If I Had Subpoena Power: Five Questions for Obama

It seems this is more of what we saw during the campaign regarding Obama or any other candidate. They say there was nothing and you want more. Well, what if there is nothing? What would ever be enough to prove that????

I did not care for the tone of this article at all. I do not see where Isikoff is coming from.

To me, it suggests all kinds of "bad stuff" that I would consider as possibly being warranted with the demonstrated operation of the past administration, but for the new president elect ???, I don't
see it.

The author wants "inappropriate" defined. And probably for good reason. I would suggest that his article is the epitome of "inappropriate", if that would be of any help to Isikoff.

Well lets hope he is not as stupid as the Republican leader Bush.Quit the B S ,just had eight years of it..N Y is left toothless,Iraq war still going on , body bags still being ship home.The country economy is a disaster,corruption has chase the invester in finacial system. Obama is not s, you never ask Bush about corruption and torture.

Wow! Mr. Isikoff is committing a random act of real journalism! May this be the first of many acts of real journalism committed by Newsweek and other "establishment" media outlets in the coming four years. May you recover from your election season swoon and deliver reportage Americans sorely need at a time when so many of our institutions are faltering and confidence is so low. Congratulations.

Answer the questions Isikoff! Stand up and answer. Be an man. Not a coward. You are being called out by the public and its time you answered. You are being held accountable for your complicity. Answer the questions. Each one.

1. Where were you when Bush was lying us into an illegitimate war?
2. Where were you when Congress was signing away our civil liberties with the 'Unpatriot Act"?
3. Where were you when Bush and the Republican Congress were deregulating us into economic hell?
4. Where were you when the Republican Congress was rubber-stamping all of Bushes nonsense?
5. Where were you when The Bush Crime Family were destroying America's moral authority by torturing prisoners?
6. Where were you when Katrina was drowning New Orleans and the "president" was bicycling?
7. Where have you been the last eight years? Obama is not yet president and you're on his case.

I would love to see the answers to these questions. We all know that politics corrupts even the finest men. Look at John Kennedy, If you haven't been corrupted just a little bit, you won't last long. Look at Jimmy Carter.

I don't care how transparent Pres-Elec Obama is, that's never enough. What most of you want is a God.....Oh, I sorry, even God is not enough to satisfy some of you intellectual prolific fools. The writer of this article Michael Isikoff asking question that's already answered is by the Obama team. This is nothing more than a witch hunt. Go ahead, make him stronger, that's how we made it through the hell of hatred hurled down through the decades. ....STILL I RISE!! Come people theres more important issues in this country that needs our attention NOW!

In regard to:

2 what happened with Senate " Candidate 1. "
How would Blagojevich have gotten the idea that this was your view? Were you or any of your aides aware, at any point, that Blagojevich wanted more than "appreciation"???such as contributions to his campaign fund or a seat in your cabinet???in exchange for appointing Jarrett?
---

Firstly, many in media find nothing wrong with Blago having been presented a list of names from Obama or by Emmanuel. Sure, complete transparency would have involved more detail. Tape recording and even video would have been any reporters wet dream. It would have been great entertainment, wouldn't it have been?

However, it is also feasible that short of any live video of Rahm Emmanuel and Governor Blagojevich, there was the plausible deniability of intimation without explicitness...of the proverbial wink and a nod that would not have been worth a tell-all or even mention by Emmanuel. Certainly other scenarios are plausible as well.

While I would like to see a new precedent established for interrogation by news media, some protocol that supports transparency there will always the a point at which only trust will suffice and at which reporters such as Isikoff will be satisfied with nothing less than shadowing the President while possessing their own security clearance. And if that were possible the reporters would be left to squabble over which one get the peach assignment as if it were some sort of beauty contest.

While I agree with the spirit of what Isikoff writes I have my doubts as to whether he would ever be satisfied. If Obama had granted an in-depth Blogo interview or series of interviews it would not have ended until there had been hundred of hours of testimony by Obama himself. Would surrogatges have satisfied Isikoff?

It matters more whether the people are happy with the answers but in this day and age I am glad there are people liike Isikoff out there. If there had been more then Bush would have been called out more often and so much of the damage he did would likely have been averted. If it was fitting for Bush it is just as appropriate for "my guy".

These

Once in a while you come across reporters who operate under the thin image of holier than thou to advance their particular personal agenda. This reporter almost but suggests to us that Obama is surely guilty until proven innocent. The way I know of an equivalent doctrine as a law student several years ago is is innocent until proven guilty! The curious question question for me is: is this reporter angling to make a name for himself or is he a handmaiden of some Obama haters, perhaps arising from the bowel of the Republican National Committee?

I think it is hysterical the way people are reacting to the legitimate questions mentioned in this article. Why is it that Obama gets a pass from having to answer legitimate questions about a major corruption scandal regarding the sale of his Senate seat to the highest-bidder? Didn't you vote for Obama because you wanted CHANGE from a corrupt political system that favored the wealthy and was not representative of the "little guy"? Well, Blogojevich and the dirty Chicago political system should be the first to go...and any knowledge that Obama had should be investigated....otherwise, what the heck are you supposed to stand for? I actually feel bad for you rabid Obama supporters b/c I think your love affair is going to be short-lived and very painful when you "break-up". Coming from a moderate Democrat who supported Hilary and then McCain....I have been very pleased to see Obama's shift toward a more moderate, centrist policy but can only imagine what his most vehement supporters, the "progressive" far-left Democrats must be feeling. Buyer's remorse anyone??? Life can be so funny.....

to: Vivaldi265, Avgoode, Kenstrstisks ---Vivaldi listed 7 outright lies about the Bush administration, He is typical of the cut and run cowardly Democrats who refused to regulate Fanniemae and Freddymac. Clinton and the Democrats caused this economic problem by forcing banks to make high risk mortgage loans to inapproriate borrowers. Bush saved your worthless rearends by going after the terrorists. What do any of you know about war? I regard you as festering pimples on the axx of mankind.

This is what overcooks my grits. "Make good on your pledge of transparency"? He's being transparent. He will release the findings of the report and many other facts will be release when/if there is a trial on the Blago matter. Being transparent doesn't mean he has to tell you what color underwear he wears. It means standing up and answering questions relevent to the American people. He's doing that. Candidate 1? Maybe she didn't really want the Senate seat. Maybe Obama can't read Blago's mind. Maybe Blago knows that asking for a bribe from Obama is a non-starter. Rezko? He sat in front of two Chicago editorial boards and answered every question they had. He stayed until everyone was satisfied. He didn't put a time limit on the question and anwer period. He was there for 3 hours answering questions. There is no hint that Obama did anything wrong. Just a witch hunt, plain and simple. There are many more important things going on, in case you did not notice.

This is what overcooks my grits. "Make good on your pledge of transparency"? He's being transparent. He will release the findings of the report and many other facts will be release when/if there is a trial on the Blago matter. Candidate 1? Maybe she didn't really want the Senate seat. Maybe Obama can't read Blago's mind. Maybe Blago knows that asking for a bribe from Obama is a non-starter. Rezko? He sat in front of two Chicago editorial boards and answered every question they had. he stayed until everyone was satisfied. He didn't put a time limit on the question and anwer period. He was there for 3 hours answering questions. There is no hint that Obama did anything wrong. Just a witch hunt, plain and simple. There are many more important things going on, in case you did not notice.