What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
How Private Online Shopping Clubs Work view!
howlifeworks.com - How to become a member and get discounts of up to 80% on must-have luxury goods
152 Comments
- charlie6969, on 10/02/2009, -21/+314I am very disappointed in Pres. Obama for trying to withold this information.
Definitely NOT change I can believe in. - FireIsBorn, on 10/02/2009, -4/+249Treason is treason.
Even when the Vice-President and Torturer/War Criminal-in-Chief commits the TREASON. - novenator, on 10/02/2009, -3/+173The release of an undercover CIA op to punish her husband for not manufacturing intel is tantamount to treason. This was a clear case of the conservatives punishing dissent to the point that it clearly broke the law, and someone needs to pay the price. Justice demands it.
There is more on this story at the Star Tribune http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/congr ... - mashedup, on 10/02/2009, -3/+127Dead-eye Dick. A man who dodged the Vietnam draft but happily sent others sons and daughters to their deaths in the phony Iraq war so he could profit handsomely. I bet he sleeps like a baby at night too. One day though Dead-eye is going to get what he deserves. Those that have and will come back from Iraq remember you well Dick - and they won't shoot their buddies in the face when hunting their target.
- DiggMasterJ, on 10/02/2009, -2/+94Can you smell it? That is the smell of burning documents.
- tgc1, on 10/02/2009, -1/+82"Both the Bush and Obama administrations said they wanted to keep the interview confidential because future presidents, vice presidents and their senior staff may not cooperate with criminal investigations if they know what they say could became public."
So much for that whole idea that the Presidents work FOR the Public. Therefore everything they do while in that position should be on the public record. If they have ***** to hide, America should be worried. VERY worried. - jhydig, on 10/02/2009, -1/+58High-level government officials should not be permitted to hide their misconduct from public view.”
- jrm125, on 10/02/2009, -1/+56Judge Sullivan is my new hero.
- AdmiralHalsey, on 10/02/2009, -2/+47We should absolutely apply their own logic against them: If you have nothing to hide, what is the problem if we look? It is for the safety of our country, are they against American safety?! Sounds pretty non-patriotic if you ask me.
And what the ***** is with Obama&Co. taking their leads from the former administration? We should decimate the republicans and democrats by electing all 3rd party candidates to every position. Our system is so *****. - DrVic, on 10/02/2009, -0/+37He must be held accountable for his actions. Plain and simple.
- valetudomexican, on 10/02/2009, -2/+39Cheney heard about this ruling and replied, "Go ***** yourself."
- blankman, on 10/02/2009, -13/+44Someday you'll realize that no matter what politician enters, they're all sleaze bag, lying, snakes. That's why they're politicians. Obama is just a better liar than the rest, which is why he's in.
- elliotys, on 10/02/2009, -1/+31A message to Obama:
Hey remember us? The people who believed in and voted for you? Where in the HELL IS THE CHANGE?!?!?!? - nirvanix, on 10/02/2009, -0/+25We should thank our lucky stars that there are still judges like this around.
- meese, on 10/02/2009, -9/+34FTA: "Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) filed a Freedom of Information request, followed in August 2008 by a lawsuit." That would be before the election, and since then it has been in court.
- dforty3, on 10/02/2009, -7/+29If I were President, I could solve most of the country's problem in about a week. But the corporate power that is so intertwined with everything wouldn't let me live for 5 minutes. Our problems are not that complicated. The bought off politicians and corrupt media just make it look that way to divide the public and distract everyone's attention. Take healthcare. 65% of the people want at least a public option, but the Corporate Party politicians won't do a thing that will impact the bottom line of the insurance companies. This is not a complicated issue. Remove the profitability from health insurance (like the rest of the industrialized world) and we can, not only solve the problems of thousands of people dying due to lack of health insurance every month, but eliminate the leading cause of bankruptcy.
- chilibeanie, on 10/02/2009, -0/+20I'm still pissed off about the deleted e-mails from that RNC e-mail server during the the dismissals of the U.S. attorneys scandal.
- elliotys, on 10/02/2009, -4/+23^Troll^ lulz
- untreadatom, on 10/02/2009, -2/+20He has done nothing to hold accountable criminals from the previous administration and I expect his admin won't start any time soon.
- vtnerd, on 10/02/2009, -2/+19RTFA and quit making excuses for Obama just b/c you think he's swell....
"Both the Bush and Obama administrations said they wanted to keep the interview confidential because future presidents, vice presidents and their senior staff may not cooperate with criminal investigations if they know what they say could became public." - niradg, on 10/02/2009, -0/+17Why would Obama want to keep this is a secret? What could he possibly have to gain?
