Argument unravels: Dean still refuses to unseal Vt. gubernatorial records

Article goes on to discuss some of the personal letters already released.

http://news.bostonherald.com/national/national.bg?articleid=117

Despite his claim that he cannot release his gubernatorial papers because of privacy and safety concerns, Vermont Democrat Howard Dean has already made public sensitive security documents and letters detailing people's medical histories, records show.

Tucked in boxes of Dean's publicly available files, the documents obtained by the Herald appear to undercut the presidential front-runner's chief excuse for keeping many of his records private.

The records could bolster arguments from Dean rivals that the hidden papers in fact have little to do with personal data but feature the kinds of ``embarrassing'' revelations Dean last year said he feared would hurt his presidential campaign.

``My guess is that if Howard Dean and his advisers did not consider a document to be politically embarrassing, they released it,'' said Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, a Washington-based group suing to open Dean's secret files.

more...

for the nomination and general election...HE HAS NO PRIOR POLITICAL BAGGAGE....He remains Rove's nightmare.

What, Rove doesn't know about the "Clark was let go due to integrity issues" comments? How blind can you be? Rove has something on EVERYONE. And he doesn't even need it. HE'LL MAKE SHIT UP. He's done it before.

How you can go through life with these delusions is beyond me.

And NO I'm not attacking Clark. I'm refuting the absurd claim that Clark has no political baggage. EVERYONE has political baggage. Sorry to burst your bubble.

Like you said, if they exist....

:kick:

Rove doesn't need anything but his imagination and money. And he has plenty of both.

Dean? isn't the secrecy and sneakiness one of the things most people don't like about bush? what conrast do we have to offer if our nominee has behaved in the same way?

THINK

Sure he'll pull in the rabid liberals, but moderates will see little reason to vote for Dean over Bush- there simply is too little difference.

It was easy for the Boston Herald to catch him in this lie.

Weren't there like three threads about this yesterday? Did you just not know you're simplifying this?

This qualifies as a damn lie.

Bush took his governorship papers to his father's FEDERAL library to keep them out of the hands of the public.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/1000681.asp?cp1=1

A FLIP RESPONSE
Wink, wink.

Timing is everything in politics. Mike’s Periscope item in Newsweek hit the wires on Sunday. On Monday morning, Dean was asked about it on ABC’s “Good Morning America.” He gave a flippant — and, as it turned out, ill-informed — reply, arguing that he was doing nothing more than what George W. Bush had done at the end of his term in Texas. That’s hardly a strong argument to begin with, but the point is, it was factually wrong. Bush had tried to seal his records, but had ultimately failed, when the Texas attorney general ruled that they had to be placed in a public repository.

to quote a Vermont DUer from almost a year ago...."get used to it".

It's equivalent to having them unavailable to the public. Bush-hole has covered has ass well in this and Dean should do the same, or at least offer to match Bush record for record - and making them quickly accessible to the public instead of shrouding them in miles of red tape.

the people who use the TV as their primary source of news info will learn about and understand that point?

Repeating them doesn't make them true.

.

You responded "Excusing the ignorance of the public again?"

Asking a question is NOT the same as answering a question

How many times are you going to dupe your own posts?

Do you think the people who use the TV as their primary source of news info will learn about and understand that point

Follow up question: Does ignorance help your guy Kerry?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

about Dean's records. I sure hope he unseals them and lets you see them first.

Just think politicians of all parties shouldn't attempt to keep public records private in an effort to advance their own interests. If it's bad for Bush to do it (and I thought all DUers were in agreement it was), it's bad for Dean to do it. If Kucinich was sitting on a trove of public records and began dissembling in an effort to keep them private, I'd be posting about him, too.

n/t

releases "Poppy's" WH records, then Dean wil have to release his. In fact, I demand it...as soon as Bush releases his records. It's only fair.

