So, when the NY Times publishes something you don't like or don't want to believe, you jump in the fray to denigrate them. But when a specious story comes out in the same newspaper that supports Rove, you automatically believe it? Which is it? Is the Times a liberal bastion of right-wing hatred or not? If so, why would they publish this? It's so funny how conservatives will grasp at any straw if it supports their case, no matter how hypocritical it might be to hold that straw -- case in pont, conservatives beliefs about the Times vs. their support of this article. I'm a political advisor and I'll tell you right now that I've been telling my friends for days that this is exactly how I would spin the story, by making it a non-leak. But Rove and the Bush White House would *never* do that, would they? They're so perfect.

So, when the NY Times publishes something you don't like or don't want to believe, you jump in the fray to denigrate them. But when a specious story comes out in the same newspaper that supports Rove, you automatically believe it? Which is it? Is the Times a liberal bastion of right-wing hatred or not? If so, why would they publish this?

Fred, the Times is consistently liberal, and it has a solid track record of attacking conservatives. In my opinion, the Times has been and is likely to continue to be a paper guided more by ideology than facts, and I will reserve the right to be amused by it when its ideological zeal backfires.

The unintended humor of this article is that the Times ran this piece hoping to deliver a coup de grace, and instead showed that a journalist (Novak) leaked to Rove, not the other way around. Rove doesn’t have to be that bright; his enemy’s are apparently just that incompetent.

It's so funny how conservatives will grasp at any straw if it supports their case, no matter how hypocritical it might be to hold that straw -- case in pont [sic], conservatives beliefs about the Times vs. their support of this article. I'm a political advisor and I'll tell you right now that I've been telling my friends for days that this is exactly how I would spin the story, by making it a non-leak. But Rove and the Bush White House would *never* do that, would they? They're so perfect.

Fred, Rove doesn’t need to grasp at individual straws when your side is tossing entire bales right into his hands.

The Times inadvertently supports Rove, as does the Cooper email, both showing that the journalists came to Rove, not the other way around. Novak obviously comes out and exposes Plame to Rove, not the other way around.

It also happens that David Corn of The Nation was the first journalist to specifically mention Plame’s former covert status, with Joe Wilson himself providing the leak. Oops. Luckily for Mr. Wilson, he admitted yesterday that she wasn’t an undercover agent when he outed his wife, so he probably won’t go to jail.

Rove and Bush like most people aren’t perfect, nor do they claim to be. Fortunately, liberals have such a low level of competency that even moderate Republican competence makes them look like geniuses by comparison.

Ol' Fred got me, too. Matter of fact, I think he did a C&P on his own comment, which really avoids the central point of the article, which can be found in so many other locations.

Limbaugh and others are alleging that it is Joe Wilson himself who is the originating source of Plame's name and employment, and possibly Ms. Miller's source. However, I think that the MSM would not go to the wall like this for Joe Wilson. The leaker, then, must be someone who meets one of these descriptions:

a. Someone who is not presently in the administration (and I mean appointment level), but has left the administration since this so-called scandal began;

b. Someone who was a member of a previous administration, who knew of Plame's assignments and status;

c. Some bureaucrat with clearance who is disgruntled or who opposes the present administration's policies (e.g., Scheuer);

d. Member of Congress with security clearances;

e. And lastly, someone who is a member of a foreign intel service who knew about Plame, and who has close contact with the media.

Option A may be viable only for Colin Powell, but I think that it is unlikely that the media would have shielded him during an election season. This is because several media people still think of him as a potential Presidential candidate despite his denials.

All of the remaining alternatives would be embarassing for both the media and the Democrats. The last one would be the most embarassing of all for the media, but Democrats would then turn on the media to get themselves off the hook.

District of Chicanery entertainment at its finest.

chsw, former Washingtonian.