What's All the Fuss About the CIA Leak?

I can't understand what all the fuss is about regarding the leak of a CIA undercover operative along with her cover business and the operatives attached thereto. When there's a larger cause at stake, everyone should be prepared to take one for the team.

To begin with let's try granting the most egregious scenario possible from a liberal perspective. Let's say that someone like Rove or Libby leaked the CIA identity of Plame in order to slam Wilson, take attention away from Wilson's criticism of the push for war, and discredit the notion that no Weapons of Mass Destruction (henceforth, WMDs) existed in Iraq.

Well, aren't CIA operatives like Plame and her co-workers prepared to make a sacrifice? Because that's exactly what happened. Our President was heading toward a war, and Wilson's going around and spreading his findings about Nigeria was just proving to be a distraction to the successful prosecution of that war. So, really, the exposure of Plame and any colleagues who shared her cover enabled them to play a crucial role in America's war effort, serving as a sacrifice so that the war could proceed unhindered.

If you look at it from this perspective, rather than viewing herself as a victim of a vindictive administration, Plame should be thanking whoever leaked her identity to the press because doing so really makes her a hero: the first American sacrifice in the war with Iraq.

And so what if there aren't any WMDs in Iraq? It should be obvious from the above model that that's just a matter of truth making a sacrifice for the greater good. And if truth is willing to take one for the team, gee-whiz, liberals should just back off.

When Did Taking an Interest Become a Negative Thing?

If you're like me, you've been following the Bill Frist story and shaking your head in disgust. Here's a man devoted to all aspects of medicine, and the press is making a mockery of him by accusing him of having a conflict of interest..

Frist is not only a doctor, but a surgeon. And not only does he shape our country's laws in relation to healthcare, but he also owns stock in the healthcare industry. Now I don't really see how there's a conflict of interest. I mean, think about it--and think clearly, not through some scandal hungry media filter. Doesn't it seem logical that as a practitioner, a lawmaker, and a stockholder, Frist would want to see the health care industry succeed and be profitable? It would seem to me that such a man would make for one really motivated lawmaker.

Now don't we want our lawmakers to be interested in what they are doing? Don't we want lawmakers who are motivated to see America succeed? Rather than tearing the man down, the media should hold him up as a shining example of what politics can truly represent in out great nation. After all, is not Frist of the same mold as our administrative leadership, Bush and Cheney. Here we have oil men pursuing oil interests, and look at everything such interests have produced.

What would liberals have us do? Elect divested, disinterested, and dispassionate politicians who adhere to ethics and objectivity? Wouldn't you prefer to elect a lawmaker who has a vested financial stake in the running of our country and the shaping of our laws?

The correct choice should be clear.

Who Can Say Anything Bad About Friendship?

In America, friendship means something. By nominating Harriet Miers for a seat on the Supreme Court, Bush shows America that he cares, and that he can be a true friend.

Who did President Clinton nominate to the Supreme Court? First time around, Clinton selected Ruth Bader Ginsberg. They didn't even know each other, much less grow up in the same state. And the second time around, our William Jefferson Clinton chose Stephen Breyer--another stranger, and one who grew up as far away as California no less. Clinton showed himself to be a President of distance and disconnection by choosing people with whom he didn't even have a personal relationship. What's that about?

By contrast, Bush has once again selected an ally and a friend for an office of high responsibility. I say, brownie points for him. He takes care of his friends. And it's not just Bush the man either. His whole adminstration offers a warm and glowing example for the entire nation to follow. Why just look at how well Richard Cheney's former associates are represented in contracts for Iraq and New Orleans.

Republicans understand that you have to go to people you know and trust.

What would Democrats have us do? Be cold? Be distant? Choose someone or some company on some kind of objective basis? Choose the most "qualified" person out there? Make companies bid for contracts? What next, make nominees bid for a seat on the Supreme Court?

As Bush shows, no bid is needed. Just be a buddy and he'll be a buddy right back.

Now as Americans, isn't that the world in which we all want to live?