1. I also think that our occasional killing of civilians by airstrikes also make Obama's statements about being 'appalled' kind of hollow.

2. Glenn, don't know if you saw my post in the other thread on the subject, but I believe that NPR's reluctance (cowardice, whatever) to use the term torture probably has a lot to do with liability. Since torture is illegal, yet no one has been convicted, NPR is scared to apply the term. To that end, if you get the chance, ask the NPR Ombudsperson, hypothetically if a high-ranking member of the Bush admin were convicted of committing/approving torture based solely on what we know now, would NPR then refer to it as torture?

3. Damn Helen Thomas is quick!

For me the deal with the pics is not that I want to see them, its more that when the govt uses 'national security' as an excuse to keep secrets, its hugely damaging to the idea of living in a free democracy. Yeah, there are reasons to not release the pics, but in my view, keep them secret in the way they are doing it is even more damaging to our country in the long run.

I think they wouldn't admit to it because they'd be embarrassed to admit it. Let's face it, admitting that would be admitting to their audience that getting them the news/facts is of less importance than covering their own butts. It would be an antithetical position for a reporter to take, but a very common one for a corporation to take. I know NPR doesn't necessarily compare to say ABC or CNN, but nonetheless in any large organization the mindset to protect the organization usually supersedes most other considerations.

Any like I said, the proof would be to ask that question. Or more generally ask, based solely on the facts we have now, what conditions would let NPR refer to torture as torture?

Ok. I thought about it some more. Here's my new snap judgment: Its still about cowardice but this time its from appearing partisan. The Bush admin/RNC/right-wing punditry have so successfully positioned (falsely of course) the torture debate that acknowledging torture is seen a being partisan in favor of Dems/liberals. And NPR is afraid of being called partisan. Much like everyone (by which I mean news orgs) was afraid of being called un-American in the run up to the Iraq war if they questioned Bush.

The grand irony of traditional news outlets being upset with HuffPo getting to ask a question is that with all thats going on in the world, one of the establishment reporters asks Obama if he's still smoking.

Takes a pretty hefty set of stones to whine about HuffPo asking a serious legitimate question while one of your own makes a mockery of your profession.

Silenced:

Obama is the Commander in Chief of our armed forces. That job description involves making tough decisions to protect the lives of our troops. Our troops are now living among people who believe in punishing the innocent to get revenge against the guilty. Obama is doing his job by protecting the troops under his command from collective retribution.

The flaw there is that since we haven't actually seen the pics, we're being forced by the govt into taking its word in what could be evidence exposing crimes.

Its a shame the debate on the pics has defaulted into assuming the govt is telling the truth.

We're occasionally, and without any consequence, killing civilians in another country with 'accidental' airstrikes, in addition to the scores who, without any trial or even charges filed, have died in our custody due to harsh and inhumane treatment, it does seems a bit hypocritical for our leaders to be speaking out. Thanks Bush! And thank you Obama for covering Bush's ass and carrying on some of his most odious policies. And McCain... Ah, McCain, of course you feel for the Iranian people! You feel we should 'Bomb, Bomb, Bomb' them! I'm sure they appreciate your concern.

Your mom may be right but if you let her force you into making a decision for you then she'll probably be calling the shots for you for some time to come.

There is a difference between blind rebellion and making the right decision for the right reasons.

A key point to be made here is not that the mom is telling her daughter what to do, but that she is using economic leverage to force her into doing what she thinks is right. As a person who wants to be an adult, thats the kind of behavior, especially coming from family who so often abuse their 'closeness' as a license to manipulate, that should be shut down IF the person in question wishes to consider themselves an adult.

The biggest problem with Ayn Rand-ers and free market proponents, including Alan Greenspan is their adherence to the concept of self-interest. It sounds good but it fails to take into account the simple fact that there are as many forms of self-interest as their are possible perspectives. And of course any student of philosophy, physics, or even just people watching knows there an infinite number of possible perspectives. Whose self-interest guides the corporation? The CEO's? And which of the CEO's self-interests reigns supreme? His long term self-interest? Short term self-interest? The self-interest of his company? The self-interest of himself? And thats not even factoring in all the possible self-interests of the other people in the company that can impact the company, or people outside the company that can impact it.

Bottomline: Objectivism is another utopian ideal based on the unreality of people being fundamentally simpler and better than people really are, and ultimately a convenient justification for assholes to be assholes.