Sunday, July 17, 2005
Roving Journalists and “Socksgate” Reminder
There are plenty of sites on the web and plenty of media "commentators" who are taking a stand on Karl Rove and his alleged criminal act involving a CIA “covert agent.”
No one's got the full scoop on this yet so neither side is really in a position to attack or defend Rove.
The Democrats and left in general are of course in overdrive to bring down Bush's supreme strategist. There’s every reason for them to despise Rove; he's conservative, smart, and has lots of power.
What got me a bit frazzled in all of this is the media’s aggressive stance on the issue along with their usual phony "objectivity" posturing. The press corps was downright rude in their bloodlust for Rove’s head in a recent press conference with White House press secretary Scott McClellan. Sometimes these characters sound more like Democrat politicians than non-aligned journalists merely seeking information. This is the same media clique that tucked a serious scandal out of attention last year making it a virtual non-issue.
To refresh your memory; former president Bill Clinton's national security advisor, Sandy Berger admitted guilt (plea-bargained) in having deliberately removed government documents from the national archives relating to the 9/11 investigation regarding responses to millennial celebration terrorist threats -- under supreme good guy, Bill Clinton.
If you recall, Berger admitted not only stealing these documents from the archives but actually cutting them up and discarding them. A national security adviser to a former president obviously couldn't plead ignorance in his suspicious actions regarding the handling of sensitive material (“I thought it was okay to steal documents related to an investigation and cut them up with a scissors and throw them out”…?).
Throughout the entire affair up to his admission of guilt, the mainstream media kept “Socksgate” a non-story. When it was reported in small back-page articles, attempts were made to make the Republican response to the issue the real scandal (how dare they point out Berger's actions!). Berger never explained just why he did what he did, and the media generally seemed to not care. This of course won't be the case with Rove. Even if he is found innocent of any wrongdoing, front page articles will ally with Democratic Party hounds and continue demanding "answers," while a new myth is created of unsubstantiated guilt. Even public school textbooks will note the non-"scandal" as part of the "Bush legacy"
The MSM can claim objectivity all they want. Consistency isn't their forte, if there’s a head to roll, they want it to be conservative and they will do all they can to make it so.
