[scottinoc]

I think -not- releasing the tape may be doing damage as well because there is so much suspicion surrounding the existence of the tape.

Ding-ding-ding! We have a winner. All the "I-wonder-what's-on-the-tape" speculation is better than the contents. Cover-up is always way more damaging than facts. Just ask Nixon.

[publius321]

“Ding-ding-ding! We have a winner. All the “I-wonder-what’s-on-the-tape” speculation is better than the contents. Cover-up is always way more damaging than facts. Just ask Nixon.”

---

That was a pretty obvious statement I made LOL. Good point about Nixon. Then, if you really want to ruminate on this - one would think the Dems would know this - and it is absurd to think that if Obama’s campaign WANTED this tape released (to exculpate him in the public mind) - that the LA Times wouldn’t gladly oblige them.

From that perspective, if the “cover up” is BETTER than what’s on that tape - it must be pretty friggin damaging. Hmmmm. If this were to reach critical mass, I expect an “edited” version to appear.

[publius321]

“Ding-ding-ding! We have a winner. All the “I-wonder-what’s-on-the-tape” speculation is better than the contents. Cover-up is always way more damaging than facts. Just ask Nixon.”

---

That was a pretty obvious statement I made LOL. Good point about Nixon. Then, if you really want to ruminate on this - one would think the Dems would know this - and it is absurd to think that if Obama’s campaign WANTED this tape released (to exculpate him in the public mind) - that the LA Times wouldn’t gladly oblige them.

From that perspective, if the “cover up” is BETTER than what’s on that tape - it must be pretty friggin damaging. Hmmmm. If this were to reach critical mass, I expect an “edited” version to appear.