It is MEDIA Apathy,i.e. Control of News-ee-worthi-ness, which moves the masses or not.

So, Joan, I do agree with previous posters that this story should be the front page focus for several info and opinion pieces on this topic alone.

Palinesque junk should be last or Salon could refer people to The Alaska Times for info. Use YOUR Control of Newsetc. power. Please.

"Gordon Wagner" --

"The States ought to reclaim power from the Federal government . . . ."

That was tried: it's called "Civil War". It was unconstitutional.

When will you be READING the Constitution -- especially the clauses which expresssly stipulate that the US Constitution is the SUPREME law of the land, and which impose limits ON THE STATES?

"until the Feds deliver the mail and administer the National Parks and defend the coastline. And that would be all."

And to hell with the "General Welfare": we are, after all, not a society of humans, a society in which to live, but rather a corporation in which only business, and its "free market" lawlessness, is Constitutional.

"They're shot through with corruption and this is yet another instance that will prove it."

The human race, being imperfect, is "shot through with corruption" -- so let's just exterminate it. In the name of a law-illiterate supermacist idiotology of perfect lawlessness and gun-nut paranoia.

Of course the administration of President George W. Obama will do everything in its power to prevent an investigation of this classified operation - including defying Congressional suponeas and court orders. The problem with vetoing the intelligence bill is that there will be overwhelming support to override the veto - most of the Democrats and ALL of the Republicans. So Obama will be reduced to affixing a signing statment that his administraion will not follow the (new) law in briefing anyone other than those that the administration selects.

I think President Obama is brilliant at letting things fall exactly where they need to -- he allows for discussion, disagreements, and eventually action. Trust him!

No spin, no dishonesty, no rambling -- just honest, forthright writing based on fact after fact after fact. So congratulations. Today, you’ve made it clear just how inferior Joan is as a “journalist.” The commenter has actually topped the columnist. Bravo.

"Northwestwoods" --

"...or that unfortunate incident in Dallas that then CIA contractor Bush 41 seems to know something about."

In effort to substantiate and prove that conspirabunk, a particular perpetuator of that conspirabunk posts an FBI document "showing" that Bush I was in Dallas on that day at the time of the assassination.

But if one reads the document -- which the perpetuator either didn't do, or expected others wouldn't do -- it actually records that the Dallas FBI office received a long-distance phone call from Midland, TX, from Bush I, in which Bush I named a particular Republican who was, in his mind, suspect as concerns the assassination.

In short: Bush I wasn't in Dallas that day, let alone at that time.

Except for the president and a few congressional leaders, it is understandable that the CIA would not reveal everything they are working on or considering. That is the first step. Otherwise there is no way that 535 members of congress and the Senate, even for the sake of national security, could keep a secret. May as well publish it in a North Korea or Iran newspaper.

"From Joan Walsh

". . . . How horrific and illegal were the Bush-Cheney maneuvers when a career Christian conservative and law and order guy like Ashcroft (and his deputies) risk their jobs to block them? And why doesn't Obama want to know?"

Haven't you LEARNED yet? Whenever a person -- especially a right-winger -- claims to be a "Christian," block your ears and watch their conduct, while keeping in mind the rules which are required of Christians.

"I can't beleive what you say/'Cause I see what you do" -- Manfred Mann.

Actions speak louder than words. Aschroft had his own area of "law and order" tyranny, and it was masked by and pursued in the name of his claim to be a Christian.

"House Democrats have set out to hobble the CIA and further handcuff the executive branch.

"WStreeter Saturday, July 11, 2009 08:11 AM

The SUPREME "hobble" and "handcuff" in our system is the Constitution.

Rule of law is a "hobble" and "handcuff," ass, in that it establishes LIMITS so that actions are not contrary to the Constitution and rule of law.

Otherwise, why pretend to be about freedom and justice while doing everything contrary to that including especially the contrary extralegal?

"A system of laws, and not of [lawless] men." -- John Adams.

@wstreeter

"The original sin was President Carter's for conceding so much intelligence supervision to Congress in the 1970s. The Obama White House is right to resist giving away any more, ..."

You're right. What we REALLY need to do RIGHT NOW, is give MORE unsupervised and unfettered power to the executive.

How could we all have been so stupid not to realize THAT?

So simple.

-- ack Saturday, July 11, 2009 08:22 AM

"wstreeter" is an elitist who knows better than the Founders/Framers, therefore hates and opposes not only their handiwork, but also democracy and the rule of law itself -- they are such an inconvenience: they "hobble" and "handcuff" our betters, who always know what's best for the rest of us.

"Think!"

You go first --

"Except for the president and a few congressional leaders, it is understandable that the CIA would not reveal everything they are working on or considering. That is the first step. Otherwise there is no way that 535 members of congress and the Senate, even for the sake of national security, could keep a secret. May as well publish it in a North Korea or Iran newspaper.

"-- Karolyn Saturday, July 11, 2009 11:04 AM"

GAWD forbid we be different than, say, North Korea by operating transparently, in accordance with our system of laws.

P.S. Iran is not the enemy. The enemy is those who are lying against Iran.

The CIA and the Bush administration must have loved the James Bond movies. I doubt whether they read the books. These so called elite of our social and economic system seemed to think they were immune from laws regulating them.

Obama's men, although not of the inherited elite, seem to have developed the same mentality.

They want to protect the Bush people as they want to be protected from their successors. I doubt whether any of both groups have met a law they felt they couldn't bypass.

What we need in the White House are people who don't have a need to control and aggregate power. Good luck on that score. This Panetta revelation is merely one drop in a bucket of blood and guts.