So, Digby says:
Once you capitulate to the idea that transparency about what our government did in the GWOT is dangerous to our troops and our national security, you have lost the argument.
Which is why Sir Change-a-Lot is hovering in “Fail” territory right now. Either you disagree with the previous admin’s way of doing things, and you change them (and, where necessary/required investigate and hold accountable), but if you don’t, you don’t. That is to say, if you continue to play their games: zero transparency, suppression of fact, re-writing of history, ignoring pesky facts, Orwellian name-games, etc. and you declare that whatever they did is just too bad, but “fuhgetaboutit, cause it works for me, too” — then you’re quite explicitly declaring your de facto compliance with what was done and how it was done. Don’t tell us how you deplore Cheney’s secrecy and then instruct your DOJ to shut down every investigation underway.
Moreover, you can declare all you want that you’re looking to do things differently and that you believe things should be done differently, but if you actively resist the change you’re advocating (and upon which you got yourself elected) then you’re really no better than the guy whose tactics you may decry, but whose tactics you are mirroring to a tee.
