Wednesday, July 12, 2006

The Bad Dad

I know there has been a lack of posts lately. There are a lot of new developments and I prefer to let them sink in for a while before blabbing some knee jerk reaction. I also have a lot of personal priorities that I have been dealing with lately. One of them is my role as a father. The right mix of stern take no crap and still maintaining a loving relationship with my children.
Recently there has been a lot of discussion about the growing authoritarian nature of the right. A prime example of this is this conversation between Keith Olberman and John Dean.
It occurred to me that the radical right is becoming the mean, unloving, brutal dad that most never want to have or ever want to be.
They condemn those who disagree or fight for the Constitution as treasonous. Just get out of my family!
Did the left ever call the right treasonous under Reagan during Iran Contra when they were selling arms to our enemy Iran? Did they roll out vitriol and hate when we were distracted for years from the peoples business with there obsession with a bj and whatever other minutiae one may want to add? Was the press treasonous for telling bad things about President Clinton and reporting every leak that flowed on an almost daily basis? We had a war and terrorism was happening then, but for the right it wasn't a big enough issue when you have a stain on a dress to talk about. No, the left did not use these tactics. It's the family approach for them. The it takes a village theory. Only the right attempts this mass jettison from society of all their opponents.
Many times on the talk show we would discuss how there apparently were a certain percentage of the population that would hang on to their hate and defeatist policies under any and all circumstances. They could never be brought to the goal of consensus or to consider new ideas. Even old ideas like maintaining the Constitution and balance of powers is poo pooed by the unrelenting authoritarians. They call everyone that disagrees with them Bush haters and say that their thoughts are just because they hate Bush. It has been pointed out multitudes of times that it is the policies that are hated but they won't listen. They call them America haters. They call them Saddam lovers, Al Quedas' best friend and on and on. Mind you this is what they call people in their own family, their fellow Americans. They're the bad dads that turn out children with all kinds of problems and issues. Usually either very angry or overly timid. They invoke more anger and hate. I use to read and comment on a right wing blog. I quit because that is what it was doing to me..making me angry and hateful. Not what I choose to be. Try it for a while and you will see what I mean. If they rule for much longer they won't have to kick me out of the family. I will find a new one. It's not where I want to be..or my country to be. I am proud to be a liberal. Especially when I look at the alternative.
I agree with some conservative principals and could compromise and come to a consensus on others. I understand the need for a strong resolute father but a brutal one destroys himself and his family.


Blogger The Game said...

I thought I would give you a comment....this is such a big blow to liberals, I have to put it here...enjoy, then cry, then take medicine, then go and respond on my blog...

My Role in the Valerie Plame Leak Story

by Robert Novak
Posted Jul 12, 2006

Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has informed my attorneys that, after two and one-half years, his investigation of the CIA leak case concerning matters directly relating to me has been concluded. That frees me to reveal my role in the federal inquiry that, at the request of Fitzgerald, I have kept secret.

I have cooperated in the investigation while trying to protect journalistic privileges under the First Amendment and shield sources who have not revealed themselves. I have been subpoenaed by and testified to a federal grand jury. Published reports that I took the Fifth Amendment, made a plea bargain with the prosecutors or was a prosecutorial target were all untrue.

For nearly the entire time of his investigation, Fitzgerald knew -- independent of me -- the identity of the sources I used in my column of July 14, 2003. A federal investigation was triggered when I reported that former Ambassador Joseph Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame Wilson, was employed by the CIA and helped initiate his 2002 mission to Niger. That Fitzgerald did not indict any of these sources may indicate his conclusion that none of them violated the Intelligence Identities Protection Act.

Some journalists have badgered me to disclose my role in the case, even demanding I reveal my sources -- identified in the column as two senior Bush administration officials and an unspecified CIA source. I have promised to discuss my role in the investigation when permitted by the prosecution, and I do so now.

The news broke Sept. 26, 2003, that the Justice Department was investigating the CIA leak case. I contacted my longtime attorney, Lester Hyman, who brought his partner at Swidler Berlin, James Hamilton, into the case. Hamilton urged me not to comment publicly on the case, and I have followed that advice for the most part.

The FBI soon asked to interview me, prompting my first major decision. My attorneys advised me that I had no certain constitutional basis to refuse cooperation if subpoenaed by a grand jury. To do so would make me subject to imprisonment and inevitably result in court decisions that would diminish press freedom, all at heavy personal legal costs.

I was interrogated at the Swidler Berlin offices Oct. 7, 2003, by an FBI inspector and two agents. I had not identified my sources to my attorneys, and I told them I would not reveal them to the FBI. I did disclose how Valerie Wilson's role was reported to me, but the FBI did not press me to disclose my sources.

On Dec. 30, 2003, the Justice Department named Fitzgerald as special prosecutor. An appointment was made for Fitzgerald to interview me at Swidler Berlin on Jan. 14, 2004. The problem facing me was that the special prosecutor had obtained signed waivers from every official who might have given me information about Wilson's wife.

That created a dilemma. I did not believe blanket waivers in any way relieved me of my journalistic responsibility to protect a source. Hamilton told me that I was sure to lose a case in the courts at great expense. Nevertheless, I still felt I could not reveal their names.

However, on Jan. 12, two days before my meeting with Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor informed Hamilton that he would be bringing to the Swidler Berlin offices only two waivers. One was by my principal source in the Valerie Wilson column, a source whose name has not yet been revealed. The other was by presidential adviser Karl Rove, whom I interpret as confirming my primary source's information. In other words, the special prosecutor knew the names of my sources.