It is state law and they were used by the Gore campaign in 2000... Its not true they are locked in daddies library. Just to clear that up. Bush wanted to seal them but he couldn't

n/c

Controversy arose over President Bush's decision to place the papers from his period as governor of Texas at his father's presidential library at Texas A & M, out of the reach of state archivists. Under Texas law, the governor's papers are public records. Open-government groups cried foul, and the attorney general ruled that the documents had to be turned over the state archives, where they are now being prepared for research and later will be shipped back to the Bush library, said Tonya Wood, an archivist.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2003/10/02/dean_is_asked_to_release_gubernatorial_records/

If you have any proof other than your faulty memory, please post it.

yeah....that works on a bumpersticker.....

pushed by the media

otherwise they would be all over the secrecy of the bush admin

He has records. They are sealed longer than the customary time. He said that there might be something in there. He refuses to let people see them. If he is witholding info it is another way of saying he is hiding something. I don't think it's phoney. I think Dean is phoney for acting like an open book, but really being as bad as Gov. Bush.

"I think Dean is phoney for acting like an open book, but really being as bad as Gov. Bush."

You know, I'm really dissapointed in a lot of view points on this website.

And we wonder why we can't get our shit together. So if he is "as bad as Bush" who will you vote for in a "bush - dean" election?

Sick, you people are sick. When I said "anyone but bush" I ment it. I wasn't just blowing smoke up everyones ass.

So if he is "as bad as Bush" who will you vote for in a "bush - dean" election?

That's at least the 3rd time you're using it today

So if he is "as bad as Bush" who will you vote for in a "bush - dean" election?

Come on it's in simple English. I dare you to answer it.

Dean has struck political gold but he certainly doesn't deserve it. And we certainly don't deserve to lose in a landslide to Bush becasue we were too shortsighted to see we nominated not only a slightly different version of Bush, but one lacking any credibility or authority to counter Bush's terrible foriegn policy.
Dean can't do that, but John Kerry can.

he's painting himself into a corner where he'll have no way to attack * on many important issues. He's GOT to disclose those records or risk being called a total hypocrit on the secrecy (including regarding 9/11) issue. I say this even though Clark's my favorite candidate, because I want whoever wins the nomination to have a rat's arse of a chance against dimson.

"The documents include five security directives from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the days after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks - several are direct correspondence from NRC Chairman Richard A. Meserve to Dean. Most of the papers are marked ``not for public disclosure'' and threaten civil and criminal penalties."

How the hell do we know what the documents include if they are sealed. Can someone help me figure out all of this?

the sealed documents in the argument were released publicly? Or Dean said that the sealed documnets included the articles in question?

<<<The documents include five security directives from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the days after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks - several are direct correspondence from NRC Chairman Richard A. Meserve to Dean. Most of the papers are marked ``not for public disclosure'' and threaten civil and criminal penalties.

Also readily available are letters written to and from Dean detailing personal struggles and medical conditions of his constituents. >>>

This were in his files that are open to the public, they are not the ones that have been sealed.

to the public. The government has access to them. People leak

Where have we heard this before?

Howard Dean seems afflicted with Brooklyn Bridge syndrome. This was epidemic when I was a kid -- its symptom being the explanation to a parent that you had done something stupid because a friend had done it first. "And if he jumped off the Brooklyn Bridge, would you follow?" the parent would ask. The answer was supposed to be no.

Dean has twice now evinced Brooklyn Bridge syndrome. The latest example came when he was asked why he had sealed his official papers as governor of Vermont for 10 years. This is four years longer than the recent custom, and Dean has been repeatedly asked why he negotiated such a long term. Dean's answer was that George Bush had done the same thing as governor of Texas.

"I'll unseal mine if he'll unseal all of his," Dean said, waxing about as Brooklyn Bridgeish as you can get....

....the fuss over his state papers has been around since the summer. Dean had plenty of time to come up with a better explanation than the one he gave -- especially when he got his facts wrong to boot."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A33561-2003Dec3.html

Because now Rove is comfortable that Dean will be the nominee? Time to strip the teflon?

Just part of the BFEE business plan.

.

It truly is amazing what one can learn by reading:

Howard Dean: the Progressive Anti-War Candidate?

Some Vermonters Give Their Views

By DONNA BISTER, MARC ESTRIN and RON JACOBS
(The Editorial Collective of the Old North End RAG)

Howard Dean the liberal, anti-war candidate? The laughter rings most loudly in Vermont.

As Dean's candidacy caught fire over the summer, a number of articles have appeared on the net examining his history and current stance on important national and international issues. They all point to a Clintonesque Republicrat whose stances are not far from that of the current administration.