- kemp34, on 10/02/2009, -0/+17Who works so hard AGAINST transparency?
CROOKS, that's who! - rkthoadan, on 10/02/2009, -3/+19The article claimed the Obama administration has sought to keep the interview a secret as well. It's admittedly unsubstantiated, but I have no problem believing it, although it might be more an error of omission than a concerted effort to block the disclosure. Either way, this is one area where I am deeply disappointed with the Obama administration.
- BlacklabelSAR, on 10/02/2009, -3/+18To those on the Right shouting "hypocrite!"
There is only one party. The Centralized Banking party. Stop acting like cattle.
Money As Debt 2:
http://www.viddler.com/explore/prommasa/videos/40/ - joeycat, on 10/02/2009, -3/+18this either boils down to one of two things:
a) the obama administration wants to save the us from further international embarrassment caused by the previous administration or
b) the obama administration has one or multiple parties that can be implicated if this investigation continues
either way, as an obama supporter, i do not agree with trying to keep this buried. - DaveySocal, on 10/02/2009, -0/+15While we are at it, can we get the Energy Task Force information too?
- wilcocola, on 10/02/2009, -1/+12"the Obama administration has suggested that future presidents and vice presidents might refuse to cooperate with criminal investigations if they knew their statements might become public."
Ummmmmm, excuse me sir, but since when did we have a choice whether or not we would wish to participate in a criminal investigation against us? WHAT THE ***** IS GOING ON IN THIS COUNTRY???????
I thought no one was above the law, but then again, like everything else that makes this country "great," it all seems to just be smoke and mirrors. - jbmcb, on 10/02/2009, -0/+11The director of the FBI is appointed by the president, and reports to the Director of National Intelligence who, in turns, reports to the President. If the current director isn't doing the job satisfactorily, the president can fire him and appoint a new one.
You can correctly extrapolate that, if the director of the FBI wants these files kept secret, the President, at the very least, is OK with it. - dafragsta, on 10/02/2009, -3/+14You're the only one calling it that. You sick bastard.
- altgeeky1, on 10/02/2009, -4/+15Interesting. In your world the FBI exists only to spy on liberal politicians, and cover-up for conservative ones (and their foreign puppet-masters). You too are a Dick.
- ptoma2000, on 10/02/2009, -0/+10Better go tell that to Henry Kissinger...
- tdclark23, on 10/02/2009, -0/+10The statement, "I don't want a future vice president to say, `I'm not going to cooperate with you because I don't want to be fodder for 'The Daily Show.'" really irks me.
I didn't know cooperating with a criminal investigation was optional. That's like a criminal saying I don't want to cooperate because my name might end up in the newspaper.
I am also disappointed in Obama wanting to limit the scope of the investigation, although I understand a President trying to protect the power of the Presidency. Every President does that. There was worry that George Washington would wind up as King of America. The people were wrong about him but we need to be eternally vigilant. - dforty3, on 10/02/2009, -0/+9@Rikkochet
The point I was making is that change can be a lot easier than what we are led to believe. The complications presented to us are often just a form of the divide and conquer strategy. As I pointed out, the Healthcare debate is a prime example that illustrates this point. Character assassination (socialist healthcare) and falsely representing details (death panels) are tactics used by corrupt politicians and the media to muddy the water and complicate issues, when there are indeed simple solutions.
Let's look at another hot topic, Illegal Immigration.
The Problem: illegals are taking our jobs.
Complications inserted: Americans are lazy and won't do hard work and so we need them to maintain lower costs and lower consumer pricing.
Reality: American people will do those jobs for reasonable rates. Corporations exploit quasi slave labor. Prices wouldn't go up that drastically if reasonable wages were paid. It would go up a few percentage points, but we wouldn't have the $17 peach as some suggest. The biggest cost for businesses is not payroll, it's transportation of goods. On top of that, unemployment would decline and the average wage would increase and we would be able to afford more anyway.
Simple Solution: Arrest, prosecute and jail any CEO who's company engages in illegal hiring (the way other countries do). Illegals will leave if they can't get work. Don't even need to put up a fence.
Am I oversimplifying things? Sure a bit. Our legislative process is intentionally bureaucratic to ensure things don't change to quickly, but the public debate is intentionally muddied with false information to prevent public edification and support for real change. If people had real facts and weren't constantly divided with red & blue labels, progress would be much simpler. - inactive, on 10/02/2009, -3/+12@dforty
Lots of things "aren't complicated" from the outside, but are hard as hell when you actually roll up your sleeves and have to implement a change rather than envision a redesign.
