It's all about politics in this game...

This from the Assoicated Press:

ALBANY, N.Y. - Republicans took aim at Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton on Monday for comparing President Bush to Mad magazine’s freckle-faced, “What, me worry?” kid, Alfred E. Neuman.A Republican National Committee official said the former first lady was “part of today’s angry and adrift Democrat Party,” while a spokesman for one of her potential 2006 Senate rivals said she was guilty of “insulting the president.” (Oh my insulting the president!! Oh how horrible!! Comparing him to Alfred E. Neuman. Hmm, if the Republicans are that upset about someone insulting the president, why don't we go back and look at THIER comments, circa 1998, and see what THEY had to say about the president. I'd wager they're a lot more insulting than a comparison to a cartoon character)
“At a time when President Bush and most elected officials are focused on the security of our nation, Mrs. Clinton seems focused on taking partisan jabs and promoting her presidential campaign,” added New York’s GOP chairman, Stephen Minarik. “Her priorities are clearly out of whack.” (Hmm, and Bushie and his ilk make no partisan jabs? Nah, what could I be thinking?)
Clinton’s attack on the president came Sunday during a speech in Colorado. “I sometimes feel that Alfred E. Neuman is in charge in Washington,” Clinton said during the inaugural Aspen Ideas Festival, organized by the Aspen Institute, a non-partisan think tank.
The former first lady drew a laugh from the crowd when she described Bush’s attitude toward tough issues with Neuman’s catch phrase: “What, me worry?” (Oh my GOD, the insensitivity! The harshness! The mean spiritedness! How DARE she!)
Sharpening attacks on BushAs Clinton gears up for a Senate re-election race in New York next year and a possible White House presidential bid in 2008, her attacks on Bush have become sharper. In her speech Sunday, she accused the president of damaging the economy by overspending while giving tax cuts to the rich, depriving U.S. soldiers of equipment needed to fight the war in Iraq and cutting funds for scientific research.
“Hillary Clinton’s opportunistic attempt to market herself as a centrist is like a wolf dressing up in sheep’s clothing,” said RNC spokeswoman Tracey Schmitt. “Such thinly veiled rhetoric doesn’t change the fact she is part of today’s angry and adrift Democrat Party.” (Well certainly the Republicans and Fox News and such would love to spend time commenting on Hillary's 'insult' as opposed to what she was really talking about, namely, I quote "the president damaging the economy by overspending while giving tax cuts to the rich, depriving U.S. soldiers of equipment needed to fight the war in Iraq and cutting funds for scientific research.")
***********************************************************
This also from the Associated Press:

WASHINGTON - For the better part of two years, the word coming out of the Bush White House was that presidential adviser Karl Rove had nothing to do with the leak of a female CIA officer's identity and that whoever did would be fired.But Bush spokesman Scott McClellan wouldn't repeat those claims Monday in the face of Rove's own lawyer, Robert Luskin, acknowledging the political operative spoke to Matthew Cooper of Time magazine, one of the reporters who disclosed Valerie Plame's name. That ran counter to what McClellan has been saying. For example, in September and October 2003, McClellan's comments about Rove included the following: "The President knows that Karl Rove wasn't involved," "It was a ridiculous suggestion," and, "It's not true."Reporters seized on the subject Monday, pressing McClellan to either repeat the denials or explain why he can't now. "I have said for quite some time that this is an ongoing investigation and we're not going to get into discussing it," McClellan replied.

Ah, yes, the "I can't comment" defense. Well, I guess we'll see now if Bushie is prepared to do what's right and follow his previous ascertations that the leak would be fired, OR maybe he won't. I mean it wouldn't be the first time he's lied to us. Course, I guess when Bushie made the statements in October 2003, he was just operating under 'inaccurate' information. Perhaps the CIA is to blame, as well, for him being told Rove wasn't involved in the leak.

ANd I have to ask yet again, where is the "liberal" media? Why isn't this being shouted from the hilltops and headlines of newspapers and the first story on TV news? is it perhaps that the "liberal" media is now controlled by conglomerates that donate heavily to the Republican party? Nah, couldn't be!

POLT

I'm not close-minded, you're just wrong. - Bucky, Get Fuzzy