THE BLOG

Bush & Habbush

09/06/2008 05:12 am ET | Updated May 25, 2011

Once more, fearful symmetry reigns supreme in the surreal world we have been inhabiting for almost eight years. The Random House Dictionary instructs us that Hab is an abbreviation of Habbakuk, a minor prophet of the 7th century B.C. So now we have another prophet -- unintentional, we can be sure -- of the early 21st, A.D. The contemporary version, you can readily see, is a conflation of Hab and Bush (another prophet of our time).

In the Book of Habbakuk, the prophet laments the iniquity of the land and the oppression of the just by the wicked. The prophet (Book of Habbakuk, 2:2) reveals that: "And the Lord answered me, and said, Write the vision, and make it plain upon the tables, that he may run who readeth it." Really, you can't make this stuff up.

But who should run where? In the spirit of fellow Huffer Marty Kaplan, whose blog yesterday eloquently pointed out how the MSM has transformed alleged high crimes and misdemeanors into low politics and spin, I have a suggestion. Perhaps -- and I'm only making a modest proposal here, so don't get me wrong - perhaps the journalistic community might do something extraordinary: pursue the story!

In other words, go find Habbush! Is he still in Jordan? Or elsewhere? Either way, find him! Ask him about the letter. Ask him about the $5 million he allegedly received. Did he get that money? If so, what was it in payment for?

Another modest proposal: while the journalists are busy with that, perhaps the lawyers could do a little research of their own. If (and, certainly, "if" is the operative word) there indeed was a forgery, what statutes might have been violated? Was there a criminal conspiracy? Did such an action constitute an effort to defraud the government? Would the creation and use of such a forgery constitute a transforming piece of information in our ongoing national nightmare? Would it constitute, in the parlance of an episode long ago but not so far away, a smoking gun?

And when we have the answers to these questions, we might consider the most radical prescription of all: turning to our elected officials and asking if, finally, they have any last shred of decency and sense of responsibility. We might inquire if the president or the vice-president, or both, have committed crimes? And then -- just a thought, you realize, I'm only thinking out loud here -- we might ask precisely which consideration rules supreme in the United States: politics or the rule of law?