Damnit, I don't look words up often, but "torpor" got me. It seems remarkably utilitarian, so I will probably end up making it a part of my vocabulary.

Well said.

It's enough to make me want to avoid the news altogether. It's in overdrive right now on this.

This is the GOP reaping what it sowed in overzealous scandal mongering. The biggest scandal in the Clinton WH was not Lewinsky or silly Whitewater.

It was the China /campaign money affair which has been all but forgotten. That and the Rich pardon.

Ok, Michael if you want out, you got it..... but you're missing all the fun

BTW, among other things, what's wrong with a blog being a bit like a tabloid? They've got quite a lot of legitimacy in our country....and are usually good entertainment, if you don't take them too seriously. Lighten up.

Speaking as the King of Tabloids, I think it's a fascinating story in the Medici/Borgia tradition. Of course I love the California Recall too. But I don't blame Michael for being turned off by both or either.

Dan and Roger,

I just can't follow the details of this stuff. It takes too much energy for not enough payback. If it looks to be an actual big deal, I'll switch gears. And, Roger, your posts are actually interesting because they are entertaining. It's the Whitewater-style hit pieces that makes me sigh.

Dan, it's not about me needing to lighten up. I have no problem with tabloids per se. The thing is, I only have so much time to write, and I don't want to expend my time budget on this . If I were a full-time blogger like Andrew Sullivan, maybe I'd wade through it.

Good for you Michael. There is as yet, few established facts but lots of hypocrisy. Note the number of Democratic Senators who are on record as opposing the extension of the Special Prosecutors law now asking for one.

While I hope no one in the White House did something this stupid, who knows. I do not have much faith in Bob Novak either.

This will never shape up to be an impeachable offense. There never has been and never will be an impeachment proceding when the congress is controlled by the president's party. NEVER! So this goes nowhere and becomes a campaign "issue." The reporters will ask questions about it and the candidates will bloviate.

"A tale told by and idiot (in this case lots of idiots) signifying nothing."

I had planned to take the high road on PlameGate as well. But then I got sucked into this thread. Now I can't stop giggling.

Oops, here's the starting point.

I remember how awful the long drawn-out Whitewater investigation was – and the whole Lewinsky mess. These investigations wasted tremendous amounts of money and time, and produced nothing of value. I was hoping that the Democrats would have learned something from history and that they wouldn’t want to repeat it. Wrong again.

I admire your stance on this, Michael. But the real story here is the insidious, supernatural pull this thing has on people. The urge to write the words "Wilson" and "Plame" in just one little blog post, however reluctantly, is just too strong to resist. It's like trying not to scratch a testicular itch in public (female readers may subsitute adjective as needed). I knew you'd crack eventually.

Michael,

The title of your post sounds like a prejudgment that the matter, on the facts known, is not worth taking seriously, and that in itself is weighing in. Or maybe my sniping here is exactly why you don't want to get involved at this point.

Actually, I am a bit disappointed for other reasons: I think that there is a way of commenting on the presently most important political development and showing that you can stay above the fray. I will miss your insights. I also think that the political implications this will have on U.S. policy and public perceptions on the issues you write on the most are potentially huge.

Gabriel: Exactly what facts are known? I've read thousands of words of opinion and conjecture, but actual facts are few and far between.

Gabriel,

If it looks like this is going to be important, I'll weigh in more seriously. Maybe I'm just behind the curve on this one. I'm not trying to be above the fray, necessarily. I just don't want to get sucked into trivial scandals. If it turns out to be serious, and perhaps it already is, I'll jump into it.

Michael, write about what you want. I tend not to blog about topics that are being well-covered elsewhere by blogs with much higher circulation than mine, unless I have a very strong opinion. The world is better off with us all spending our time on topics we care about that no one else is covering.