Comments on: MARY McCARTHY: HEROINE

By: Citizen DeWayne

Citizen DeWayne — Mon, 15 May 2006 15:25:15 +0000

A lot of accusations but no evidence there Rick. You keep asserting that she is guilty of treason, but where is the hard evidence? Why hasn’t she been indicted? Is the Bush administration afraid of what the liberal press might say? If she is guilty she should be charged and sentenced.

I see you haven’t written about the raid on Dusty Foggo’s home and CIA office on Friday. Josh Marshal, at Talking Points Memo, has been following this story for months and has posed the question: Could there be a connection between McCarthy’s firing and the Foggo investigation?

From TMP: “…[A]t the time of her firing, McCarthy was working in the CIA’s Inspector General’s office, the same office that was then investigating Foggo and not more than a few weeks after McCarthy’s firing would participate in raids on Foggo’s home and office.”

My question is, if there turns out to be a connection between Foggo’s investigation and McCarthy’s firing, will you make a sincere apology?

By: DaveG

DaveG — Mon, 15 May 2006 14:36:30 +0000

Tano -

Heroine? Yes, I think so. Does she have the right to call the administration on illegality? Absolutely. I know you fantasize about a world in which everyone just lays down and allows the govmint to do what they want, irrespective of the laws

Do you actually read the post before you start spouting? She was in the IG office. She, more than most, knew the proper channels for airing her concerns, but chose to not use them. You see, she took a job, swore an oath, and took what we in the employed world call “renumeration” in return. She willingly gave up her right to squawk to the partisan, shrill media when she did so. She’s not allowed to just change her mind and do whatever the hell she wants - that is the cost of being a grown-up. You probably won’t like it much, should you ever defy all odds and actually achieve it.

By: MayBee

MayBee — Mon, 15 May 2006 05:23:00 +0000

I actually thought this article by R. Jeffrey Smith was informative and fairly well balanced. Of course her friends are going to back her up, but I thought the reporter did a good job of making it clear it was her friends offering support. Usually we get Larry Johnson and Ray McGovern, former CIA agents, as the only explanation of who’s speaking on her behalf.
The article also mentioned she has a long history of feeling policy was overriding analysis- starting in the Clinton years. And finally, we get to see that she started in the IG office just shortly before she decided to throw her pennies at John Kerry.

Yes, it would have been nice for Smith to point out that McCarthy had other avenues open to her if she truly believed someone at the CIA lied. But I have to say this is the first time, since the story broke, that I felt the WaPo decided to actually act like a news source rather than McCarthy’s personal PR agency.

By: SShiell

SShiell — Sun, 14 May 2006 22:50:56 +0000

Tano:
And when the “grownups” come back, they will no doubt introduce new policy directives in this country. “Dhimmi” status will be secured in hopes our Muslim brothers will not be too mean to us when the Caliphate is re-established. God forbid we should bow down to our new lords and masters without an established policy directive from the “grownups”. Then you, Tano, can kneel down before your new masters and show then how you stood up for their “rights”. Just remember those rights and how you showed Rick the error of his ways when your head is lying apart from the rest of your body, your eyes twitching to and fro, and your last thought can be “Boy, I sure showed Rick!”

By: Richie Rich

Richie Rich — Sun, 14 May 2006 21:41:48 +0000

Also, take a look at the last paragraph. McCarthy will still receive her pension…

By: Fritz

Fritz — Sun, 14 May 2006 20:35:52 +0000

In today’s NY Times: Both officials said they were speaking about the internal discussions because of the significant national security and civil liberty issues involved and because they thought it was important for citizens to understand the interplay between Mr. Cheney’s office and the N.S.A.

So “they” determined their personal views on secret internal deliberations by elected policy makers, the people elected to government, the very people held accountable by the democracy must be exposed to “their” determination as to what is important?

We at the Times are more than happy to throw this out there with no corroboration: And one government official, who had access to intelligence from the intercepts that he said he would discuss only if granted anonymity, believes that some of the purely domestic eavesdropping in the program’s early phase was intentional. No other officials have made that claim.

By: Fritz

Fritz — Sun, 14 May 2006 20:12:22 +0000

They have become what they most hated about Nixon. That 70’s Show mentality will be their demise. They are using government agencies as a political weapon against their political opponents. The MSM are willing enablers, yellow journalism, it shows how negligent the editors have become. The very non-political transparency they demanded in the 70’s be dammed!

By: gene

gene — Sun, 14 May 2006 19:40:52 +0000

Isn’t it true that this lady (person) somehow got elevated to her position and no one knows exactly how? Just maybe that the same people who promoted her had something to do in hiring Joe Wilson.

By: Tim

Tim — Sun, 14 May 2006 19:21:30 +0000

My only regret is that she’s not been hauled up on charges of espionage and giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

By: wickedpinto

wickedpinto — Sun, 14 May 2006 18:54:42 +0000

God forgives sinners, but his love is for all. And the only way to show YOUR love for god, is to not sin.

Mary is no peter, no paul, and DEFINATELY no john.