Foreign Policy

Although he publicly opposed attacking Iraq -- a smart political move setting him apart from the other Democratic candidates -- Dean recently declared in a Washington Post interview that he is now opposed to a pullout of US troops from Iraq. According to the interview, he now feels we must stay as a matter of national security, and not allow another anti-American regime to develop. Of course, events on the ground seem to indicate that the occupation itself is what is creating anti-Americanism in Iraq, but most politicians wont acknowledge that. Deans basic objection to the war was to the Bush administrations unilateral approach, without UN approval. But what about Washington-driven wars that are not unilateral? What if the Security Council were arm-twisted into support? What about multilateral wars like the war on Iraq in 1991, or the ones on Yugoslavia and Afghanistan? Plain and simple--Dean supported them.

Although he would likely be more sparing in its application, Dean has endorsed the Bush doctrine of preventive war, saying that he would not rule out using military force to disarm either North Korea or Iran. Dean has never voiced an objection to the notion that it is Washington's prerogative to decide which countries may have nuclear weapons, or its right to forcefully disarm those who do not do so voluntarily. In addition, Dean does not support cutting the defense budget, either for routine military expenditures, now at over one billion dollars/day, nor the extra supplementary appropriations to support the Iraq occupation, currently at four billion dollars/month.

CONTINUED...

http://www.counterpunch.org/jacobs08292003.html

You're right - reading IS phundamental. Ever tried it?

He wasn't anti Iraq war. Invading 30 days later is NOT an antiwar stand. It's cutesy cover your ass talk.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Facts really scare the pants off you DeanHaters!

Dean supported Biden-Lugar which allowed a unilateral invasion of Iraq without UN or Congressional approval. Dean also called for a 60-day ultimatum for Saddam, followed by a unilateral invasion if Saddam did not comply.

Dean's actual words, during one of the debates:

"HOWARD DEAN: Well, as you know, I believed from the beginning that we should not go into Iraq without the United Nations as our partner. And in this situation, fortunately the president is finally beginning to see the light. We cannot do this by ourselves, we cannot have an American occupation and reconstruction. We have to have a reconstruction of Iraq with the United Nations, with NATO, and preferably with Muslim troops, particularly Arabic-speaking troops from our allies such as Egypt and Morocco. "

B/L only allowed a unilateral invasion without UN approval if it could be unequivocally proven that the US was under imminent threat. As we know this was never proven, nor was it true. Therefore Dean was correct and opposed this war.

But DeanHaters continue spreading lies, because it's all they have. Sad, sad thing.

George Bush Sr. and James Baker--saying he'd consider them for a job in his admin--I can't take a Kerryite bash of Dean as anything except desperation or RW manipulation.

try again

how is using his executive privilege to seal his records unethical?
be careful what you wish for: I predict reams of boring phone call logs and the like that will just further bolster the fact that Dean is who he says he is and had nothing to hide. Will just make all the people who wish the Democratic Party to splinter into quarreling factions embarrassed and all the more stupid-looking.

instead of lying as the Herald story revealed.

Sure, I knew you could:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=807497

But hey, the more time you obsess about Dean the less you are acomplishing anything for your candidate. In fact, I am sure Dean appreciates the free publicity. ;-)

Julie

I think you're smarter than that.

that criticism of Dean helps Dean. Yet, that doesn't stop them from complaining about our criticism.

has only seemed to help. You tell me.

Every time I see some issue or other proclaimed as the one that will stop Dean's success it turns out to be quite the opposite.

I guess we'll see, won't we?

Julie

this will all come home to roost. Hopefully before Iowa.

however, is the first article dealt with Dean's first clumsy attempt to keep public records private by claiming he'd unseal his when Bush unsealed his only to find out Bush had, unwillingly, already unsealed his. This article deals with his new clumsy attempt to claim he's not releasing the records out of concern for the privacy of his constituents, a claim this article would appear to demolish. If the story doesn't go away, I guess next he'll have to have his bloggers vote to keep the records sealed and then claim the Will of the People has tied his hands on the matter.

Justify all you want. You live for the bash and that's your problem. Enjoy. Keeps you unproductive, what more can one from an opposition camp ask for?

By all means, have at it. Work real long and hard on this. :-)

Julie

the same paragraph from an Adam Nagourney (of all people) article attacking Kerry would attempt to accuse someone else of being interested only in bashing. Anyway, I guess I'd claim I'm interested in facts and an approximation of the truth, at least as far as we're able to get, but who knows? Humans are notorious for falling prey to self-deception.

