Adam Nagourney, frequently a Bush administration shill for the New York Times, has a Week in Review piece today about the perils of Democrats going too far with congressional investigations. Fair point to consider.. But Nagourney doesn't exactly get it in noting that Democrats scored a mid-term gain after incessant Republican investigations of Bill Clinton. He fails to note the difference between the hot pursuit of oral sex versus hearings on the failure of the military health system; a dishonestly waged, abysmally conducted and corporately corrupt war; political meddling in the Justice Department; abrogation of constitutional rights; squelching of science for political gains; and on and on. There's a reason Bush is backed only by the 30 percenters and why Clinton enjoyed 60 percent support during the Republican witch hunt. Try competence.
Speaking of the lying liars: You'd think from listening to Bush that no White House has ever sent aides to Congress to testify under loath. The Washington Post finally gets around to compiling the evidence that he's wrong again. How could anyone forget the troop of Clinton aides made to testify in various Whitewater snipe hunts?