New York Times Editorial:
The template for the Bush administration’s mania for secrecy was signed by the president six years ago — Executive Order 13233, reversing the presumption of right of public access to presidential papers. This basic right of taxpayers and historians alike was embedded in the 1978 laws enacted after the Nixon administration. The reforms established a reasonable 12-year waiting period for access. But Mr. Bush’s reversal lets presidents or vice presidents (guess who?) keep their records sealed in perpetuity unless they or their heirs approve access...."
Technorati tags: Bush, Executive Orders, Secrecy, US Government, Politics, History, New York Times, editorial, op ed
2 comments:
All the more reason to dump them; this is meant to be a democracy (or a republic or something of the people) which means transparency not secrecy.
Everyone for a Third Party candidacy raise their hands!
Question, Al: Is it better to have a third party or elect an independent (affiliated with NO party)? I choose the latter in that party politics corrupts and limits politicians from responding to issues purely on their own beliefs vs. having to compromise those beliefs for the "Party Line."
As for dumping the current two parties, but of course! -- unless a strong third party or independent candidate fails to emerge.
My hand is raised and waving wildly....
Post a Comment