They're trying to distract us. The point is not whether Rove used Valerie Plame's name or just called her "Wilson's wife." That is not the point and that does not matter.
The point is that Rove said he knew nothing about it, said nothing about it. Well, I am so sorry, sir, but if you spoke about "Joe Wilson's wife" then you did indeed know something, you did indeed say something.
I'm not that stupid.
I'm not that easily diverted.
First you said you knew nothing, then you said you didn't use her name. Well which is it? You've contradicted yourself.
As for the diversion, it's about identifying her. It's really quite simple. "Joe Wilson's wife" = Mrs. Wilson = Valerie Plame.
It does not matter which name or label you used for her. It matters if you identified her. Clearly you did. You said you did (but not by her name...).
But at some point, you lied about it. Regardless of what you knew about Valerie Plame, regardless of what you said about Valerie Plame, misleading the grand jury, lying to the grand jury, is obstruction of justice. And if you did that, it's illegal.
And yes, lying about whether or not you outed a CIA agent (as a, let's face it, very bitchy way to try to discredit Joe Wilson so that people would not attend to his report that said there was no reason to go to war with Iraq; a war, let's please remember, in which 2,000 American soldiers have now died) is a much bigger deal than lying about who's gone down on you in the oval office.
The Righties are trying to say this is all a political game of those mean Lefties. There's a key problem with this argument: the Lefties are not the reason this investigation got started.
Harm was done to a CIA agent. The CIA didn't take kindly to that. The CIA took the issue to the DOJ.
How is that a Lefty political game?
Two days left. Will anyone be indicted? We shall see. The clock is ticking...
Wednesday, October 26, 2005
Sunday, October 23, 2005
Things fall apart
That's the name of a book. A book I read many years ago. I don't honestly remember much about it. Something about an African tribe and missionaries. Maybe about old ways of life and new ways and how one way is not automatically better than the other.
Maybe. Like I said, I don't really remember.
Sure seems right though, doesn't it?
Things fall apart.
You don't always mean for them to. Actually, I think you never mean for them to.
Whenever I've heard this phrase in the past, I've always thought of a whole falling into pieces. A whole what didn't matter. Just a whole that fell apart.
But what if there was never a whole? What if instead you had gathered together pieces from here and there throughout your life. And what you do, day after day, is hold those pieces together.
Then one day, you just lose your grip.
Doesn't matter why. You just do. And when you lose your grip, all the different pieces start to fall in all different directions. You were holding together so many pieces and you spent so many years gathering them all together, you just really can't imagine gathering them all back up again.
So what do you do now?
Keep on keeping on and start gathering new pieces?
Try to gather up the old pieces?
Ignore all pieces, old and new, and just take a nap?
It's getting late on a Sunday and I have class in the morning, so I'm going for the sleep.
Maybe. Like I said, I don't really remember.
Sure seems right though, doesn't it?
Things fall apart.
You don't always mean for them to. Actually, I think you never mean for them to.
Whenever I've heard this phrase in the past, I've always thought of a whole falling into pieces. A whole what didn't matter. Just a whole that fell apart.
But what if there was never a whole? What if instead you had gathered together pieces from here and there throughout your life. And what you do, day after day, is hold those pieces together.
Then one day, you just lose your grip.
Doesn't matter why. You just do. And when you lose your grip, all the different pieces start to fall in all different directions. You were holding together so many pieces and you spent so many years gathering them all together, you just really can't imagine gathering them all back up again.
So what do you do now?
Keep on keeping on and start gathering new pieces?
Try to gather up the old pieces?
Ignore all pieces, old and new, and just take a nap?
It's getting late on a Sunday and I have class in the morning, so I'm going for the sleep.
What's with all the china?
In the last week, I've heard new versions of the two main takes on the situation in Iraq and what we should do about it. We know the two main takes:
1. We can't leave now. We have to stay until we've restored order to the area, until democracy is in place, until the current administration is no longer in office.
Okay, so that last part is my little addition.
2. Get out. Get the hell out.
Again, my take. The kinder, gentler way is to say that we should withdraw as soon as possible. That we need to leave the business of rebuilding that nation to the people of that nation.
So now on to the new versions. They are the same old stories, the same scenarios, the exact same theories. Just repackaged. So we'll keep the same numbers.
1. "It's like broken china." Broken china that we broke. So as we learned in kindergarten, since we broke it, we should stay and fix it.
2. "It's like a bull in a china shop." You can imagine the chaos and destruction. Everywhere the bull turns, it breaks more china. It doesn't mean to. It may even try to stop. But it's a bull and it's china. It's inevitable. And the only way to stop it is to get the bull out. Get it the hell out.
Unfortunately, I don't actually remember who said what. And the explanations are in my own words. But you get the picture.