Maybe Dean's ever shifting stories on why public records are being held from public scrutiny are irrelevant when it comes to casting one's vote. Doesn't seem that way to me, though.

Because if Chimpy has them "open and public" but has to await approval from *'s ass-kissing AG, then there's no point in unsealing Dean's records.

Besides VT law allows Dean for sealing up to 6 years. Judical Watch can knock 4 years down from the original 10 years, but he'll have to wait till Dean's 2nd term in the middle before they get to dig any dirt.

Hawkeye-X

do you think the people whose main source for the news is TV will learn and understand those details?

Oh wait I get it. "We need to rise above it". Put on a halo. Maybe help guide the rifle barrel to our own foreheads. Good plan.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Whereas I choose to prod the public into looking at the facts. You know, facts; those things that send GOPers and antiDeans into a right froth.

I didn't know I was so powerful!!!

I am sangha!! Hear me ROAR!!!

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I am so powerful!!!!

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

.

Over at FreeRepublic....makes one wonder, doesn't it.

.

First, it will appease no one. Each unsealed document will be pored over and scrutnized for even the slightest bit of "juice."

Second, where is the "outrage" over the documents bush has kept sealed? His records while he was governor (ALL of them), the materials requested by the 9/11 panel, reports requested from Cheney regarding his secret meetings with energy corporations, etc.?

Finally, for those of you who say x candidate would be better because he/she "has no baggage" -- bull!! They ALL have baggage, and if they don't, baggage will be created. Even boy scouts like Gore and Dukakis had "baggage" in the end. The thing is that crap like this (and MUCH worse) will be swung at WHOEVER gets the nomination. Are we going to fight this, or are we going to do what we do best -- cower and say "I told you so"?

If it's simply privacy then names can be withheld. It's apparently more than that.

Dean has given two different reasons for not releasing papers, and the latest reason is an obvious sham

"I'll unseal mine if he'll unseal all of his," Dean said....

As a statement of principle, Dean's rejoinder lacked a certain something -- substance.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A33561-2003Dec3.html

Makes me wonder who you're really working for.

Incidentally, it makes zero political sense to give your opponent ammunition while you let them keep theirs from you. This is what the old dems do - "shoot thyself in foot, then lose".

no one said they want Bush*'s files sealed.

Incidentally, it makes zero political sense to give your opponent ammunition while you let them keep theirs from you.

So then why is Dean using the bogus excuse of protecting people's privacy? Why is Dean DENYING that he did it to avoid embarrassment?

"no one said they want Bush*'s files sealed."

What does this mean? He already has certain files sealed. Don't you want to have access to them? Or is this just a requirement for Dean?

How do you know Dean is NOT protecting peoples' privacy? You said it's a bogus excuse to say so. In order for you to say that you must have inside information that he is not telling the truth on this. Let's see your evidence....or you will be guilty of the "straw man".


And a few lies.

No one here is arguing about Bush*'s files being released. It's just you imagining things.

How do you know Dean is NOT protecting peoples' privacy?

Because the law prevents the release of private info, and Dean has already released personal info about people.

Let's see your evidence....or you will be guilty of the "straw man"

So it turns out YOU don't know what a "straw man" is!!!

Unsupported arguments are NOT "Straw men"

"Because the law prevents the release of private info, and Dean has already released personal info about people"

With their permission and knowledge, or he'd be in several law suits over it, which he's not.

Is this all you have?

With their permission and knowledge, or he'd be in several law suits over it, which he's not.

From the article:

"Also made public: a 1991 letter to Sheri Arpin of St. Albans, who wrote Dean looking for help with her depression.

Arpin said she was shocked the letter was released, given Dean's claims that he's protecting those who wrote to him. ``I figured he read it, sent it through the shredding machine or in a personal file,'' she said yesterday. ``I wish he had. That was a time when I was extremely ill.''

Officials of the Dean campaign did not return calls for comment yesterday"

Nope. Care to try again?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

You said Sherrie gave permission. Where is it?

He's running in a primary against eight other Democrats - so I don't understand the reference to Bush's records. Perhaps he's afraid to give his opponents (the eight Democrats) ammunition to use against him?

Dean has three different reasons for sealing the papers.

