Did you see the mealy mouthed editorial in today's Ithaca Journal:
http://www.theithacajournal.com/news/stories/20050224/opinion/2021969.html
Conspiracy theories Temper zeal with some restraint
EDITORIAL
Veteran area Congressman Maurice Hinchey, D-22nd District, overstepped the bounds of good sense Saturday when he publicly theorized that CBS anchorman Dan Rather was duped by White House operatives.
During a question-and-answer session held at a town meeting here, Hinchey suggested that the White House was the source of an autumn, 2004 media scandal in which CBS reported on President Bush's National Guard service during the Vietnam War. The broadcast alleged that Bush's absenteeism during his time in the military was the result of favoritism. The report, based on documents supplied by a long-time Bush critic in Texas, surfaced only weeks before the 2004 presidential elections. An October surprise, indeed.
But within days of the CBS broadcast, media bloggers reported that the incriminating documents were fakes. Subsequent investigations by the network confirmed the charge of forgery.
Motivations
On Saturday, Hinchey stated that he thought White House Chief of Staff Karl Rove actually planted the phony documents. According to this scenario, Rove deliberately released documents that could be swiftly unmasked as bogus in order to both inoculate the president against criticism of his war service and undermine the credibility of a powerful network anchor. Hinchey offered no proof to back up his notion of an intelligent design behind the forgery, and on Monday, the congressman amended his remarks to emphasize that his statements were conjecture.
"My theory is -- it's a theory -- is that it came from the Bush Administration," Hinchey said. "It came from Karl Rove. I do think it's very important to get to the bottom of things like this."
It is important to get to the bottom of things, but it is also important for public officials not to peddle half-baked theories with little supporting evidence.
A healthy pressure
As principle, Hinchey's motivations for investigating alleged White House manipulation of the media are not only healthy for democracy, they are the proper role for a congressman in a minority party. In our two-party system, members of the opposition party -- in this case, Democrats -- have an obligation to exert a healthy amount of pressure and skepticism on the party in power. Republicans did that to the Clinton Administration, just as the Democrats do to the Bush Administration today.
In the absence of such pressure, the natural process of checks and balances is diluted. The motives and actions of the White House need to be questioned and examined, not only by the media but by members of Congress.
A real danger
Unsubstantiated theories emanating from government sources can be far more dangerous than Hinchey's recent remarks. The most egregious example in memory traces back to the Bush Administration itself.
Two years ago, President Bush and members of his cabinet were preaching far and wide about the dangers of Saddam Hussien's arsenal. They theorized that the Iraq dictator was developing and stockpiling chemical agents, biological weapons, sophisticated delivery systems and possibly a nuclear bomb program. The mantra was "weapons of mass destruction," but the truth was something else.
No such weapons were found -- but the administration used that theory as a pretext for a war that has killed more than 1,400 brave American soldiers, wounded more than three times that amount, killed and maimed many more Iraqis, alienated much of the Muslim world and inflated the federal deficit.
All because of unsubstantiated theories.
In comparison with the Iraq debacle, Hinchey's recent remarks were definitely no harm/no foul. Yet both instances illustrate why it is important for our leaders to be sure of information before they present it to their constituents. Most people still trust their leaders to tell them the truth and make life and death decisions based on what they say.
Maurice Hinchey has done an excellent job representing the 22nd Congressional District. In the long run, Saturday's remarks won't add up to more than a small bump in the road. But they should remind us all that caution can be a virtue.
I listened to part of Sean Hannity's radio program this afternoon when he was asking 'Congressman' Hinchey for proof to back up his accusation. He was dragging in conspiracy theories left and right (Gannon supposedly outed Plame and Hannity was in on it, etc.)
Hannity tried many times to get him to answer the question and he wouldn't shut up. Finally Sean just shut down the audio from Hinchey and he would return to it every so often and the whack job was still mouthing off. It was hilarious! The DNC gave their 'talking points' to the wrong person this time!