host

Please defend your "idiots like Bill Keller" statement. I find it especially offensive, because I've put the time in to make the thorough case that the Times acted on my behalf, and that they broke no law, because it is not illegal to publish the classified information that they published.

Would you have us know, if it was up to you, nothing about the controversial ,measures that the Bush administration has taken, simply because they stamped most of their unilateral decisions as "classified"? I asked before...if, after five years without a terrorist attack on American soil, this country, when it is spending double on it's military per year, as it did in 2000, and ten times as much as it's next nearest rival, cannot err on the side of a free press and a transparent and accountable government, <b>what country can do that, and when?</b>

How do we know what, about their policymaking, to support or criticize, if Keller cannot publish what he knows, simply because the administration stamps the majority of it's decisions as classified? Does the time we live in and the threats that we face, really compare in immediacy and scope to the Civil War, WWI, or WWII? If you think that it does, please provide references that support how a stateless threat by "evil doers", can trump the right to know of the people of the most powerful nation, militarily, in history?

Here is some of the record of this administration's decision making, when it comes to protecting our security and communicating the threat level:

Bush appointed Porter Goss to head the CIA, and Goss appointed unknown CIA middle manager Kyle "Dusty" Foggo to be CIA #3....executive director, equivalent to the director of operations. Foggo is the best friend....all of his life....of Brent Wilkes, co-conspirator #1 in the Duke Cunningham scandal.

Bush appointed Bernard Kerik to head the new DHS, and then hastily withdrew that appointment:
The white house was caught using the DHS color coded terror alert warning system for political purposes, needlessly raising public concerns, airport delays, and the expense of living in the country for all of us......
The chief of staff in the OVP office was revealed in news reporting, and in releases from special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald to be directly involved in telling reporters the name of a classified status employee of the CIA. Then, he lied to the FBI and a federal grand jury about what he had done.

It has been falsely claimed that the administration's handling of pre-Iraq invasion intelligence had been "vetted" by the 9/11 Commission, Sen. Pat Roberts Senate Select Intelligence Committee, and the Robb-Silbermann Investigation, when it fact, all three investigations released reports that stated that they had avoided or been directed, not to investigate that important issue. Roberts has managed....by dividing the "phases" of his investigation...twice....to postpone investigating and reporting on that intelligence handling investigation for two full years, now, and will continue to delay disclosure at least until after the election in November.

I'm only touching the surface, powerclown, for the reasons that I believe that it is my right to know, and Bill Keller's right to report what the administration is doing, that makes your "idiot" label, extreme...... especially in view of the circumstances that clearly make it obvious that this administration is not even attempting to be transparent, accountable, or deserving of our trust. Why not leave the attacks and name calling to Cheney and congressional republicans, why join their chorus? If the news reporting did any harm, where are the examples of that "harm"? Why not make a case that rebuts my documented opinion that Keller was exercising his paper's legitimate contitutional right to publish classified info that did not fall into the narrow realm of prohibited categories?

Your contention that Bush's polling has risen signifigantly does not seem that signifigant: