM from United States

After weeks of joyous anticipation by many in the media, a Bush Administration official, I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, was today indicted by a federal grand jury. NBC’s Washington bureau chief Tim Russert wanted to emphasize the event’s importance, telling his MSNBC audience: “This is significant, it’s the first time in 130 years a White House official has been indicted.” Not according to MSNBC’s own Web site. It’s “Fact File: White House Staff Indictments” provides a “brief history of indictments in recent administrations.” Going back only into the mid-1970s, it identifies eight people, including a Reagan Cabinet member and two Clinton officals

Posted by on 10/28/05 at 08:15 PM from Australia

After masturbating furiously for two years, in the end the liberals got nothing more than a tingle.

Lee, you hereby have my blessing to go back to prison rape jokes. The endless prison rape jokes were annoying, but didn’t sear disturbing images into my brain like the above did. I mean, seriously, the thought of Moore, Franken et al bopping their baloney is enough to prevent me from ever being sexually aroused again.

Posted by on 10/28/05 at 08:43 PM from United States

This is exactly the state of the American left: overemotional, fantasy-driven, mythology-believing children who were just convinced that today their rank hatred of Bush was going to be rewarded.

If you look at the headlines they are still holding out for a Rove indictment, despite the fact that Fitzheartbreaker has clearly stated that the bulk of the investigation is over and the grand jury would remain open only as a matter of standard procedure.

Posted by on 10/28/05 at 09:05 PM from United States

Here’s something from Josh Marshall that I found on Andrew Sullivan’s site (I know, I know, I’m a moonbat-homo-lover for reading Sullivan).  I don’t know the particulars of the CIA’s various departments, but I thought this was intriguing, nonetheless.

Posted by on 10/28/05 at 10:10 PM from United States

Geesh.  The liberals at the BBC have their knickers in a twist and just won’t let this go.

They run with this exaggerated headline:

Indictment Rocks Bush Administration

Come on.

That is just plain stupid.

Message to the BBC:  Get over it!

Posted by on 10/28/05 at 10:28 PM from United States

Regarding Tim Russert’s “Incorrect Fact Files"… how could he neglect the two famous Clinton Administration criminals Henry Cisneros and Mike Espy, who were both indicted?

Oh, I see.

It is Tim Russert WORD PLAY!

He should have said something original such as… “this is the first time in this Nation’s HISTORY that someone named Scooter has been indicted! All Bush’s fault!”

For a sad recap of Clinton indictments… check out this site:

Clinton Crime Family

Posted by on 10/28/05 at 10:36 PM from United States

For a sad recap of Clinton indictments… check out this site

Um, I don’t see any indictments listed on this site...just a lot of “could’s” and “should’s” and “woulda’s.”

(chuckling at the continual Clinton references) You right wing folks just can’t stomach the fact that even after being impeached, Clinton could STILL beat Bush if an election was held between the 2 of them today.  With one hand tied behind his back, and a lucky cigar between his lips...yeah, baby!  :-)

Posted by Drumwaster on 10/28/05 at 10:41 PM from United States

If you want indictments of Clinton, then allow me to oblige.

Posted by on 10/28/05 at 10:47 PM from United States

If you want indictments of Clinton, then allow me to oblige.

I wasn’t denying that indictments of Clinton existed, silly Drum!  I was saying that the site that Friend Bob von pointed us to was nothing more than a badly thrown-together list of partisan hoo-ha.

And pointing out that bashing Clinton is still the favorite sport of nattering neocons of negativity.  :-)

Posted by Drumwaster on 10/28/05 at 10:49 PM from United States

Can you define “neocon”? Or is it just the standard insult for anyone whose arguments you cannot overcome in other ways?

Posted by on 10/28/05 at 10:54 PM from United States

Can you define “neocon”? Or is it just the standard insult for anyone whose arguments you cannot overcome in other ways?

I thought “neocon” was a fairly innocuous term you used to describe yourselves...am I wrong?  I believe it is a contraction for “neoconservatives,” which would translate into “new conservatives.”

From the American Heritage dictionary online:

An intellectual and political movement in favor of political, economic, and social conservatism that arose in opposition to the perceived liberalism of the 1960s: “The neo-conservatism of the 1980s is a replay of the New Conservatism of the 1950s, which was itself a replay of the New Era philosophy of the 1920s” (Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr.).

And you must admit that it rolls off the tongue much nicer than your clumsily constructed “libtard.” ;-)

Posted by on 10/28/05 at 10:56 PM from United States

Plus I thought I might get points for my Spiro Agnew reference above (via Pat Buchanan, his speechwriter).

