Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
It's not clear to me that the national interest is served by having public testimony. Not that I want all of this hidden away, but I'd rather the commission take testimony out of sight, and then release the transcripts, etc., when they release a report. It's more important to get this stuff right, and I'm not sure the process is conducive to that when everyone is trying to score points for the cameras.
|
I'm torn on that, too. I do like that this is all transparent and forms part of the national debate, and I hate it when we're only fed the massaged and acceptable conclusions at the end with none of the data, but I wonder what doesn't get revealed because of the cameras and mics. I think Rice's testimony would be most helpful, but I'm guessing the public nature of the hearings will preclude that.
