"No President should fear public scrutiny of his program".

[TruthIsAll]

There was once a president who believed in the obligation of the media to provide a full public scrutiny of his administration, who also recognized that constraint was needed only to protect real, legitimate issues of national security.

Compare this to the unelected fraud who believes only in misleading the people and who revels in his and their ignorance.

http://www.jfklibrary.org/j042761.htm

snip

It is the unprecedented nature of this challenge that also gives rise to your second obligation--an obligation which I share. And that is our obligation to inform and alert the American people--to make certain that they possess all the facts that they need, and understand them as well--the perils, the prospects, the purposes of our program and the choices that we face.

No President should fear public scrutiny of his program. For from that scrutiny comes understanding; and from that understanding comes support or opposition. And both are necessary. I am not asking your newspapers to support the Administration, but I am asking your help in the tremendous task of informing and alerting the American people. For I have complete confidence in the response and dedication of our citizens whenever they are fully informed.

I not only could not stifle controversy among your readers--I welcome it. This Administration intends to be candid about its errors; for as a wise man once said: "An error does not become a mistake until you refuse to correct it." We intend to accept full responsibility for our errors; and we expect you to point them out when we miss them.

Without debate, without criticism, no Administration and no country can succeed--and no republic can survive. That is why the Athenian lawmaker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy. And that is why our press was protected by the First Amendment-- the only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution- -not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize the trivial and the sentimental, not to simply "give the public what it wants"--but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices, to lead, mold, educate and sometimes even anger public opinion.

This means greater coverage and analysis of international news--for it is no longer far away and foreign but close at hand and local. It means greater attention to improved understanding of the news as well as improved transmission. And it means, finally, that government at all levels, must meet its obligation to provide you with the fullest possible information outside the narrowest limits of national security--and we intend to do it.

[Toots]

1. Send that to any Media source and you may end up at Gitmo.

JFK was everything that Bush* isn't. Brave, intelligent, wise, honest and articulate. I'm sure there are so many more adjectives that are apt but these some that are fitting.

[calimary]

2. This is a great reminder. It's like the ashcrofts of the world would say

"...if you've done nothing wrong, then you have nothing to hide/worry about, now, do ya?"

That goes BOTH ways. In a free society where we supposedly have a government of, for, and by THE PEOPLE, it MUST go both ways. Otherwise, we start getting what we have now.