From: "George Sherwood" 

On Mon, 10 Apr 2006 19:33:52 -0400, Rich Gauszka wrote:

> "George Sherwood"  wrote in message
> news:4439c350$1{at}w3....
>> On Sat, 08 Apr 2006 23:48:37 +0100, Adam wrote:
>>
>>> "I've constantly expressed my displeasure with leaks, particularly
>>> leaks of classified information."
>>>
>>> Answers on a postcard to.....
>>>
>> Good editorial in the Washington Post today on this whole affair.
>>
>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/08/AR2006040800
895.html
>>
>> PRESIDENT BUSH was right to approve the declassification of parts of a
>> National Intelligence Estimate about Iraq three years ago in order to
>> make clear why he had believed that Saddam Hussein was seeking nuclear
>> weapons. Presidents are authorized to declassify sensitive material, and
>> the public benefits when they do. But the administration handled the
>> release clumsily, exposing Mr. Bush to the hyperbolic charges of
>> misconduct and hypocrisy that Democrats are leveling.
>>
>>
> The Washington Post had this today
>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2006/04/10/BL2006041000588.
html
>
> The White House's longtime rationale for its stonewall on all matters even
> vaguely related to the CIA leak investigation -- that it can't comment on
> an ongoing legal proceeding -- was never a particularly plausible excuse,
> even though it has thus far proved oddly effective at keeping the press
> and the public at bay.
>
> But now, with the president's personal conduct very much in question, it
> doesn't even come close to hacking it anymore.

That's fine, but I see some difference between the paper's editorial page
and this guys blog.  I was pointing out that usually the editorial page is
not very pro-administration.  The columnists can be anywhere in the
spectrum.  I just found the editorial interesting.  Any one can write their
opinion such as this guy.

George

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5