Carol Browning has been referred to as Obama's climate czar. The Washington Times has reported on a recent testimony she provided in a civil case concerning governments obligation to preserve documents. In the testimony, the Washington Time quotes her testimony:
"It was a conscious decision not to use a piece of equipment or to learn how to use a piece of equipment because I didn't want to be in a situation similar to what I had been in Florida," she testified about government computers. The testimony referred to her days as an environmental regulator in Florida, where an e-mail message sent to her surfaced in litigation.
"This is why I made this decision not to use my computer," she said. "I was very careful."
Apparently Browning and Cheney share an affinity for destroying public records as well:
The lawsuit examined why EPA officials failed to save electronic records that chronicled the Clinton administration's final actions in office and that were being sought by a conservative legal group under federal open-records laws.
The same day a judge ordered the agency to preserve such records, Ms. Browner asked a staff member that any files on her government computer be erased, prompting allegations of a possible cover-up.
This reluctance to keep her actions on public record will mesh well with her newly appointed title "Czar".
7 comments:
That rhetoric is coming from the far right and libertarian camps, Josh. Democrats don't like it, but its part of the politicretardscape.
As for keeping records, yes, they should keep records.
I see that term being used on the Huffingtonpost.com more than anywhere else. Doesn't get much more left than that.
They are probably using it ironically to make fun of right wingers and their stupid rhetoric.
I'm not an idiot. The left in the US is in love with Czars. They are not using it ironically. Next time I see it, I'll post it.
"I'm not an idiot. The left in the US is in love with Czars. They are not using it ironically. Next time I see it, I'll post it."
You do that, Josh. I'm quite sure it is written with a touch of irony.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/24/obama-climate-czar-intent_n_153352.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/11/neel-kashkari-bailout-cza_n_142916.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/maia-szalavitz/obama-drug-czar-pick-no-r_b_145461.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/16/car-czar-could-force-bank_n_151468.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/14/obama-pushes-for-50-billi_n_143769.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/15/white-house-wmd-czar-post_n_134925.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tag/obama-drug-czar/1
I saw it in scare quotes a couple of times, but it does seem that the Huff is using it quite regularly. Most of the left thinks the government is not democratic, so its use seems to be emerging from the libertarian's rhetoric as a leftwing way of discrediting Obama's regime if it makes all the wrong moves. So far, from a liberal's perspective, he's already failed, because he hasn't appointed any liberals. Obama's socalled bipartisanship seems to be another way of saying "cave in to the right!"
Post a Comment