|
Sinergy -> RE: Canidates refuse to disclose tax returns (5/16/2007 5:29:58 PM)
|
What we see here is damage control by candidates who dont want to disclose their conflicts of interest, faced with the problem that one of them broke ranks (Obama) and presented his. The ones who refused now look guilty, whether they are or not. The media spin will be to convince the public that candidates have a right to privacy. That way the people who believe media spin will champion their right to not disclose. I do not believe it for a minute. Want to keep your affairs and life private, do not apply for the job (seek to run for office) as a public servant. Decide to run as a public servant, expect everybody and their dog to search for your skeletons in the closet. As Real0ne said, they ARE applying for a job as a public servant. What determines whether they get the job is public perception. All but one shot themselves in the head right out of the gate. I think it is hilarious. I personally dont care whether they have conflicts of interest or refuse to provide their tax returns. The damage is already done; Obama presented his for public scrutiny and is way ahead of the rest of them as far as credibility and openness is concerned. Half of the ones who refused to provide their tax returns are already fighting to explain their vote supporting the AUMF. Sinergy p.s. On a related note, this flap will have blown over with all of them dangling in the wind like ex-pirates, and will not touch Al Gore a year from now if he decides to run. The battle will already be fought. If the politicians win their fight to keep their affairs private, he can simply say "gee, you didnt force them to, why should I?" If they dont win their fight to keep their affairs private, he may/may not have any more skeletons in his closet than the rest of them. Win / win for Gore.
|
|
|
|