When Valerie Plame’s name was “leaked” - everyone on the left went nuts. It was a chance to bring down the leakers, which apparently would cause problems for the administration.

And when the CIA secret prisons are leaked - everyone on the left is going nuts. It was a chance to bring down praise the leakers, which would apparently hurt the administration.

LaShawn adds “What’s wrong with this news? Answer: That it’s news.”

As a Rush caller asked yeterday:

Listen, talking about contradictions and contradictory behavior, I want to know why it’s okay for the Washington Post to out a hundred secret prison facilities and who knows how many CIA agents around the world but it’s criminal behavior to out one woman who apparently was already an outed woman, CIA agent, Valerie Plame. That was disgraceful, abominable, an affront to the security and well-being of agents everywhere, in the middle of all this criminal behavior the Washington Post front page is a hundred secret facilities! Why…?

UPDATE: Powerline agrees.

Something is clearly amiss. It is well documented that Joseph Wilson, a low level diplomat who was “retired” from the corps at the age of 48, was sent to Niger by the CIA with those arrangements being initiated by his wife, Valerie Plame. Plame at the time was not a covert agent, but a bureau worker for the CIA.

It seems rather odd that Valerie Plame, Joseph Wilson’s wife, would, on her own, decide to maneuver a scheme to send her husband to Niger to investigate Iraqi efforts to procure uranium, a job that Wilson was poorly qualified to undertake.

It is even more unusual that this would be done without the White House’s knowledge, which seems to be the case.

It is also well known that Plame and Wilson are big Democrat supporters, if not operatives.

Wilson, upon his return from Niger, appears to have verbally confirmed the administration’s position and that of the intelligence community; that is that Iraq had indeed attempted to procure uranium from Niger. However, he did not put these findings in writing. (Could his initial verbal report be given to protect or add confirmation to the intelligence community? Was his first approach designed to mitigate any effort to impugn the intelligence community of which his wife was a part? ) Even Fitzgerald in his indictment of Libby gets this wrong.

But Wilson changed his story and subsequently has been identified as inconsistent at best, or deliberately trying to deceive at worst.

Serious questions and investigations need to take place into the role the Democrat Party played in this whole scheme. Clearly this has been an effort to undermine the country and the war against terrorism. Complicit is the so-called mainstream media.

Such behavior points to potential evidence of treason. Hatching a scheme, fabricating information and then conducting an all out effort to attack our country and our President during a time of war with a fraudulent cacophony of propaganda seems to fit a case for treason.

Perhaps that’s why the left has to stay on their fraudulent story. If the real evidence is explored it just might lead to a defining link between the Democrat Party, Valerie Plame, Joseph Wilson and a deliberate, premeditated scheme to undermine the country.

Since the Congress is so keen on investigations maybe they should start looking at emails and contacts and sources involved with Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson leading up to Wilson’s assignment to Niger and the nefarious path following his trip. Dig deep and there just might be some really interesting connections given the Rockefeller memo and all… that is if Sandy Berger hasn’t been allowed to accidentally destroy the evidence.

Added by Eric. Joining various mid-week open trackbacks: SOS, Political Teen, TMH, Stop the ACLU. And linking to others commenting on the Rockefeller Memo: SLIDC, Harold, SoCal Pundit, The Anchoress, Jim Kouri, MacRanger, Kent, Nick Queen, Gannon, Gary Gross, Corpus Callosum, Jim Mullins.

Pat Schroeder 2 and Bob Barr 2, two political opposites, have teamed up in an editorial today in the Washington Times, lambasting Google’s planned Print Library Project.

You’re probably reading the byline above and wondering, “What could these two, from opposite sides of the aisle in Congress, possibly have in common with each other?”

The answer is when it comes to Google’s Print Library Project we have much in common: We’re both authors and both believe Intellectual property should actually mean something.

And so we find ourselves joining together to fight a $90 billion company bent on unilaterally changing copyright law to their benefit and in turn denying publishers and authors the rights granted to them by the U.S. Constitution.

nternet behemoth Google, plans to launch their Library project in November. It plans to scan the entire contents of the Stanford, Harvard and University of Michigan libraries and make what it calls “snippets” of the works available online, for free.

The creators and owners of these copyrighted works will not be compensated, nor has Google defined what a “snippet” is: a paragraph? A page? A chapter? A whole book? Meanwhile Google will gain a huge new revenue stream by selling ad space on library search results. Selling ads on its search engine is how Google makes 99 percent of its billions.

With the California special elections just around the corner, there is lots to check out.

Christopher Monnier has a point by point critique of the “Speak Out California” voter guide.

Ken Grandlund points out what has become all too common in this era of 24/7 fillable news air time.

As I listen to the campaigning for or against these propositions though in the final days, I notice that the political posturing and advertising is focusing less and less on the actual issues and more and more on the game being played.

It will be interesting to see if the absentee ballots delay the tabulation and announcements.

Matthew J. Peterson at the The Claremont Institute this morning looks at the Flash Report’s interview with Arnie Steinberg.

The cycle goes something like this: what should be a grand slam win for the CA GOP is squandered by wasting strengths and magnifying weaknesses through either wishy-washy un-policy and/or radical imprudence. Throw in the sort of mismanagement of the essential, practical realities that Steinberg is talking about, and the excitement over the initial, obvious opportunity to win that CA Republicans had turns into a bitter, depressed, and losing attitude. The sort of attitude after elections that has CA GOPers swilling their beer and saying things like “this state is soooo liberal, change is near impossible.” This sentiment is false—there are all kinds of opportunities to overturn the out-of-the-mainstream tide of wacky leftist spasms that run throughout California politics. However, if November 8th turns out to be another wasted opportunity for Arnold, don’t say Arnie didn’t warn you.

And of course, if you haven’t done so yet, check out the first ever Carnival of Arnold!