Ed Weaver Is A Nitwit 10.3.06

Wouldn't it be more interesting to read information, any information, in a political-based article written for today's newspaper on one of the biggest story taking place today? In the wake of the explosive new book State of Denial: Bush at War Part III from respected Washington insider Bob Woodward, columnist Ed Weaver returns to bashing former President Bill Clinton instead.

Here are a couple of excerpts from Weaver's 10.3.06 article and my feelings about them:

"Some cherry-picking going on"

That's this week's headline. His point? Democrats are cherry picking portions of the National Intelligence Estimate report to make their case against U.S. involvement in Iraq. Yeah, probably true. But Weaver does exactly what he complains about. He cherry-picked the topics for this week's article and skips over the most important of the day (see above).

Later, Weaver extols the virtues of Republicans that get caught in scandals — citing the current Representative Foley debacle, former President Nixon, and former U.S. Speaker of the House Bob Livingstone (sic) — by praising their willingness to resign when caught. Instead of spending any time on their transgressions, he quickly changes subject to bash former President Clinton.

"Bill Clinton was too arrogant to resign, even though the House impeached him for lying under oath to a federal grand jury and obstructing justice in the Monica Lewinsky affair."

Clinton in a scandal; doesn't resign: Bad. Republicans in a scandal; resign: Good. Resigning makes it all okay. Turning the Nixon disgrace into a positive meant overlooking a lot of historical facts. That took some fancy footwork. Weaver should be a Broadway dancer.

Constantly repeating the Clinton/Lewinsky story is like beating a dead horse and reaching back to the Nixon impeachment (early 70s) and Livingston resignation (so old, he forgets how to spell his name) is regurgitating old news. Very old news.

---

Ed Weaver's column appears every Tuesday in The Record newspaper in Troy, NY. I'd say he's a right-wing conservative, but all indications are that he's even whackier than that. His views are so skewed, and based in a reality that I don't even recognize, that I think he sees the world through fun house mirrors‚ only it isn't funny. He's proof of the theory that hindsight is 20/20, only his vision is 20/100...20 for those things that support his views, 100 for those that don't.