Martha we hardly knew you

Martha Stewart has lost her appeal for a new trial and it appears she is to do hard time. She was very publicly prosecuted to show how tough this government is on white-collar (lace-collar?) crime. The fact that she is an outspoken Democrat might have something to do with it, I don't know. Her offenses, however, pale to insignificance in light of the curiously unpublicized financial transgressions of our misleader in chief who dumped his stock in the Harken oil company shortly before it took a huge plunge in 1990. You can read about it at

http://www.hypocrites.com/article9157.html .

You may ask yourself why a huge deal was made of Martha's crime (not insider trading, but lying to cover it up), when Mr. Bush has never been hauled before a court or investigative body to explain his foresight in anticipating the loss of over $800,000 of his value in a company on whose board he served, and bailing out, selling his stake to a person whose identity has not been disclosed. Martha's $47,000 looks kinda puny at this point, does it not? The fact that the future President (and the current President's son) was specifically warned that such action might trigger an insider trading charge did not deter him. Remember, he is a strong and determined leader.

Does this lack of prosecutorial zeal look a little funny to you, when you consider that the Republican Javerts in Congress pressed an investigation at a cost of $70 million taxpayer dollars of the Clintons over a land deal in Arkansas in which they lost money? The only "crime" they could come up with was a tawdry White House sexual escapade, and then only by hauling the President up and arranging for him to lie very publicly about the private matter.

If the Democrats controlled either house of Congress right now, can you imagine how different Mr. Bush's life might be?