Posted by on 10/28/05 at 11:01 PM from United States

Or is it just the standard insult for anyone whose arguments you cannot overcome in other ways?

PS-What arguments are you putting forth right now that I am failing to overcome?  I’m curious…

Posted by on 10/28/05 at 11:05 PM from United States

Diva,

I hate to tell you this, but Clinton never won a majority of the vote.  Bush did.

Posted by Drumwaster on 10/28/05 at 11:07 PM from United States

I thought “neocon” was a fairly innocuous term you used to describe yourselves…

Ah. Stereotyping again.

PS-What arguments are you putting forth right now that I am failing to overcome?  I’m curious…

I’m not putting forth any arguments, libtard…

Posted by InsipiD on 10/28/05 at 11:11 PM from United States

Only a few of you get it...the libs think that this is a victory.  An indictment of “a high-up in the Bush administration” is what they want to point a finger at.  To the BBC, this IS rocking the administration.  They’ll use this to talk about rampant corruption and to continually call for Bush’s ouster.  They won’t want to stop until it’s at least Rove who’s leaving.  They’re just jealous that indictments were the least of Clinton’s worries and that if it hadn’t been for his near constant criminal activities, we’d have some sort of impossible socialized health system.  If Gore had been elected, we’d have $5 gas, a ruined economy, the middle east would be even worse, and GM and Ford would probably be out of business.  But we’d be “respected"…

Posted by on 10/28/05 at 11:15 PM from United States

I hate to tell you this, but Clinton never won a majority of the vote.  Bush did.

1992 Clinton percentage win:  49.2%
2004 Bush percentage win (he didn’t receive a majority in 2000): 50.7%

What’s a measly 1.5% points between friends? :-) Bush won a majority only by .7%...do you really want to split hairs over this?

Posted by on 10/28/05 at 11:18 PM from United States

Ah. Stereotyping again.

No, Drum, I was serious.  I really didn’t think that was an insult to right-wingers.  I’m not insulted when people call me a liberal...I wear the label proudly.  What part of being called a “neocon” offends you?

I’m not putting forth any arguments, libtard…

Then, why did you say that above?  Hmmm....

(See “libtard” just doesn’t have the same sonorous ring to it, now does it?)

Posted by on 10/28/05 at 11:20 PM from United States

How appropriate for someone named “divamom” to lecture us on the popularity of her idol, Bubba Clinton.  Her world probably revolves around the same fake, poll-driven (i.e. popularity contest) drivel that dominates the self-annointed “divas” of modern pop music.  Talentless, gyrating, wailing whores that become well known not for their musical accomplishments (they all scream and wail the same, IMO), but their sex appeal and shock value.  And she’s the mother of them all.....

You and Clinton deserve each other.

Posted by on 10/28/05 at 11:20 PM from United States

his near constant criminal activities,

Then, he’s escaped doing jail time how?  Because Kenneth Starr didn’t spend enough of your money trying to prosecute him?  Puh-leaze.  Slick he may be, but criminal, no.

Posted by on 10/28/05 at 11:21 PM from United States

You and Clinton deserve each other.

Yes, someone finally gets it!  The DivaMommy thanks you!

Talentless, gyrating, wailing whores that become well known not for their musical accomplishments (they all scream and wail the same, IMO), but their sex appeal and shock value.  And she’s the mother of them all.....

Ah, the jealousy....

Posted by Drumwaster on 10/28/05 at 11:22 PM from United States

Then, why did you say that above?

Why? You’re not “offended”, are you?

Then, he’s escaped doing jail time how?

A plea bargain with the Federal prosecutor, where he would “surrender his law license” and pay a large fine to escape jail time.

Posted by on 10/28/05 at 11:27 PM from United States

The DivaMommy wrote:

Then, why did you say that above?

Drummie responded:

Why? You’re not “offended”, are you?

The DivaMommy clarifies:

Sorry, Drummie.  I was referring to the statement that you said that I was using name-calling as a way of not attempting to overcome anyone’s arguments (and I was asking you to clarify which arguments you or others were making that I was not responding to).  I was unclear in my reference above.  So, I don’t know to what you think I should be offended by (if you hadn’t noticed, it takes a lot to offend me.  I mean, I’m Lee’s friend, fer chrissakes!).

Posted by on 10/28/05 at 11:28 PM from United States

A plea bargain with the Federal prosecutor, where he would “surrender his law license” and pay a large fine to escape jail time.

So, then he’s not a criminal per se, right?  No more than Scooter will be proven to be for his own perjury, correct?

Posted by Drumwaster on 10/28/05 at 11:32 PM from United States

Assuming you can get Libby to admit to any kind of violation, which is by NO means a certainty, indictment or no.

