Promise Keepers on 43rd Street

|

In an interview with Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, members of The New York Times editorial board help define fit to print:

SECRETARY RICE: I assume that there are—there is information that corporations keep confidential; it's in their boardrooms. But somehow, when it's the United States Government that is dealing with life and death, war and peace matters, allies who are putting their lives on the line, allies who have different political structures than we do and different obligations than we do, we're not supposed to keep anything confidential. And so I —

QUESTION: Well, that's taking it to extremes.

SECRETARY RICE: No.

QUESTION: And we—this paper has kept some of your secrets for you, too.

SECRETARY RICE: I understand that and I appreciate that.

NEXT: Censoring Debbie Nathan

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I think they’re up at 57th Street now, in the new Hearst Tower.

    Yes, that Hearst Tower.

  2. Has Rice been taking lessons from her boss in how say things that make no sense to any rational being?

  3. But somehow, when it’s the United States Government of the people, by the people, for the people….

    There you go Condi.

  4. The thing is, when you take that analogy to its logical conclusion, if the CEO of a corporation were to, let’s just say as a crazy example, lie to shareholders, he or she would be fired and imprisioned.

    -sam

  5. It’s an even lousier analogy because if a company lets its secrets to be leaked the most they can do is try to sue anyone who violated a non-disclosure contract; beyond that it’s tough nuggets for them.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.