I know, I know. It's hardly earth-shattering. But my subscription to TIME was the last present my dad gave me before he died last spring, and I always read it, at least out of a sense of connection to him. The reporting is occasionally good, but the "analysis" by sociopaths like William Kristol and others are often in CoulterLand. This week's episode actually outdoes Kristol, and it's nefariousness is hiding behind a sham slam of Bush. I'm talking about the article "Easy Commute" by Richard Lacayo.
disinfecting the yellow journalism below...
Bush's commutation of Scooter's prison term is pretty damn big news this week, and I was unsurprised to see it referred to on the cover of the July 16 edition, under the teaser headline "The real reason Bush let Scooter skip jail". It was also the lead story in the "Briefing" section on p.13, complete with photo of Libby in a limousine smiling his safe little ass off.
After a leadup like that, I was expecting more than six paragraphs on the commutation. I was also expecting some sort of meat to the "real reason" headline. No such luck.
What I got was neocon spin. According to the Very Serious Reporter Lacayo, the real reason Bush let Scooter skate is a combination of personal loyalty and 'freedom'. As in Janis Joplin's line "freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose", which the author actually quoted, and the editors highlighted.
And to someone barely paying attention, that bromide might just wash. After all, "everybody knows" Bush has this charming personal loyalty thingy, just as "everybody knows" his approval is wallowing in the bilge zone. So he helps his buddy out, while still allowing the Draconian punishment of a $250k fine (paid by multimillionaire co-conspirators) and the "damage" to Scooter's reputation stand.
Nothing To See Here, Pleasure Of The President, Blah,blahblah.
Worst, the article is couched in terms of disapproval, leading off with this:
George W Bush once promised that anyone in his administration who broke the law would "be taken care of". At the time, he appeared to mean they would face the consequences of their actions. Then he took care of I. Lewis Libby, and all at once his words assumed a somewhat different tone.
A promising start, but it backslides horrifically from there. Within three paragraphs, we're told that Libby's case was "close to his heart" (like he HAS one), Cheney felt the conviction was "an injustice in itself", and the commutation was "a measured approach to mercy".
ONE very oblique reference to the REAL, ACTUAL reason Libby was commuted is caromed off into further discussion of Bush's unpopularity:
With his approval ratings at historic lows, Bush didn't have to worry about spending political capital by making an unpopular decision, one that opened the way to questions about buying Libby's silence. If he let Libby go to jail, his critics still wouldn't love him. (bolding definitely not TIME's)
See? it's personal. And oh, so freeing. As in "free from consequences", "free from investigation", and "free to keep on keeping on".
I do sports instruction for a living, and this technique of sandwiching a little bit of unwelcome news between two feel-good statements is called the "PNP" rule, for positive-negative-positive reinforcement. (We in the industry have another name for it: the Shit Sandwich.) It is deliberately designed to make the student feel good about a performance that is lacking in some substantial way. For example: "Gee, Mrs Rockefeller, you looked pretty confident heading to that black diamond ski trail. That wipeout didn't muss your ski suit one bit." The purpose is to generate warm fuzzies that translate into repeat business, not to prevent future wipeouts. It's not coaching, it's psy-ops.
Keep in mind that the reporter AND the editors know full well that commutation of Libby's sentence was the only option available that would continue the obstruction of justice that is the heart of the conviction, as evidenced in the aside quoted above.
Keep in mind that presidents Bush and Cheney have PLENTY to lose if the Scooter were to start singing.
Keep in mind that the last sentence of this deliberately idiotic "analysis" says the exact opposite of that.
Keep in mind that there was no mention of the upcoming House Judiciary hearings into this flagrant abuse of power.
FWIW, I don't really care if Scooter does time in the big house. I want the truth of the White House conspiracy to come out much more than I want to see a true believer go to a minimum security golf clubhouse, because the "deterrent effect" of such a punishment is lost on the fanatical. Ask any insurgent in Iraq.
The feature article in the same issue of TIME is a discussion of the science of addiction and how to cure it. I have several months left on my subscription, but I'm going cold turkey as of right now. It has been a small connection to my sorely missed father, who was my political mentor, but it must go.
Sorry, Dad.
This diary grew from an angry letter sent to the magazine canceling my subscription. If you are similarly inclined the email is
letters@time.com