(if you hadn’t noticed, it takes a lot to offend me.  I mean, I’m Lee’s friend, fer chrissakes!)

Me, too.

Posted by on 10/28/05 at 11:41 PM from United States

That’s why I like you, Drum.  Except for when you go off the rails like you did the other night (okay, I promised that I wouldn’t bring that unfortunate incident up again!  Bad DivaMommy!).

Posted by on 10/28/05 at 11:57 PM from Japan

Damn DW, you went off the rails again??!?  ;)

I missed it. Which thread, Diva?

Posted by on 10/28/05 at 11:59 PM from United States

Oh, I don’t want to open up any old wounds between me and Drummie.  It’s all peace, love, and sunshine today in my blue county/red state!

Posted by californianative on 10/29/05 at 12:11 AM from United States

Uh, can we get back to the topic at hand?
Enough of your ego, diva. Yes, we have got it.  You like to hear yourself speak or in this case, your words in lights.

Tim Russert.  Another media spokeperson spewing misinfomation?  No indictments? Really?
I swear, I am so glad I took my head out of my ass and started doing my own research. No more being a fool for me.  I love my country way too much to take the word of the major media, no least as gospel. Imagine expecting them to get the facts right. Is that not one their major parts of their well paid job?

Posted by on 10/29/05 at 12:15 AM from United States

Enough of your ego, diva. Yes, we have got it.  You like to hear yourself speak or in this case, your words in lights.

And you post your opinions on an Internet blog...why?

Posted by InsipiD on 10/29/05 at 12:17 AM from United States

So, then he’s not a criminal per se, right?

Wrong, plea bargains DO make you a criminal.  Remember, many people serving life in prison plea bargained to avoid the death penalty.  Bill Clinton had a long career of mainly sexual harassment that had to be glossed over.  Clinton plea bargained, bought out of, or was convicted of sexual harassment, perjury, obstruction of justice, and others.  Clinton was convicted of worse than Libby is indicted for, and the press already has Libby in prison for 30 for this.  I would like to see all the things that Clinton staffers and cabinet said to each other about Vince Foster’s death.

Posted by Drumwaster on 10/29/05 at 12:19 AM from United States

So, then he’s not a criminal per se, right?

Given that he paid a penalty for violating the law, I would say that makes him a “criminal”, by definition, especially since the crimes with which he was charged were all felonies.

I personally wouldn’t have taken any pleas that didn’t include jail time and a public mug shot, but that’s just me…

Posted by californianative on 10/29/05 at 12:51 AM from United States

And you post your opinions on an Internet blog...why?

Diva, moderation, dear.  That is all we ask. There are others on the playground too.

Posted by on 10/29/05 at 01:04 AM from United States

Diva, moderation, dear.  That is all we ask. There are others on the playground too.

Thanks for your kind response.  It’s almost bedtime in the Diva-Zone, so I shall be retiring soon.  You must excuse my zeal in posting today as the word “indictment” has got my liberal naughty bits all a-tingling!

Posted by Drumwaster on 10/29/05 at 01:10 AM from United States

And that’s all you get, despite two years of yanking at that little man in the boat…

Pity, isn’t it?

Posted by Sean M. on 10/29/05 at 01:16 AM from United States

Then, he’s escaped doing jail time how?  Because Kenneth Starr didn’t spend enough of your money trying to prosecute him?

Funny how we haven’t heard any liberals moaning about how much taxpayer money Fitzgerald’s investigation has cost.  I wonder why…

Posted by on 10/29/05 at 01:20 AM from United States

Dear Drummie, it’s not over until the fat Turd Blossom...er, lady sings (or until Fitzie yells “last call,” or whatever lovely analogy you’d like to use).  Time will tell, time will tell.

Posted by on 10/29/05 at 01:22 AM from United States

Funny how we haven’t heard any liberals moaning about how much taxpayer money Fitzgerald’s investigation has cost.  I wonder why…

Perhaps because Fitzie hasn’t used as much of my money as Starr did?

Posted by Sean M. on 10/29/05 at 01:25 AM from United States

Yeah.  Sure.  That’s gotta be it.

Posted by Drumwaster on 10/29/05 at 01:25 AM from United States

Perhaps because Fitzie hasn’t used as much of my money as Starr did?

Thank God for Bush tax cuts, eh?

Posted by on 10/29/05 at 02:03 AM from United States

divamommy......ah yeah another liberal troll, geez I know this earth shaking news must have your goat cheese encrusted meat curtains all a tingle.

Posted by on 10/29/05 at 01:34 PM from United States

Hey divamommy, I am not a neocon and I was not trying to single out Bill Clinton for bashing.

