How can you assassinate the character of someone like Tenet? His 'performance' was appalling. All he did was reveal just enough to try to mitigate his own failings without actually revealing anything that might get someone else in trouble, that people with eyes and ears didn't already know.

It was a disgusting, self-serving act of a man with no honor or shame.

Mr. Greenwald,

"In fact, his behavior is so repellent precisely because so many of these facts are true."

I don't deny his facts are true, (although it could be asked if they are indeed true since everything he revealed was self-serving. Also as per the interview on '60 Minutes' one must question if the man knows what the word 'fact' means.) I do however feel they do not 'reveal' anything of substance or that we didn't already know.

All he revealed were snippets that mitigated his own actions, without casting aspersions on anyone else's.

Re: Tenet

Thrasyboulos said: "And right on cue, the kneejerk "left" demands perfection, and peers long and hard into the mouth of a gift horse."

I don't demand perfection. Some substance would be nice. What exactly did Tenet reveal that either wasn't known, or is provable? Anything? Everything he revealed was self-serving, and was either known, or if new, boils down to 'he-said/they-said' unprovable assertions.

Tenet offers nothing but CYA for himself (and poorly done at that)and a boost to his book sales. Tenet needed to either say something back when it might have mattered or offered some evidence that might matter now.

Those who still support the war as it enters its 5th year aren't going to be swayed by this tool.

Like I said, I don't demand perfection, but what does Tenet offer that is of substance?

I eagerly anticipated watching him on 60 Minutes, though was disgusted by the time it was over.

I found it hard to believe this man crept out of the rock he hides under (presumably in shame) to redeem himself with this:

(paraphrased from memory)

Scott Pelley: How did you get it so wrong?

Tenet: Hey! We made mistakes! People make mistakes! You can tell I'm sincere because I'm acting angry!

That was it. Yes we KNOW you made mistakes, you'd have to be brain dead or an Administration Official to not see that. The question was how could you have made them?

To answer the question of how mistakes were made with the answer that mistakes are made, smacks of incompetence or willful dissembling to protect yourself or others.

Way to redeem yourself Tenet.

Now where else did someone else's anticipated turn in the spotlight to clear things up end up with that person looking like an idiot?

My god, its the Gonzales testimony all over again!

Somehow I think it won't be the last time we see this stratagem from the Bush (Rove) playbook.

You have to admit it would be entertaining.

I kinda see the whole first episode as one long uncomfortable silence.

What is the point of being that evil if it isn't the money?

What is most telling is that the part of the story that seems to be noted for its remarkableness is that Bush was spoken to bluntly. That should be a huge indicator and indictment of his him and his presidency that 6 years into it, blunt (characterized as honest and forthright) talk is considered newsworthy.

I saw the Fonda/Colbert show and enjoyed it thoroughly. The reasoning being is, you must remember, Colbert's character is an amalgam of O'Reilly/Limbaugh (spits to clear mouth) and when you watch Colbert's show you agree to buy into his act, so it was nice to see someone who 'portrays' such an ass be put off guard.

But the real issue her is Fonda. 69!?!?!?!? Holy crap! I hear 69 and I think oxygen tanks and a foot in the grave. She looked awesome. Perhaps now men in their 50's will leave their wives for women in their 60's for their new trophy wives, dashing the hopes of countless 20 to 30 year olds.

That these people planned a war, yet can't handle MS Office. Perhaps it's part of the problem? In addition to the arrogance, incompetence, malfeasance, greed, blind-ambition, etc... part of the problem is that we have people who think in terms of fingers on triggers rather than fingers on keyboards? Maybe the entire adult middle-age ruling class of America are on the wrong side of a paradigmatic cultural shift from grunts with guns to electronic information? Yet they are still in charge despite having become obsolete in their own lifetimes. Our rulers are all 20th century thinkers in a 21st century environment. Of course the fact that they are all criminal lying murderers shouldn't be overlooked.

Look, I'm not a socialist at all. I believe people who're willing to put in the extra should get the extra.

HOWEVER

I believe a society exists to benefit the members of that society. So for me the test of a society's success is simple: Do the members of a given society reap the benefits of that society? If the answer is 'No' then your society is failing.

Now you can lay the blame wherever you want, but if in America the working and participating members of our society are going without healthcare, or are receiving inadequate healthcare, then something is wrong. (I even qualified that "working and participating" to make my case stronger, personally, I think it applies to every citizen.)

Period.