Apparently the mouths have gotten tired of talking about Iraq and what we do now. Apparently they're actually tired of saying the exact same thing all the time, day after day, week after week, month after month, year after year. So they were repackaging a bit last week. I guess even they get bored with the same story being in the news for so very long.
1. We can't leave now. We have to stay until we've restored order to the area, until democracy is in place, until the current administration is no longer in office.
Okay, so that last part is my little addition.
2. Get out. Get the hell out.
Again, my take. The kinder, gentler way is to say that we should withdraw as soon as possible. That we need to leave the business of rebuilding that nation to the people of that nation.
So now on to the new versions. They are the same old stories, the same scenarios, the exact same theories. Just repackaged. So we'll keep the same numbers.
1. "It's like broken china." Broken china that we broke. So as we learned in kindergarten, since we broke it, we should stay and fix it.
2. "It's like a bull in a china shop." You can imagine the chaos and destruction. Everywhere the bull turns, it breaks more china. It doesn't mean to. It may even try to stop. But it's a bull and it's china. It's inevitable. And the only way to stop it is to get the bull out. Get it the hell out.
Unfortunately, I don't actually remember who said what. And the explanations are in my own words. But you get the picture.
Apparently the mouths have gotten tired of talking about Iraq and what we do now. Apparently they're actually tired of saying the exact same thing all the time, day after day, week after week, month after month, year after year. So they were repackaging a bit last week. I guess even they get bored with the same story being in the news for so very long.
Tuesday, October 4, 2005
Should white girls speak up?
I attended a panel discussion on Hurricane Katrina and the media-race links today. One thing I noticed at this discussion was that only one of the white audience members (there were perhaps 20 people, 30 at most, in the audience) commented. The white faculty and staff added their thoughts (and actually, two members of the panel were white) without hesitation. I was struck by this and sat wondering about it.
The panel didn't raise any issues that I have not already considered myself. And I had thoughts. I had lots of thoughts. But I didn't contribute. Why? Because somewhere along the way, I learned that it wasn't my place. I'm a middle-class white girl (though at 33, some would probably claim that I'm no longer a girl), what right do I have to talk about racial issues, to talk about poverty, to talk about the suffering that goes with both in our society? I have a bachelor's degree, a master's degree, I'm in law school. No, I'm not independently wealthy. Yes, I have debt. Yes, the cash flow is restricted. But come on, who can't recognize that I'm a "have"? That I even had access to get these degrees is something that not everyone can say. I'm privileged in that way.
Wow, how stupid was I? Sheesh. Sometimes the vast level of my stupidity surprises even me.
How exactly will anything ever change if the "haves" think they have no place in the conversation? The "haves" create and dictate the damn conversation (in terms of the media and the public sphere, not necessarily in terms of the private sphere and the local level). For changes this big, this encompassing, this important, the change happens on the small, personal level. It happens by starting the conversation, and keeping it going, with your friends and your neighbors and your coworkers. It happens on your block, in your neighborhood. It happens with your children. It happens when people like me speak up and join the conversation and in that way become a part of the solution. Actions aren't enough here. You can't just not discriminate. You have to talk about it. You have to have the discussions, the conversations.
My master's is in public administration. At heart, I'm all about the public sector. I want to make a difference, to make a change, to make our world better for all of us. And yet, there was still a part of me that thought I didn't have a place in the conversation? How can that be? How can any of us not participate?
I'm such an idiot sometimes.
The panel didn't raise any issues that I have not already considered myself. And I had thoughts. I had lots of thoughts. But I didn't contribute. Why? Because somewhere along the way, I learned that it wasn't my place. I'm a middle-class white girl (though at 33, some would probably claim that I'm no longer a girl), what right do I have to talk about racial issues, to talk about poverty, to talk about the suffering that goes with both in our society? I have a bachelor's degree, a master's degree, I'm in law school. No, I'm not independently wealthy. Yes, I have debt. Yes, the cash flow is restricted. But come on, who can't recognize that I'm a "have"? That I even had access to get these degrees is something that not everyone can say. I'm privileged in that way.
Wow, how stupid was I? Sheesh. Sometimes the vast level of my stupidity surprises even me.
How exactly will anything ever change if the "haves" think they have no place in the conversation? The "haves" create and dictate the damn conversation (in terms of the media and the public sphere, not necessarily in terms of the private sphere and the local level). For changes this big, this encompassing, this important, the change happens on the small, personal level. It happens by starting the conversation, and keeping it going, with your friends and your neighbors and your coworkers. It happens on your block, in your neighborhood. It happens with your children. It happens when people like me speak up and join the conversation and in that way become a part of the solution. Actions aren't enough here. You can't just not discriminate. You have to talk about it. You have to have the discussions, the conversations.
My master's is in public administration. At heart, I'm all about the public sector. I want to make a difference, to make a change, to make our world better for all of us. And yet, there was still a part of me that thought I didn't have a place in the conversation? How can that be? How can any of us not participate?
