I cannot comment at this time.

It seems like no matter what uncomfortable subject comes up in the press, the accused or their spokespeople always come up with a line like "It's not appropriate for us to discuss this during an ongoing investigation." Why not? Why is it not appropriate?

Does anyone really buy the idea that it's *not* appropriate? Isn't it oh so clear that what they're really saying is, "Umm, this topic makes me extremely uncomfortable and I'd rather not talk about it so I'll make the excuse that I can't comment so these reporters will get off my back."

Two obvious instances:

Rafael Palmeiro's agent, Arn Tellem, on the steroids scandal: "It would not be appropriate to comment while the House Committee on Government Reform is doing its work. Pending review by that committee, there will be no other public comment."

And the most absurd bordering on the obscene, Bush's press secretary Scott McClellan stonewalling about the Karl Rove leak investigation (see the whole ridiculous transcript here):

QUESTION: Does the president stand by his pledge to fire anyone involved in a leak of the name of a CIA operative?

MCCLELLAN: I appreciate your question. I think your question is being asked related to some reports that are in reference to an ongoing criminal investigation. The criminal investigation that you reference is something that continues at this point.

And as I've previously stated, while that investigation is ongoing, the White House is not going to comment on it.

The president directed the White House to cooperate fully with the investigation. And as part of cooperating fully with the investigation, we made a decision that we weren't going to comment on it while it is ongoing.

We all know that is a bunch of BS. It's just an attempt to deflect difficult questions in the hope that the reporters will eventually tire and give up. Sadly, this strategy often works.

Perhaps even more stupid is when people accused of crimes, citing the advice of their attorney, refuse to answer questions. If you're not going to answer questions, at least be man or woman enough to take responsibility for your silence, rather than blaming your attorney as if they've put some gag order on you and you really wish you could talk.

As president, I don't want a press secretary or a spokesperson. I don't trust anybody else enough to speak for me (anyone else thinking of the mouth of Sauron?). I wonder how far back that tradition goes, of having other people speak for the president. I would want very open, very clear communication and information in my administration. No stonewalling, no hiding behind excuses, no semantics, no oh-so-subtle language nuances. Examples like the above only continue to embitter the public and further erode their faith in our democracy.