The Argument over Rove

[bryant69]

As I've read some of the Letters to the Editors and other discussions of the Rove Matter it seems like there are two main ways we could focus this story.

Method 1 - Karl Rove committed a serious crime (treason) in outing Valerie Plame and he should be tried and convicted; his lawlessness shows the lawless nature of the Bush Administration.

Method 2 - President Bush has stated that he wanted to know who the leaker was in the Plame Case, and that whoever it was would no longer have a place in the Bush White House. Karl Rove has now been revealed as the leaker. Why won't President Bush live up to his promise?

Which of these two seems the stronger argument in your mind?

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[tk2kewl]

1. the argument must tie back to WHY

WHY=yellowcake lie

and then use Plame/yellowcake lie to corroborate DSM

[NewJeffCT]

2. Method 1 is stronger because

People think politicians break promises all the time, so it's no big deal.

[bryant69]

3. I'm not sure I buy that

President Bush, to a certain extent, relies on a reputation of honesty and forthrightness (particularly with his base). Now he doesn't live up to it; but in most cases he's kept his lying from becoming a major issue. This being such a high profile case he may not be able to do that.

[BurtWorm]

4. Of these two, Method 1 seems stronger.

Method 2 seems to me to be an appeal to Bush's sense of honor. How do we know he has one? We know he's freakin' loyal to a fault, but loyalty and honor are not the same. It's also reminiscent of a playground tactic, to trick someone into making a promise they can't keep and then expecting them to keep it. And furthermore, why tell anyone but Bush himself that you think he should fire Rove? What good does that do?

Method 1, without reference to any "shoulds," is stronger by appealing to the reader's sense of outrage. It makes an argument that has relevance for anyone reading it.

[bryant69]

7. Well

Whether or not he has a sense of honor (and I doubt he does) he clearly wants to look like he has morals. It's a contrast between what Bush said and what Bush is doing.

I lean towards 2 becaue I think it's easier to prove. The data is very clear; where as the legal ramifications in whether or not Rove broke the law are an area where the Right wing can snowstorm all day.

[BurtWorm]

10. What is the best outcome we can hope for?

Rove's resignation or firing, or a mass waking up among the people to what the administration has been up to?

If you think Rove's head is the best we can hope for, then method 2 may be the "strongest," in that maybe it will help accomplish that goal. Of course it will leave Rove alive to live another day (or election cycle) and the party and Bushists get off scot free. I'd rather see their program and party rule itself out for as many election cycles as possible, and the way to do that is to spread the word that they're all corrupt.

[noamnety]

5. Method 3

This leak is one of three major ones by this administration that has impeded our ability to track and thwart terrorism. (The others being a leak to Miller in 2001 that caused her to make phone calls that tipped off suspected terrorists prior to a raid, and Kahn last summer).

It's not a single event; it's a continuing pattern of incompetence and corruption that is endangering our national security.

[dchill]

6. Method 3 - Rove is a criminal traitor ...

who DID NOT ACT ALONE. This administration AND Cheney & staff* are all suspect in the scandal. Wilson is only one of at least three who went to Niger and discovered NO EVIDENCE of Saddam seeking yellowcake uranium. Cheney still wouldn't accept "No" for an answer. It only made Bush & Co. angry and eager for retribution. The Plame leak is the result of that juvenile emotion.


*The "No one in this administration" parsing is their way of technically not lying about the VP's involvement in this sickening charade.

[bryant69]

8. I don't understand that last line

Isn't Rove a part of this administration?

[dchill]

9. What I heard on a cable news channel...

(I can't recall which one) is that technically, the VP and his staff are not a part of the administration. (Sure, okay...) Of course Rove IS. My statement about parsing is merely to explain how the VP & staff would not be included in a broad declaration (lie) that no one in this administration had leaked Plame's identity.

Does that explain my * ?

[bryant69]

12. I see what you are saying - they would have been smarter

To have let Cheney do all the dirty work. I suppose, though, for a man of Rove's disposition, it's hard to pass up the chance to slime.

[Road Scholar]

11. KKKarl commited treason! nt

[bryant69]

13. Knowing it and proving it are unfortuantely two different things.

I'm just saying.