“translucent” not “transparent”

bush_obamathe non-partisan non-profit group called citizens for responsibility and ethics in washington (crew) sued the obama administration to gain access to information related to visits by coal company execs to the white house because “in recent days, the secret service has rejected requests from two organizations for the logs, which document the west wing meetings that have helped shape obama’s policies on banking regulation, economic recovery, foreign policy and the auto industry.”  

 if this sounds familiar to you, it should.  the bush administration received great criticism for similar behavior related to the vice president’s discussions with the energy task force and the administration ultimately lost it’s fight to keep records related to those dealings private.  according to crew’s legal council anne weismann, “the obama administration has now taken exactly the same position as the bush administration, telling us the visitor logs are presidential records…i don’t see how you can keep people from knowing who visits the white house and adhere to a policy of openness and transparency. the discrepancy between the rhetoric and the policy is especially great.”

of course, the obama administration is quick to point out that their administration is much more open and transparent the prior administration, citing as proof, the “website for information about the recovery act, posts presidential memoranda and executive orders on whitehouse.gov, and streams white house events live on its website.”  come on dude, really? that’s kinda like saying:

you can’t use as proof of being transparent , the vehicles you use to distribute information and disregard the content of the message.

If you enjoyed this post, subscribe to our rss feed, ' or leave a comment.


Similiar Stories:
Comments

No comments yet.

Leave a comment

(required)

(required)