Apologies for linking to a poorly formatted site pertaining to the Clinton Administrations indictments.

My retort was aimed at Tim Russert, who felt obliged to twist his statements regarding the Libby indictment as being “the first White House indictment in 150 years.”

It was meant to be a blast against the biased, liberal lame stream media.

You don’t have to be a “neocon” to see the bias.

And, as many of us on the website have said before, if Libby, or Cheney or anyone else broke the law, then they should be charged and serve their time.

You have seen absolutely no bad-mouthing of Fitzgerald, who is a top-class, professional prosecutor, by any pro-Bush or Republican commentators.  Stack that up against the left-wing spin machine that bashed Ken Starr.

Posted by Drumwaster on 10/29/05 at 02:07 PM from United States

Tim Russert also managed to forget the details surrounding Nixon’s resignation.

Sherman, set the Wayback Machine to Saturday, July 27, 1974 as the House Judiciary Committee approved submitting Articles of Impeachment to the full house for Obstruction of Justice. The following Monday (the 29th), they voted to also charge him with Abuse of Executive Power. On Tuesday, the third and final article (Contempt of Congress) was approved.

The vote in the Committee is the legal equivalent of a Grand Jury, requiring only a majority in the House to send those articles to the Senate for trial.

Nixon resigned before that full House vote could be taken, so he was never formally Impeached, but he WAS “indicted”.

Of course, Ford Pardoned him a month later, so he could never be prosecuted, even if he had been the one actuqally picking the lock on DNC HQ at the Watergate building.

Posted by on 10/29/05 at 05:33 PM from United States

Rove should resign. Part of the indictment says that Rove talked to Novak about Wilson’s wife. Sure Rove did nothing provably illegal, but to me it is too close and he should be out. Bush should announce this at 9am in front of cameras. Bush should announce his Supreme Court nominee at 9:30am in front of cameras.

Bush really needs to start showing progress on the immigration, spending, and judges stuff, and get people to stop talking about abortion. We have all 3 branches of government yet all my big issues get squished by the moonbat liberals.

Posted by Nethicus on 10/29/05 at 05:40 PM from United States

This is a disappointment, for me anyway.  What’s the indictment about?  Leaking a CIA officers name?  Nope.  In fact, Fitzie was very clear that this had nothing to do with an improper leak.  Scooter was indicted for Obstruction of Justice.  And the fact that there were no “PLAMEGATE!” (I wish I could make the font bigger for that word like they do at HuffPo) indictments just aggrivates the numbskullery of Libby.

Why obstruct?  Why not just tell them what you did?  You would have walked!  You made your own bed here, Scooter.  I don’t think you’ll be convicted, but if you did obstruct, you should be tossed out on your ear for being a dumbass.

It’s not a victory for the libbies.  It’s not a victory for the Bush Admin.  But it is a close call for them.

And Joe Wilson-- you’re a douchebag.

Posted by on 10/29/05 at 05:50 PM from United States

Drum,

Your Nixon reference reminded me of this:

Next time any ouf you hear younger liberals blabbing on about the evils of the Nixon administration, ask them to explain the details of the scandal to you. Ask them what happened, who was involved, what office was broken into, who was the target, Nixon’s role, etc.

My generation has been very poorly informed of what actually happened with Watergate; most of us under 30 do not have a clue what really happened.

Seriously, ask any young liberal; 7 out of 10 won’t have a clue what actually happened, other than. “Nixon was impeached because he was a criminal”

Posted by Drumwaster on 10/29/05 at 06:04 PM from United States

True. Nixon was one of the most highly-respected politicians in the world, especially after opening up formal relations between the United States and Communist China. He was elected to give us an end to the Vietnam War, and while he really blew that one (he should have ended the war by WINNING the fucking war, rather than just walking away), he did manage to bring an end to it.

This was the one that gives every new governmental scandal the “-gate” suffix. Yet 90% of them couldn’t even tell you what the Watergate really was, and what was involved…

I heard some young lady discussing this era once, and I almost laughed out loud when she said “Watergategate”.

Posted by on 10/31/05 at 11:21 AM from United States

"Perhaps because Fitzie hasn’t used as much of my money as Starr did?”

That might be the difference between the way that the administrations handled the investigations.... Clinton fought each subpeona with ‘Executive Privilege’ to the highest court at each step in the investigation… Bush ordered his staff to co-operate with the investigation and to hand over all notes, e-mails, etc.  He has never claimed ‘Executive Privilege’ in trying to obstruct the investigation....

Next entry: Protest Me, Hardy

Previous entry: All Kneel

<< Back to main