Pundit overload

/ 31 October 2005

I enjoy reading the dailyKos. I often don’t agree with them, or think they’re going off on tangents, but today’s post about “pundit overload” in relation to the Libby indictment, struck a chord with me:

"Throughout the entire pundit brigade -- blogosphere included -- everyone is trying to decide whether or not the Fitzgerald indictments are a "victory" for their side or the other side. It's not, OK? It's just not. There is nothing good or victorious about this situation, for either side. Nothing. Nothing.

We've got exactly two choices here. Either the White House outed a covert agent because they handled sensitive and classified information so incompetently that it was distributed throughout the administration and into administration-selected leak receptacles without anyone realizing that the classified information was, duh, classified...

Or, they did it on purpose. I say "they", because we know that even though Libby is currently the only one indicted, the public record already shows, at minimum, Karl Rove as being one of the other administration figures that discussed Plame's classified CIA status with multiple reporters. That little tidbit ain't going away, regardless of how it's spun."</p>

Here we are, engaged in a quagmire of violent conflict in Iraq, with an ever widening gap between the rich and the poor in the US, with a disastrously unprepared public health system, etc. etc. and all we can talk about is who got "zinged"? We need to attend to what really matters, and the media pundits aren't helping us to do this in any real way.