Search Results for : newrq


Public Servants?

Why are these people even in office?

North Carolina cities and other government agencies are pursuing the authority to sue citizens who ask to see public records.
Lawyers for local governments and the University of North Carolina are talking about pushing for a new state law.
That law would allow pre-emptive lawsuits against citizens, news organizations and private companies to clarify the law when there is a dispute about providing records or opening meetings.

I can think of only one reason for public records not to be disclosed: they contains personal information that should not be released without an individuals consent. Anything else should be provided right now accompanied by a bow and a “May I help you with anything else?”
Via Politech.


A Few Questions for the Candidates

Here is Roxanne’s opening:

Dear John Kerry and George “W standing for Women is a lot like Putin standing for Democracy” Bush:
I no longer give a shit about your Vietnam-era exploits. It doesn’t matter to me if you were once a drunk-driving, cocaine-tooting mama’s boy or if you were an effete BMOC.
More importantly, though, go read her questions for the candidates.
You may not agree 100% with the positions implied by the questions but this is the level at which any meaningful campaign should be occurring. That it isn’t confirms more firmly my belief that the whole mess needs to be redone.


Everything Changed?

Point 14 of the things Mark Kleiman recently learned at an Executive Session on Gang Violence opens with:

14. On the other hand, gang violence accounts for more deaths each year than were killed on 9-11. Thinking about getting ready to think about it isn’t really a satisfactory response.
Why hasn’t this changed everything?
It is pretty clear that the policies of local, state, and federal governments over the past 100 years have not fulfilled the government’s obligations to the people. Perhaps it is time to make some fundamental changes in these entities to get them refocused on serving the people’s rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness rather than the faction de jour.


Nope, No Transparency Here

The bushies will not release to the 9/11 Commission the complete text of rice’s preempted 9/11 speech. Josh Marshall tries to understand why not:

Unless the argument is that we can’t let our enemies know the depth of the poor judgment displayed by the president’s national security team it is searchingly hard to fathom what possible national security issue could be implicated by handing over the speech since it was — do we have to say it? — a speech! A speech for public consumption.

And just to be clear:

Trent Duffy, a spokesman for the White House, said only: �The White House is working with the commission to ensure that it has access to what it needs to do its job.�

These folks must have a different understanding of the commission’s job then the rest of us.


Where Does the Buck Stop Now?

Apparently it still stops in the Lincoln and other White House bedrooms:

Bush’s criticism of the Clinton fund-raising scandal is one of the reasons the White House identifies guests. In a debate with Vice President Al Gore in October 2000, Bush said: “I believe they’ve moved that sign, ‘The buck stops here,’ from the Oval Office desk to ‘The buck stops here’ on the Lincoln Bedroom. And that’s not good for the country.”
Bush’s overnight guest roster is virtually free of the famous � pro golfer Ben Crenshaw is the biggest name � but not of campaign supporters.
At least nine of Bush’s biggest fund-raisers appear on the latest list of White House overnight guests, covering June 2002 through December 2003, and-or on the Camp David list, which covers last year. They include:

Yes this bit of hypocrisy should be pointed out but no one should be surprised that bedsheets are traded for friendship or money.
First, you can pretty much count on the bush team either having done, doing or planning to do something they hammer the opposition about.
Second, and more important, the US government transfers huge amounts of money from the losers to the winners and the latter’s stripes change only modestly from administration to administration. Until we the people put a stop to the massive transfers we can expect politicians to seek favours votes and donations and reward those who give them with both bedsheets and favorable laws and regulations.
Via Calpundit who picked it up from It’s a Crock. The Apostropher also comments.
Update: John Cole and Mark Kleiman both argue that a Bush – Clinton comparison is off the mark and I acknowledge both their points which are different enough that you should go read their posts.
I will, though, stick to what I say in the two paragraphs above the ‘Via’ statement.