Libby is indicted, resigns

Originally Posted by tw

The Wikipedia article does imply how the term 'Fall guy' could have been created. But it does not say so specifically. IOW is there a better source that specifically cited the origins of 'fall guy'? And is there a description of how the event eventually resulted in the expression - ie a newpaper reporter?

The term "Mission Accomplished" should be an expression defining another political method of lying - or how a nation can "Peral Harbor" another and not feel guilty. But I doubt it. What was it that made 'fall guy' so generic? Was this another creation of W Randolph Hurst?

I did a Google on the origin of the term and another explanation is that it originated in Britain around 1906:

A scapegoat, one who is blamed for the actions of others. For example, He refused to be the fall guy for his colleagues. This expression uses fall in the sense of “consequences” or “blame,” which originated in prison slang. [Slang; early 1900s] Also see take the fall.

An easy victim, one who is readily duped. For example, His friends had marked him as the fall guy—they knew he would believe their ruse. [Slang; early 1900s

Perhaps Albert Fall's mis-adventures helped the term become a part of American English, as well.

[xoxoxoBruce]

No, Wikipedia states that;

The word's origin dates back to the 1920s, during the administration of U.S. President Warren G. Harding (1921 - 1923). The term is allegedly named for Albert B. Fall, a U.S. Senator from New Mexico who served as Secretary of the Interior during Harding's years in office and became notorious for his involvement in the infamous Teapot Dome Scandal.

[richlevy]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

No, Wikipedia states that;

Ahh, vindicated. hank you.

Wikipedia is the only source that states that. The other dictionaries available online give various different origins of the term. It was first used in written language in 1906 - well before the Tea Pot Dome scandal. Google it for yourself if you don't believe me. :p

[richlevy]

Originally Posted by marichiko

Wikipedia is the only source that states that. The other dictionaries available online give various different origins of the term. It was first used in written language in 1906 - well before the Tea Pot Dome scandal. Google it for yourself if you don't believe me. :p

Well, I found the 1906 source in an etymology site. I also found a few other sources which mention the Albert Fall theory.

I will have to do some more research.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by richlevy

I also found a few other sources which mention the Albert Fall theory.

Such as how many foles it takes to fill him?

/obscure

[Spexxvet]

Libby - guilty

A White House spokeswoman says President Bush is ''saddened'' for the former White House aide and his family.

But he's not "saddened" for Wilson and Plame and their family. Go figure.

From here.

Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, who has led the leak investigation, said no additional charges would be filed. That means nobody will be charged with the leak and Libby, who was not the source for the original column outing Plame, will be the only one to face trial.

Why not prosecute anyone else? Someone had to have leaked the info. The Democats need a pit bull like Ken Starr to get on the case.

A funny aside: On NPR yesterday, reporter Libby Lewis reported the Lewis Libby story.


Lewis Libby

Libby Lewis

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

Why not prosecute anyone else? Someone had to have leaked the info.

Because Libby's perjury blocked the investigation.

[Flint]

When the verdict was announced, Libby should have said "Pardon me?"

[tw]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

Why not prosecute anyone else? Someone had to have leaked the info.

Notice how many - clearly a majority even in the Cellar - still support the mental midget. The quantitative measurement? How often does anyone ask the obvious and embarrassing question: "When are we going after bin Laden?"

Meanwhile, it’s only a matter of time before George Jr pardons Libby. What is more important? A neocon agenda. An agenda well supported by all conservatives because conservatives also don't ask the embarrassing question. Just another reason why a Libby pardon will occur without any consequences.

[glatt]

Originally Posted by tw

a majority even in the Cellar - still support the mental midget.

I don't think you have your finger on the pulse of the Cellar. Put up a poll and see.

Originally Posted by tw

Just another reason why a Libby pardon will occur without any consequences.

..on the last day Bush is in office.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by glatt

..on the last day Bush is in office.

...and the appeals can easily last until then.

[tw]

Originally Posted by glatt

I don't think you have your finger on the pulse of the Cellar. Put up a poll and see.

So how many posters disparage the president? How many actually demand the only solutions available? Anyone can tacitly criticize as the majority did during Nixon. And yet we stayed in Nam massacring good Americans for longer than America's WWII. How could we kill off so many good Americans if so many civilians "opposed" the Vietnam quagmire? For all the talk, an overwhelming majority only dislike and therefore still support "Mission Accomplished".

Given oppurtunity to oppose the war, Americans voted for the liar Nixon in a landslide. Even after he said he had a secret plan to end the war - and he did not - still America voted for Nixon in a landslide four years after the 'secret plan' lie. Why? The majority clearly disliked Nam. But when it came to action, the majority massively promoted four more years - in Nam. And that was when demonstrations against Nam put one million in Washington. We don't have any demonstrations against "Mission Accomplished" for one good reason. The overwhelming majority only dislike and therefore still support "Mission Accomplished".

I don't see anyone even asking an embarrassing question about bin Laden - which means tacit support for "Mission Accomplished" - as the majority did to support Nixon's fiasco. Yes, a majority are in 'dislike' of George Jr. But my benchmarks clearly define passive support for "Mission Accomplished". Even the term "Mission Accomplished" - such a trivial expression - would be routine if the majority here opposed this war.

Passive criticism is how a majority of Americans supported a massacre of the last 30,000 American soldiers. They even criticized whistle blowers on My Lai rather than blame the coverup at highest levels. A clear majority here do not even demand actions defined by the Iraq Study Group - our only viable solution. We even suspended writ of Habeas Corpus and a clear majority in the Cellar do not care - more support for the lying president. We openly kidnapped and tortured in 'secret prisions' with near zero outcry. No matter what one says; without blunt demands for actions, then one does not call it "Mission Accomplished".

Text and tone of a majority here is not opposition to "Mission Accomplished". It is only 'dislike' of that war. 'Dislike' is how one supports war - as the majority supported what was obviously to be a defeat in Nam.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Whom do I ask about Bin Laden? No one on this board can answer that, so why waste my time asking here?