Well, the attacks on the Libby verdict have begun.  Among the arguments advanced as set forth by advisorjim is the silliness that there should not have been charges since no underlying crime was committed.

Let's look back at a few statements from the not-so-distant past.  Let's look back at the Clinton impeachment and look at our esteemed public servants waxing on about the sanctity of the oath.

Why John McCain noted about the seriousness of the oath

All of my life, I have been instructed never to swear an oath to my country in vain. In my former profession, those who violated their sworn oath were punished severely and considered outcasts from our society.

There's more.

McAuliffe has plenty bad to say about John Kerry.

"I thought the decision of the Kerry campaign to back off any real criticism of Bush was one of the biggest acts of political malpractice in the history of American politics."

According to a preview of his new book, McAuliffe claims that he's not the only one that shared that opinion.

He said Bush called President Clinton while he was recovering from his heart attack in September 2004 and said, "The Kerry campaign is the most inept group I have ever seen in politics. Don't let them ruin your reputation."

More after the flip.

It's no surprise that commissions get formed for the purpose of researching an issue in order for politicians to take political cover beneath the commission's findings.

It's also no surprise that commissions get formed in order to arrive at the pre-ordained recommendations favored by those who created the commission.

Here's a surprise: the Great Decider can't even get his own commission, the Baker/Hamilton Commission, to endorse his agenda.

Mr. Bush spent 90 minutes with commission members in a closed session at the White House two weeks ago “essentially arguing why we should embrace what amounts to a ‘stay the course’ strategy,” said one commission official who was present.

There's more on the flip.

Tell me this is a joke.  The problem is that the NSA is running a secret wiretapping program of dubious (at best) constitutionality.  

So what does Specter do?  How does Congress get a ruling on the constitutionality of the program?

In secret, of course.  He's agreed to the creation of a secret court to rule on the constitutionality of the program.

It gets worse.

Where does this guy get off?

He holds out on this information for years?  He doesn't tell his boss at the WAPO?  Even though presumably Fitz has been asking the WAPO for info on these leaks?  

In the meantime, a lot of taxpayer money has been spent on this case.  A reporter has sat in jail over this case.  A government official is now under indictment.  This is serious stuff, Mr. Woodward.

This one isn't as much a diary as a solicitation of your predictions.  And as political junkies, we got lots of those!

The excellent diary that synopsizes Frank Rich's newly-expensive column today discusses the Bush family history of cronyism.  Many of us have noted that there are new revelations daily about the unqualified being placed in positions based on political considerations.

My question is about what comes next?  What becomes of the GOP after the Bush Administration?

OK, we all have our political beliefs and agendas to push, debate and argue over.  If done in a spirit of compromise, give-and-take and good faith, such a process can be healthy and desirable.

Some of the evangelicals have no interest in compromise, give-and-take, nor in good faith.  Indeed, some of them encourage their faithful to pray the current bench off the Court, by whatever means necessary.  Some of them equate opposition to Roberts with Satan.  And, not surprisingly, these evangelicals seek to make a few bucks from the whole process.  Would you expect any less from Pat Robertson?