Talk about a test of beliefs!

As I've posted before, holding to your ideals and beliefs over how an action helps/hurts your party/the other party is the thing to strive for. This is how thinking people should do it - be true to something more than party.

Well, dammit, talk about the ultimate test! From fark.com, we get this:

"And I know I'm going to get pulled into the grand jury for saying this but the source of...for Matt Cooper was Karl Rove, and that will be revealed in this document dump that Time magazine's going to do with the grand jury."

That's Lawrence O'Donnell speaking, the senior MSNBC political analyst.

LET ME EMPHASIZE THIS CLEARLY - THIS IS NOT A CONFIRMED REPORT, NOR SHOULD IT BE TAKEN AS TRUE UNTIL A FEW MORE SOURCES/OUTLETS GO WITH THE STORY. Most of the suspicions I've read about focus on Scooter Libby, the dep. Chief of staff to Cheney, as the leak, with Rove being a possibility but not a serious one. So again, do NOT take this as gospel yet. So why do I mention it?

I post it as a hard question to myself. I don't like Karl Rove at all - he's the man behind the scenes of the demonization and vilification of people who don't agree with his views. He's helped push political debate into a kindergarten's realm of maturity. He helped make everything from tax cuts to Social Security to the next Supreme Court Justice pick (I feel sure) to be, somehow, part and parcel of 9/11. He's a man who probably can't decide what tie to wear without thinking of the political risks and benefits.

But as I stated, I'm also for allowing the press to keep its confidential sources just that - in the Plame case, in the Wen Ho Lee case, in all cases. (In the Lee case, it's a little harder to justify, since it seems that the C.I.'s were basically smearing Lee instead of reporting, but I still feel that being forced to reveal sources will, inevitably and surely, drain the life from the press like an open wound.) I would love to see the media people tell their sources, "If I find out you're using me (a la the Lee sources and POSSIBLY Rove) I will tell everyone who you are. Be honest with me and I'll be honest with you." That's the press setting the rules, which is fine to me. But I don't feel the courts should be allowed to demand the sources.

And I have to hold that belief, even in the face of Rove possibly being the leaker of Plame. While I would love to watch Rove get nailed for a cowardly, slimy, and vengeful act, this isn't the way to do it. If he does get nailed and arrested for whatever (there seems to be a chance he perjured himself in the Plame grand jury), I will probably be happy in some way - and a lot saddened in the other. Of course, it will be funny if he's convicted of the same thing Clinton was...

And one last comment, which I believe I can say regardless of my stance on press sources. Should the Plame leaker indeed be Rove, I'd just like to be one of the first to say, "No more needs to be said about the motives of conservatives."

UPDATE: Many reports now say that while Rove was a Cooper source, he did not leak Plame's name. He could still get nailed for perjury, depending on the grand jury testimony he may have given.