|
that's a reasonable list to use as a starting point, ace.
i'd probably not sequence it that way (from most to least "reliable" seems to be how you organized it)...
but with that, it seems like we don't really have a disagreement about the importance such documents play in the building of an understanding of what an administration might have done and why after the fact---maybe only about how each of us would approach that history, were either you or i to write it.
so what it seems the issue is comes down to whether you are inclined to support the bush administration's sealing of its documents for 12 years and why.
i do not support it. i think that it is particularly incumbent on this administration to make its rationale--its internal processes--available if only because of the extraoridinarily problematic and divisive policies that it has chosen to pursue--so "for the country" maybe an act that cuts against its apparent grain and takes transparency a little seriously would be good.
i don't really understand why a conservative would support less rather than more transparency on principle--it runs against everything about the usual criticisms from the neoliberal set of government functions, regulation, institutions, etc.
why do you support this again?
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|