Dean is asked to release gubernatorial records

retyred

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Oct-04-03 04:49 PM
Original message

Dean is asked to release gubernatorial records

Edited on Sat Oct-04-03 04:53 PM by retyred

Dean is asked to release gubernatorial records
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2003/10/02/dean_is_asked_to_release_gubernatorial_records/

Dean, who served as governor for 11 years, negotiated an unprecedented 10-year seal on correspondence from his administration, saying at the time that he didn't want the documents made public because he feared embarrassing revelations in future endeavors.

In a letter to Dean, Thomas Fitton -- president of Judicial Watch, the group pushing for the document disclosure -- wrote, "Failure on your part to provide full disclosure of your records as governor raises disturbing questions concerning accountability and transparency."

<snip>

In a written statement, the Dean campaign said: Those documents currently under seal will remain under seal until January 2013 as per the agreement with the secretary of state."

It is not entirely clear which records Dean has sealed; he has not outlined their contents to the state. A review of documents that he did make available suggests that internal State House documents -- particularly those from him to his staff and vice versa -- have been withheld from public view.

*****************

Now I realize it is Judicial Watch and Dean does have a right (by law) to hide/seal his records from enquiring minds, but the case for allowing the American people to view his gubernatorial records to better understand the man as a potential candidate is a legitimate request.

Deans statement that he didn't want the documents made public because he feared embarrassing revelations in future endeavors should throw up a big red flag about what it is that could be discovered about his past that could be embarrassing. Did he, like Clark, vote for a republican? Or possibly a Republican agenda issue? Did he as accused by Gebhardt actually support Newt and his bill? Or as accused actually subvert the law in order to install a long time friend with less than, shall we say, “the right of innocent until proven guilty” priorities as a judge? Or possibly not vote as claimed in some of Vermont’s political decisions thus making the claim of support of a bill more of a “now that it passed, I was always in favor of it” sort of claim.

A lot of “dust” has come up about the other candidates through various searches with a large gap on Dean due to this “Sealing of records” it would seem that once he had secured any possible threat of embarrassment was when he made his candidacy known.

How loud has the cry been for the revelation of bush’s records for public openness? How often has the cry “If you’ve got nothing to hide” be open and honest? by most if not all these same Dean supporters that mysteriously avoid the question of Dean’s sealed past. And why Dean’s attempt to seal them for 20 years instead of the 10 years offered? One not a Dean supporter must wonder.

Maybe Dean is as squeaky clean as he and his supporters would like everyone to believe, but I would think that since the cry from Dean supporters has been so vocal with regard to Clark’s past, that they above all others would be questioning their candidates motives for hiding his past from public view instead of gleefully trashing others not devious enough to take advantage the law to hide their embarrassing revelations.

I for one doubt his pious assertion that it is strictly for fear of embarrassment that these records are sealed, you don’t take the time or effort to seek a judges ruling to hide/seal your gubernatorial records for ten years, if you’ve been as squeaky clean and above board as you claim.

While I'm not above admitting I'm wrong should he choose to be open and honest and it is found that indeed there is nothing there, my distrust of this man as being not what he claims remains an issue for me. As long as he takes the “I have nothing to hide but you can’t see” type attitude that the bush administration holds so near and dear to their heart with the American public there isn't a reason for me to think that there is indeed alot of the real Dean that isn't real.

The ability to expose a candidates failings leads to an informed voting public and wrong decisions made after are decisions we live with, but to hide discovery until after the vote leads to a deceived voting public and a decision that should not be acceptable.

While I support Clark, I do so through personal research of what's available via open postings here on DU w/supported links and unsealed records, so far I find nothing to change my opinion that he is what he claims to be at this point in time, past revelations are just that...past, there is little in the past two years that I have had to re-evaluate and change, but there is also things I have and should the now revelation of misrepresentation surface, I will then reassess my support and possibly reconsider my choice.

CLARK FOR PRESIDENT
"I'm going to give them the TRUTH and they'll THINK it's hell."
Retyred IN FLA.