Don't forget that anything trying to accomplish something is changing an existing design. Communism? Classic academic example, and can't be implemented. You can "create" communism from scratch, but you can't convert a modern nation into a completely different economic model without getting mired in details. - jasvll, on 10/02/2009, -0/+9Now the interview will be released with all the sections that actually pertain to the reasons its release was demanded REDACTED. Victory for the PEOPLE!!!
- kemp34, on 10/02/2009, -2/+11NEO-conservatives.
Aside from that, I agree with you. - hereticoftruth, on 10/02/2009, -1/+9I am glad the judge ruled the right way on this. But I am sure a lot of "Covering Cheney's Butt" will be listed under "National Security".
- gfrommer, on 10/02/2009, -0/+8I thought people had no choice whether to cooperate with law enforcement during an investigation. If a person has an answer to an investigators question and chooses not to tell them that answer (or worse lies about it) that clearly seems like obstruction of justice.
I think Obstruction of Justice only counts if you make less then $50k/year though. I mean come on... it's like Nixon said: ".... if the president does it, then it's not illegal" .... ahhhh Nixon... one day I wish we could revive his head and place it in a jar of liquid like in futurama. I would have to get a Kissinger head though....... if you could have any living or dead president's animated talking head in a jar of liquid perched on top of your mantel, which president would it be and why?
/tangent - SmokenJoe, on 10/02/2009, -1/+9I thought we would get change looks like business as usual.Prison should not be limited to poor people.
- kemp34, on 10/02/2009, -2/+10Buried for red herring. While their may be serious issues in there, they have ultra minimal to do with the topic at hand.
- JStraum, on 10/02/2009, -0/+7Hmmmm, that interview must have been lost with all those emails, so sorry...
- altgeeky1, on 10/02/2009, -2/+9While I share your disappointment (Cheney arguably committed treason), I'd much rather see Obama pass the agenda I voted him in to do...
- cfuse, on 10/02/2009, -1/+8It can't have been easy to make that decision knowing the sort of payback that's likely to result.
- tj111, on 10/02/2009, -1/+8He then invited this judge on his hunting trip.
- jbmcb, on 10/02/2009, -0/+7> Or might he have other things to worry about being the president of the united states?
If it's in the news, which it is, the president has to worry about it. It's simple, the president can tell the DNI to tell the FBI to release the files, and it's done. It would take all of ten seconds. Obama made a pledge to be more open and transparent - releasing the files would be honoring this pledge. - Winston84, on 10/02/2009, -1/+7What's next, Dubya and Tricky-Dickie's "conversation" with the 9-11 Omission ??
- AgeofMastery, on 10/02/2009, -4/+10More like you need Prozac now...
- inactive, on 10/02/2009, -2/+8This whole thread is interesting in the fact that it IS truth. The problems from a speaking standpoint ARE easy to fix, but from an implementation standpoint is staggering.
For instance, absolve the fed and IRS. This is quite easy when spoken, but to implement it will take a LOT of planning, approval, and money.
Others are FREE, but will never pass because it is aimed at the guys who would vote to pass it. Senate and house term limits. No office should be able to be held indefinitely, that only breeds laziness, corruption, and big heads. But to get that passed would require the guys voting to lose their jobs. Yeah right.
Other stuff is easy, universal health care. YAY! But does ANYONE really know what it entails? No, they don't because you have a ton of asshats that lie through their teeth 24/7, and even proof won't stop the lies from becoming the proof.
Another nice one would be forcefully dissolving the two political party system and banning lobbying. ***** easy to say but try and chop the hippies and radical bible thumpers from their party. Banning lobbying? Yeah right, ban people from money, again not going to happen.
The only REAL way to get major ***** like this forced through in THIS day and age would be to take away all democratic voting... which kinda does away with America.
p.s. in before anyone that will say it, America is a Constitution Republic, not a democracy. - FertileBastard, on 10/02/2009, -2/+8Why is it that Richard L. Armitage's name rarely comes up in this discussion? He who did the actual outing of Plame. Why does no one mention Colin Powell his boss and close associate. How could Powell possibly not been aware of what was going on?
- altgeeky1, on 10/02/2009, -4/+10I'm sorry, did you say something of value? No, therefore you got buried hard... as you usually do. Have a nice day!
-
Show 51 - 100 of 154 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is