What part of "I have a full time job" to attempt do in-depth investigative work, as you have suggested, which would probably consume every waking hour for the rest of my life and even then would not yield anything acceptable to you because each thing I did manage to uncover, you would want sourced ten different ways from Sunday. Life would be so much simpler, wouldn't it, if we actually had an open, honest and transparent administration?
It certainly would be better if we had a more open, honest and transparent administration, Denise. I have some questions I'd like answered myself. These would be about Bagram Air Base, The Treaty on The Rights of The Child, why there has been no appropriate clarification on torture as U.S. policy and why there has been no legal action taken against those people who sanctioned its use during the last administration and those who may continue its use during the current administration. Those are the beginning of my list. I have made no secret of my problems with this administration and with at least some of its policies. Have I said anything thus far that is actually news to you?
I'd be surprised if it was.
Perhaps you think that my time is less fully taken up than yours? Sorry. It's also private. Sorry again.
Even if I spent my time in riotous debauchery, I would still be feel obligated to keep those things I talk about within the realm of the verifiable unless I made a point of being fanciful and people were aware of it. I don't demand that you verify things a hundred ways from Sunday. When you go for a dictionary, I don't hold out for the OED, for example; all I want is something that's generally thought of as good enough for a grown up discussion.
When folks want source material around here, they frequently get fairly picky. I'm not the guy who runs down the Main Stream Media, Denise, as though they had no virtues to match their many flaws. I try to be very clear about who I am quoting. If folks have difficulty with my sources, I'm happy to talk about them. Many of them are Mainstream Media, which you, among others, have spent a fair number of electrons knocking. I make a point of also using some Right Wing and neutral media as well.
All it takes to satisfy me is use of reliable sourcing and a solid attempt at getting at the real story, whatever that happens to be. Some right wing publications are good at that. I've spoken of Janes Defense Weekly before and of The Economist, both of which have sources that put the national intelligence services of some nation states to shame. Both of which are excellent sources.
I should read both more frequently.
The thing that I find about this administration is that it seems substantially more open, more honest and more transparent than any of the last several administrations. Perhaps you might care to suggest an administration that was more open, honest and transparent than this one within your memory. The one that comes closest in my mind is that of Bush the Elder, and he was driven out of office by the loathing and disrespect of his own party as much as by any other factor. At the time, if you'll remember, much was made of his connection with the CIA and there was a fair amount of international and national distrust of the man and his motives.
Perhaps you're comparing President Obama's openness, honesty and transparency with that of Bush II, who was forced to acknowledge lying about many of his statements before leaving office. President Clinton? President Reagan, who was forced to admit lying on purpose about Iran/Contra in fact but not feeling that there was a lie in his heart. ( As a psychotherapist, I can't tell you how many cheating spouses I've heard trying to get away with the same line.) President Carter may certainly have been as honest, open and transparent, but somehow I don't think he'd be up there on your scale. Perhaps I'm misjudging you there. And President Nixon?
Should we go on?
I suspect you're comparing President Obama with something else, and not with something or somebody real.
And, yeah, I'd like more from him, too.
There are enough other ways that this administration is wasting taxpayer money every day, even if the concert schedules for the past 17 months are nothing out of the ordinary, which I tend to doubt given the increased wasteful spending with the so-called stimulas [sic], cash for clunkers, cash for appliances, the subsidising [sic] of the auto industry, sweetheart deals to unions, confiscation of our healthcare system, and the planned continuation of the confiscation and resdistribution [sic] of wealth since his election.
Lotta big words there, Denise. Lotta nasty insinuations. You can't prove the concert stuff, but saying baseless stuff against a public figure isn't libel. Maybe it's baseless, maybe it isn't baseless, and you're too overworked to check it out. Saying vile sounding things that you can't or won't prove, so what? Who's going to stop you? It's only the guy's reputation, and you're already sure that his reputation's no good because you listen to other people who say the same thing, and the facts are too tiring to get to.
Not too tired to keep repeating the same nasty stuff, though.
Confiscation and redistribution of wealth?
You voted for the Republicans who voted for the Tax Cut for the wealthy, didn't you?
If that's true, you're not against confiscation and redistribution of wealth, you're simply against letting some of that money go to the poor. It appears that the money that goes to the rich at the expense of the economy doesn't bother you at all.