A BuzzFlash Reader Commentary


MORE
BUZZFLASH

SUPPORT BUZZFLASH

INTERVIEWS

WORLD MEDIA WATCH

FIFTH COLUMNIST

SOUTHERN STYLE

BARBARA'S DAILY BUZZ

THE ANGRY LIBERAL

CARTOONS

CAPITOL BUZZ

CONTRIBUTORS

MAILBAG

EDITORIALS

PERSPECTIVES

NEWS ANALYSIS

NEWS ALERTS

LINK ARCHIVES

SEARCH

ABOUT

Smoke and Mirrors

April 15, 2002

Dear BuzzFlash:

I am delighted to hear that you were mentioned on Crossfire. I haven't seen the new crossfire (since I don't have cable -- expensive), but I love reading about it on your site and MWO -- I bet the ratings are skyrocketing just like the sales of Michael Moore & David Brock's books, another oasis in the right-wing media desert.

It was nice to read the transcript of Carlson claiming not to have read the BuzzFlash interview and Begala comparing Clinton and Reagan indictments.

The next time Carlson argues that Clinton *must* be corrupt because he's been the most investigated president, Begala and Carville should remind him that . . .

a) Clinton isn't lucky enough to have a daddy whose library can be used to protect his governor's records from public scrutiny. What don't we know about the Lay-Bush relationship and Funeralgate?

b) Clinton isn't lucky enough to have a son who can protect his presidential papers from public scrutiny (e.g. legal delay tactics and George the Second's executive order).

c) The investigation into the Whitewater land deal originated in the Bush administration during the 1992 presidential election. (It's in the Ray report.)

d) When Clinton stonewalled, it was about sex. Bush and Cheney are stonewalling about public policy. (Remember, Hillary did release the secret health task force records when pressured.)

e) Clinton never pardoned anyone convicted in a scandal in which he himself was implicated. (e.g. George the First's pardon of Caspar Weinberger, etc.)

f) Clinton was never indicted, let alone convicted, for anything related to Whitewater. And his impeachment was not Whitewater-related.

g) Rep Henry Waxman (one of the few politicians untainted by Enron contributions) has enough evidence to launch at least as many investigations of the Bush administration as Burton did of Clinton, but the minority party in congress doesn't have subpoena power. Burton, of course, has yet to launch any White House/Enron investigation. The rationale: There's no proof of any wrongdoing. Well, that never stopped the Republicans when Clinton was president.

h) In this country, we still try to stick to the principle of "innocent until proven guilty." At least for now.

From what I could gather from the transcript, Carlson's argument is, "Where there's the most smoke, that's where the fire is." But that's not necessarily true -- where there's smoke, there might be mirrors instead.

* * *

Contributed by BuzzFlash Reader, Hallie


CONTRIBUTOR ARCHIVES

 
 
MEDIA WATCH
DAILY BUZZ FIFTH COLUMNIST CARTOONS SOUTHERN STYLE
ANGRY LIBERAL
INTERVIEWS CONTRIBUTORS MAILBAG PERSPECTIVES
EDITORIALS
ANALYSIS ALERTS PERSPECTIVES HEADLINES
SEARCH
MEDIA LINKS LINK ARCHIVES SEND NEWSFLASH ABOUT
HELP KEEP BUZZFLASH BUZZ'N!
 

Unless otherwise noted, all original
content and headlines are © BuzzFlash.
Contact BuzzFlash for reprint rights.