The Los Angeles Times is digging in on its refusal to release the tape they have of Barack Obama at the Rashid Khalidi goodbye party. The Times says they promised the source it wouldn’t be shown (but it was fine to describe it?), so they are keeping it under lock and key.

Well, then, perhaps they should do a better job describing the scene. Why not a fuller account of what Obama actually said? Who else was sitting at Obama’s table? What did the original report mean by “the warm embrace Obama gave to Khalidi, and words like those at the professor’s going-away party, have left some Palestinian American leaders believing that Obama is more receptive to their viewpoint than he is willing to say”?

This isn’t ancient history. This event was five years ago. Whom he sat with, what he said, and what others said may be highly relevant to the decisions of millions of voters. At the very least, the Times owes the voters a very complete description of what went on.

del.icio.us

Google

Facebook

This entry was posted on Wednesday, October 29th, 2008 at 8:12 AM and is filed under Contentions. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.