Reduced Watergate

Siva Vaidhyanathan gets to the heart of the matter with a post at Altercation:

Deep Throat did not bring down a president. The Washington Post did not bring down a president. The Constitution and the core beliefs of this country brought down a corrupt president.

Well said! The rest of the post is also good, and reminds a suffering anti-torture, anti-Iraq folly, anti-lies lies lies yeah, Lame Ass like myself that there is hope yet for this country and this government.

Truth

Headline: Bush Aide Softened Greenhouse Gas Links to Global Warming

The White House will determine what the truth is. All dissenters are agenda-driven and are not to be believed. Objective science and expertise are irrelevant.

Remember this when anyone describes Democrats as obstructionist. Attempting to alter the truth is a bit more obstructionist than any actions that the minority party may take.

Instead of seeking to solve the problem of climate change, or minimize the damage, or even to recognize that there is a problem, the first move is to "muddy the waters." There is clearly no attempt at progress, at enacting a rational policy. There is an attempt to halt any efforts that would financially harm the energy industry. Obstructionist.

Scandalgate

If I can get serious here for a minute, no one seems to be addressing the real issue about Watergate and what it has meant to journalism, government, and the country in the 30 years since the story broke.

That is, of course, the shorthand labeling of each new scandal with the suffix "-gate." Stupid, lazy, and wrong.

Watergate was the name of the hotel at which the break-in occurred. That name really has no meaning outside of the context of the scandal, unless you are looking for a place to stay in DC.

So, sticking a "-gate" at the end of an unrelated word is really meaningless. Travelgate? Troopergate? Meaningless!

Journalists and editors: you can do better. Get creative and stop with the shorthand.

Digby

Digby has some good stuff going on.