- Schaffer vs. Udall
- View From A Height
- Thinking Right
- Mt. Virtus
- Rocky Mountain Right
- Slapstick Politics
- Daily Blogster
- Hugh Hewitt
- Hot Air
- Fox News
- Real Clear Politics
- Rocky Mountain News
- Denver Post
- Debka Files
- Talking Points Memo
The Senate Race
Rocky Mountain Alliance of Blogs, 2.0
My personal musings about anything that gets on my radar screen--heavily dominated by politics.
|Let's Apply A Consistent Standard|
Look at the following quotes from a prominent blog regarding scandal:
--Yesterday I was discussing with a friend whether the leak seemed more likely to be a Republican leak or a Democratic one (his view). The latter possibility is not as far-fetched as it might sound: . . .(dated 7/2. . )
--The one thing I'm certain about in this  matter is that I really wish the folks investigating his case were investigating the Plame case because if that investigation leaked as much as this one does my life over the last year would have been quite a bit easier. . . .(dated 7/2...)
--"I know Chairman  will work to get the full truth of what really happened and help all of us better understand why , a person who should fully understand the gravity and importance of sensitive national security materials, would operate with such overt negligence and apparent disregard for the law."
Any  has to see red when reading those words -- in fact, I'm tempted to say anyone with more than a bit of decency. . .(dated 7/2...)
--However, it seems equally clear that the surfacing of this matter is the product of a malicious leak intended to distract attention from 
Consider the timing. . . (dated 7/20)
Got all that? The key thing to note is that most of problem this author has with the subject at hand is the LEAKS and the POLITICAL PURPOSES thereof; as an aside, he's indignant at the seemingly mild, if pointed, criticism leveled by a prominent Republican.
Again--GOT IT? It's not about the security breach, it's about the politics. Let's remember that.
These writings were all courtesy of Joshua Micah Marshall, all on or about this date last year, in reference to the Sandy Berger pilfering of documents from the national archives.
So you have to ask yourself: is this standard, which was applied to the removal of evidence related to the 9/11 attacks and commission hearings, roughly the same standand as is being applied to the confirmation of a rumor that a reporter had been hearing?
I daresay the double standard is in full display here, as the left has hosen to apply a much more rigorous standard of conduct on a Republican administration official than they applied to Democratic officials.
For interest purpose, here's what JMM was saying last year about Fitzgerald's inquiry:
The Times says that Fitzgerald is "expected to announce in a matter of weeks whether he will prosecute anyone." And it's not clear to me that he will choose to bring any indictments. Like everyone else, I have no idea. Yet the Vice President's office would clearly like to see the investigation scuttled or at least lay the political groundwork for a defense against possible indictments.
Few weeks. . .few months . . . Hard to know if this is ever going to go anywhere.
Just don't expect the left to give whoever comes out of this the same soft treatment they gave Berger.