Plame Pallywood
August 29, 2006
What to make of Armitage? David Corn and Michael Isikoff try to draw the curtain on their three-year old manufactured soap opera with the release of their new book “Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War.”
How much time, money, and energy has been spent to investigate this matter when the original leaker was known from the beginning of this scandal? How much ammo has this scandal given to the “Bush Lied, People Died” comic troupe? This is a good indication of how some media will try to get huge mileage out of a contrived situation and steer public dialogue, sometimes for years on end.
This was one of the fundamental narratives of the Angry Left, and it’s withering away awfully quick. What other invented storylines are out there? Top contenders have to be the current hysteria over global warming and the debate on Iraq.
Vince, Vince, Vince…my you surely know how to agitate Zac and I. First, how do you consider global warming to be a contrived situation and invented storyline? There’s a load of ongoing research and studies on it (http://www.nrdc.org/globalWarming/fgwscience2005.asp)
and I find it hard to see why the media reporting on one of the biggest scientific debates of the day is contrived or invented.
And what hysteria are you referring to? The skeptics have had a disproportionate voice in regard to the actual scientific findings and there’s been precious little action taken on the issue in the U.S.
I’ll let Zac defend the fact that the media has the gall to report on a war that our country is currently in.
Global warming–the real, the hypothesized, the imagined–has been sensationalized by media. An example that best typifies this thought is this:
Some hysterical examples are listed here in this issue’s table of contents.
M, I’m surprised you haven’t jumped in on any of our other conversations. I am also surprised that you interpreted my post as a criticism of the media for simply doing its job, which it wasn’t. I criticized the media for making up a storyline and then milking it.
Ok, so that headline is a bit sensationalistic. Could it be that they are stealing a page from the Right’s playbook and hoping to use FEAR to rally support for a cause?
I have been hesitant to add to the Iraq debate because I don’t have much constructive to add. I think that war is a mistake of extremely large proportions, but to completely walk away from the mess that we created would just exacerbate the situation and be morally wrong. I do think we need to take drastically different actions there because it’s a complete mess, but I honestly don’t have a clue exactly what those actions should be. That the frustrating thing to me about the whole “stay the course” vs. “cut and run” dichotomy. Neither is right and I haven’t heard anything resembling a rational strategy that would better the situation.
Overall, I think our Mid-East policy is counterproductive because it only provides more fuel to the fire that is attracting terrorists to that belief system. I think we need a policy that is cognizant of the impression that our actions are creating in the minds of millions of future, might-be terrorists if we ultimately hope to win the “war on terror”. But admittedly, it is a more nuanced view than just bombing the hell out of those infidels and making them submit to our worldview.
I sense a realization from you that politicians of any ilk sell fear, prosperity, jealousy and/or security, and happily benefit from willing media.
I appreciate your honesty about Iraq, but the notion that we’re feeding new generations of jihadists is only partially true, and doesn’t nullify our need to protect American interests. Why not argue the opposite, that increased jihadism has only emboldened American resolve?
I followed your link. You might as well have linked me to Al Gore’s site. ALAR anyone?
Vince: In response to your complaints on the time, energy, and vast resources spent investigating the Plame affair, I submit the following by taking some of your words and adding a few of my own:
-How much time, money, and energy has been spent to investigate this Clinton-Lewinsky matter? How much ammo has this scandal given to the Right-Wing Republican (would-be-comic-if-it-weren’t-so-damn-tragic) troupe? This is a good indication of how some media will try to get huge mileage out of an IRRELEVANT situation and steer public dialogue, sometimes for years on end.-
I must say, I’d rather see MILLIONS of tax dollars investigating the outing of an active CIA operative than see, as we all did, the millions of dollars used to investigate where Clinton and his penis spent their leisure time. With Plame, we are talking about national security and our nation’s intelligence-gathering community (among other things). With the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal, on the other hand, we were all forced to watch as right-wingers played out their twisted obsessions with sex, internationally displayed their scorn for an able, articulate president, and spent millions of our tax dollars doing it.
The millions wasted on the Lewinsky scandal are lamentable. The millions of tax dollars spent to investigate the betrayal of a CIA operative, and the murky waters full of lies that comprise said betrayal, make me happy to pay taxes.
Besides, how could I not have a school girl’s crush on Patrick Fitzgerald?!?!
In other news, Vince, I thought you might be interested in reading this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/30/opinion/30wed1.html?ex=1157083200&en=c891eb3cadfa1580&ei=5087%0A
WELCOME to my kabuki theater! Not sure if you’re home or away, but good to have you!
Interesting how you’d like to talk about another scandal intertwined with the great Michael Isikoff! See, there is a pattern of media intrigue!!! ;^)
Clinton was lucky enough to have only one cocktail dress show up drenched in semen. A habitual sexual predator in any other environment (even as a CEO) would have been sent off and would rightfully have been called a pig and sent off. I’m not sure how much the Lewinsky case cost all by itself but you’re right, Clinton’s penis was both able and articulate.
I guess I’m at a loss as to why you’re happy to pay taxes to investigate a crime that didn’t happen. Plame wasn’t covert. Certainly there is some explaining to do, but by the “wrong” persons (Armitage and Powell). I don’t think any crazies will move their protest camp from Rove’s house to Armitage’s.
I can see how the Clinton investigations got truly out of hand, and I don’t necessarily agree with all of what happened, and I certainly was repelled by what I remember of the media fiasco. But Clinton’s scorched earth stance exponentially expanded the controversy when there were multiple opportunities to set the record straight and escape “back to America’s business.” The fastest horse is from the lesser guilt.
forgot–B, I think the NYT editorial should probably be another post. Either you can start it or I can tomorrow.
Ok. I need a username and password.
RE: Plame’s Status
Plame’s Identity Marked As Secret
Memo Central to Probe Of Leak Was Written By State Dept. Analyst
By Walter Pincus and Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, July 21, 2005; Page A01
A classified State Department memorandum central to a federal leak investigation contained information about CIA officer Valerie Plame in a paragraph marked “(S)” for secret, a clear indication that any Bush administration official who read it should have been aware the information was classified, according to current and former government officials.
Plame — who is referred to by her married name, Valerie Wilson, in the memo — is mentioned in the second paragraph of the three-page document, which was written on June 10, 2003, by an analyst in the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR), according to a source who described the memo to The Washington Post.
The paragraph identifying her as the wife of former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV was clearly marked to show that it contained classified material at the “secret” level, two sources said. The CIA classifies as “secret” the names of officers whose identities are covert, according to former senior agency officials.
If there was a crime committed–and the investigation isn’t final yet–I’m sure Fitzgerald will bring charges, even if only the slightest illegality took place. Are you seeing some complexities in this fiasco that Fitz somehow is overlooking?