I'm such an idiot sometimes.
Monday, October 3, 2005
Why?
Why can we not yet talk about who was to blame in the mess that is the Gulf Coast? What do you mean, it isn't time yet? When will it be time? Will it ever be time?
Why is "Brownie" being paid to help with FEMA's investigation? Since when do we hire those at fault to investigate themselves?
Why is it that the Republicans praise the Democrats and nonpartisan politics when they get their way, but scream and holler and jump up and down and have fits and whine about partisan politics when they don't get their way?
Why are the Republicans yelling about political motives being behind the DeLay indictments when there have been more Dems investigated in TX than Republicans? (Oh wait, perhaps I should see the question above for a clue with this one...)
Why are we still pretending to be surprised about the flooding in New Orleans?
Why are we pretending to be surprised about the forecast that came out today predicting a bad October in terms of tropical storms and hurricanes? Wake up people, if you've actually managed to miss it, we're in for a bad year! Actually, we're in for a bad decade. Be prepared.
Why are we ignoring the fact that all of those displaced people from the Gulf Coast will never come "home" again? They didn't have the means to leave, you're not kidding yourself into thinking they magically found the means to get back, are you? Did you know that there's no plan to bring them back?
Why is the United States of America, the Melting Pot of the world (or to be more hip and current, the "Salad Bowl" of the world), talking about building a fence to keep people out? If the Native Americans had done that back in the day, where would we all be?
Why is the senior legal analyst on CNN so shocked at the fact that the latest Supreme Court nominee is not a judge? Apparently he slept through law school: Nonjudges on the high court are hardly new. He might want to look into the former Chief's background as a start.
Why is the reconstruction work in the Gulf Coast being awarded via no bid contracts to outsiders (Haliburton's doing some of this work? Really?) rather than giving the work to those in the area who currently really need the work? Why aren't we letting the people help themselves in such a basic way?
Why is it that video games get protestors saying that all of that violence will lead to desensitization toward violence in the real world, meanwhile the news keeps showing a tape of a suicide bomber again and again and again and again and... ?
Why don't we ever learn that we cannot, should not, rule the world?
Why is so much of tonight's NewsNight exactly what we saw on tonight's Anderson Cooper 360? Is it always this way? I admit to not usually watching NewsNight (been tuning in lately just for Anderson), but really, what's the point in all the same stories and interviews? If this is the norm, I won't be turning into a regular viewer of NewsNight.
Why did they get rid of the light brown m&ms? It may not be a new issue, but it'll also be there for some of us.
Why is "Brownie" being paid to help with FEMA's investigation? Since when do we hire those at fault to investigate themselves?
Why is it that the Republicans praise the Democrats and nonpartisan politics when they get their way, but scream and holler and jump up and down and have fits and whine about partisan politics when they don't get their way?
Why are the Republicans yelling about political motives being behind the DeLay indictments when there have been more Dems investigated in TX than Republicans? (Oh wait, perhaps I should see the question above for a clue with this one...)
Why are we still pretending to be surprised about the flooding in New Orleans?
Why are we pretending to be surprised about the forecast that came out today predicting a bad October in terms of tropical storms and hurricanes? Wake up people, if you've actually managed to miss it, we're in for a bad year! Actually, we're in for a bad decade. Be prepared.
Why are we ignoring the fact that all of those displaced people from the Gulf Coast will never come "home" again? They didn't have the means to leave, you're not kidding yourself into thinking they magically found the means to get back, are you? Did you know that there's no plan to bring them back?
Why is the United States of America, the Melting Pot of the world (or to be more hip and current, the "Salad Bowl" of the world), talking about building a fence to keep people out? If the Native Americans had done that back in the day, where would we all be?
Why is the senior legal analyst on CNN so shocked at the fact that the latest Supreme Court nominee is not a judge? Apparently he slept through law school: Nonjudges on the high court are hardly new. He might want to look into the former Chief's background as a start.
Why is the reconstruction work in the Gulf Coast being awarded via no bid contracts to outsiders (Haliburton's doing some of this work? Really?) rather than giving the work to those in the area who currently really need the work? Why aren't we letting the people help themselves in such a basic way?
Why is it that video games get protestors saying that all of that violence will lead to desensitization toward violence in the real world, meanwhile the news keeps showing a tape of a suicide bomber again and again and again and again and... ?
Why don't we ever learn that we cannot, should not, rule the world?
Why is so much of tonight's NewsNight exactly what we saw on tonight's Anderson Cooper 360? Is it always this way? I admit to not usually watching NewsNight (been tuning in lately just for Anderson), but really, what's the point in all the same stories and interviews? If this is the norm, I won't be turning into a regular viewer of NewsNight.
Why did they get rid of the light brown m&ms? It may not be a new issue, but it'll also be there for some of us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)