I’ve got to give the Washington Post credit for their headline choice. On the top of the page and in the subject line of the news update email I got from them this morning was an excellent headline stating “Obama Rejects Truth Panel.” When I clicked on the link, I found the subtitle even better: “Commission Would Have Investigated Abuses in Terrorism Fight.” Arguably biased language? Yes. An accurate depiction of the situation? Also yes.
As the story explains,
President Obama rebuffed calls for a commission to investigate alleged abuses under the Bush administration in fighting terrorism, telling congressional leaders at a White House meeting yesterday that he wants to look forward instead of litigating the past.
The president made the announcement with House Minority Leader Jim Boehner, and a later statement by the White House Press Secretary blamed much of the president’s failure to go through with his plan to investigate torture tactics used under the previous administration on “the intense partisan atmosphere.” While the Senate Majority Leader announced that the Senate has its own investigation in the works, and Boehner accused House Democrats of disingenuousness in implying that they have not long understood that torture was occurring, Obama made clear that he is not interested in a truth commission, which he said would “open the door to a protracted, backward-looking discussion.”
Well…yes, Mr. President. If a crime is suspected, we look into what happened in the past, and meet out punishment as appropriate. That’s what investigations are for. And that’s why “Obama Rejects Truth Panel” is so great…and so telling.
Read the rest here.Published in