When Fitzgerald arrived, he had a third waiver in hand -- from Bill Harlow, the CIA public information officer who was my CIA source for the column confirming Mrs. Wilson's identity. I answered questions using the names of Rove, Harlow and my primary source.

I had a second session with Fitzgerald at Swidler Berlin on Feb. 5, 2004, after which I was subpoenaed to appear before the grand jury. I testified there at the U.S. courthouse in Washington on Feb. 25.

In these four appearances with federal authorities, I declined to answer when the questioning touched on matters beyond the CIA leak case. Neither the FBI nor the special prosecutor pressed me.

I have revealed Rove's name because his attorney has divulged the substance of our conversation, though in a form different from my recollection. I have revealed Harlow's name because he has publicly disclosed his version of our conversation, which also differs from my recollection. My primary source has not come forward to identify himself.

When I testified before the grand jury, I was permitted to read a statement that I had written expressing my discomfort at disclosing confidential conversations with news sources. It should be remembered that the special prosecutor knew their identities and did not learn them from me.

In my sworn testimony, I said what I have contended in my columns and on television: Joe Wilson's wife's role in instituting her husband's mission was revealed to me in the middle of a long interview with an official who I have previously said was not a political gunslinger. After the federal investigation was announced, he told me through a third party that the disclosure was inadvertent on his part.

Following my interview with the primary source, I sought out the second administration official and the CIA spokesman for confirmation. I learned Valerie Plame's name from Joe Wilson's entry in "Who's Who in America."
I considered his wife's role in initiating Wilson's mission, later confirmed by the Senate Intelligence Committee, to be a previously undisclosed part of an important news story. I reported it on that basis.

The Left bashed Rove and Bush for 3 years about this....this was the "culture of corruption"
ONCE AGAIN, the Left has no clue, and it is shown that every time they yell and scream, every time they PRETEND to be is ALL based on two things: getting back power, and undermining the President of the United States....THAT IS IT.

No one broke any law. NO ONE EVER said the name Valerie Plame or Wison, NO ONE....except JOE WILSON....that is who he found out the information from....Rove didn't say it NO ONE did...But the Left was so outraged that this "leak" was made...

I never understood this story. I KNEW it was always about it is proven...

And why does the Left care so much about this leak, the "leak" of a woman's name that was NEVER said, and a person that was not really undercover if all you had to do was look up her name....

So, they care about THIS leak that does not matter, but they are in love with leaks that ruin vital programs of the United States government used in the war on terror....

Where are all the investigations on this leak??? Oh, wait, the MSM only cares about it if it hurts Bush...
So, another story, another issue that the Left yelled at to the point of needed new bottles of medication is a NON-STORY....You should all write letters to Rove telling him you are sorry.

5:13 PM, July 12, 2006  
Blogger Ron said...

This is worse than no point at all. That is the problem with your "issues" game. You never bother to make sure you have all the facts before you copy and paste.

We know a cia undercover agent was outed. Patrick Fitzgerald who investigated the case said she was undercover. The CIA who asked for the investigation said she was. Harlow was not allowed to reveal she was undercover because that would be a violation! That is likely why he recommended it not be reported- ya think? We are resonably sure it came from cheneys office. We know she was working on the wmd program in Iran which a year or two later is in crisis. If you think not saying her name is not revealing her identity then ask Dolly Roves husband what he thinks about it. Tell me game where, before this happened you could look up the fact that she worked for the CIA on Iran wmd?/ Can ya find it for me? I mean what was the point in all this anyway. To cover a lie? Turns out thats what it was. And little sheeple deny and walk right over the cliff. We don't yet know if any one will be nailed for breaking a law. That certainly doesn't mean it didn't happen. You say no one said it but yet it got out.???? What the hell are you talking about! Get back on your medication. It is obvious to a 4 year old it did happen.
You talk about vital programs in the "war on terra". How you know? No you don't because it is all a secret! Even from congress. Get real and understand the difference between Constitutional democracy the shines a light, balance of powers and authoritarian smears that try to shut people up and protect a lie. How else would it get out? Game,you debate like a grade school student, or a wingnut talkshow host.

Notice game didn't comment on the post. Just a totally unrealated rant. We do have the coffee table for that but likely game didnt even read the post. If he did he would realise that he was posting a prime example of what I was talking about..especially that percentage that will never change for anything.They will walk over the cliff following their authoritarian leader. game I am not commenting on your blog. You breed hate other Americans and rigidity over consensus there and I chose not to live in that.

11:20 PM, July 12, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ron, Ditto.

1:35 PM, July 14, 2006  
Blogger The Game said...

okay ron, have fun by yourself...unable to understand or except others opinions, thoughts and feelings...that sounds like an intolerant person....hummmm
I'm sure Donkey will come on here eventually and give you that warm, respectful, non hateful speach you are looking for...good luck with that...

11:19 PM, July 14, 2006  
Blogger Ron said...

Yes game I have reached the point of not being able to tolerate it anymore.
I have lost all my patience with you guys. I'm mad as hell and not going to stand for it anymore! How clear does it have to be to get you to understand how screwed we have become. We have huge gas price increases, little real domestic security, a failed foreign policy and world wide threats.Low wage labor coming in, jobs going out,Less freedom and liberty, secret government. Failed policy all the way around. Will you see it only when its too late??!!! I'm not waiting!

2:39 AM, July 16, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here are some links that I believe will be interested

8:03 AM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Very pretty site! Keep working. thnx!

2:32 PM, August 10, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hi! Just want to say what a nice site. Bye, see you soon.

11:42 PM, August 15, 2006  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home