1) Embarrassing
2) Privacy
3) Bush* should do it first

Dean's internet fundraising. The Hive has noted your name and will be watching for further deviations.

of course you know that but you chose to tell a clowing tale.

1. Developers v. Environmentalists
2. Walmarts R Us
3. non-Union Business
4. Unfunding the Underfunded Public Defenders Office
5. CYA Police Brutality.

There are more areas to ponder, but I'm hoping they'll get overlooked when vetting.

and Dean standing up for his closest political friend- Attorney General William Sorrell.

http://www.justiceforwoody.org/story/sorrell.html

A remarkable interview, for those interested in learning about the real Ho-Ho:

Excerpts from Interview with Peter Freyne

From "Democracy in Action"

EXCERPT...

QUESTION: When did that happen?

FREYNE: That would have been around 1980...  It's the party job.  Perfunctory thing.  You run a meeting.  There's not a whole lot of activity on it.  You get together at election time...  They're always looking to find someone for those jobs--who wants to do it?  But then I guess he went to the Democratic Convention, became a delegate, the whole story about him and Esther Sorrell...has already been written up.  Billy Sorrell's now the Attorney General; Howard tried to appoint him Supreme Court Chief Justice but it didn't fly.  Sorrell didn't get through the committee.  They had set up a mechanism for judicial review of some kind and Sorrell didn't make the cut.

SNIP...

He stood right up to the Democratic liberals right away.  We started to see what he was about.  That's when I started to notice the Howard Dean of Park Avenue and East Hampton and Yale University.  He was never part of the tax and spend liberal Democratic wing, ever. 

CONTINUED...

http://www.gwu.edu/%7Eaction/2004/dean/dean0702/freyneint.html

http://www.sevendaysvt.com/insidetrack/

...

'Seriously folks, what the journalism stars of Washington have missed here is what other governors, including Gov. George W. Bush of Texas, did with their secret files. Only Dean’s, however, appear to matter.
According to a 2002 study by Professor Charles Schultz, 28 states have a law requiring governors’ records go to the state archives. Only 20 states, however, actually make it a practice. In Colorado they’re sealed for 25 years. In Maryland it’s 30 years.

How did George W. Bush deal with his gubernatorial records in Texas?

Our research indicates Dubya’s done a better job than Dean of keeping his from public view.'

...

Bush-hole has daddy's library to hide his in.

because Texas AG wouldn't let him.
Once again, despite what many Deanies believe and Dean himself apparently believed when on Good Morning America, Bush Jr. records are available and not sealed!

"Our research indicates Dubya’s done a better job than Dean of keeping his from public view."

We're democrats, remember? We don't go after the opposition, because to do so would make us "angry" and we're not supposed to get "angry." But our own? SURE!!!

...that we have an actual CRIMINAL sitting in the WH and Democrats are busy eating their own.

This is smelling more and more like their intent. You know what got me suspicious? When I read some of Dr Funkenstein's antiDean posts right from the board of the talking point drones at Freeperville.

Almost word for word.

I don't know why he spends so much time attacking Democrats.

Oh you're a funny one!

I think he is holding out on opening the records purposely. Then he will give the ok to open them. And guess what? There is no "there" there. Makes them all look like complete fools. He wins again.

if he releases the records after saying releasing the records will damage people's privacy.

1) Why would Dean want to give any ammo to the opposition (ie, the REPUBLICANS, in case anyone has forgot) by opening up all his records? Everyone knows damn well that Karl Rove would have a team in there ASAP pouring over everything to dredge up even the teensiest little detail that he could use against Dean. And it wouldn't even have to be something legit. It could be another Dukakis-like "he let all the felons out of prison" type shit, but it still works, sadly enough.

2) Dean can make this an issue against Bush if he keeps his records sealed. Not being able to look at them, Rove and company will instead complain that Dean is secretive. Then Dean can say "you are calling ME secretive???" and then go on to list every thing the Bush admin has done, INCLUDING the outright refusal to give up documents despite SEVERAL court orders. Suddenly a few papers about governing Vermont doesn't seem such a big deal.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/02/national/02DEAN.html

Questioned on the ABC News program "Good Morning America" about his handling of the papers, Dr. Dean tried to turn the issue back on President Bush, who originally sent his own papers from his years as governor of Texas to his father's presidential library.

"I'll unseal mine if he will unseal all of his," said Dr. Dean, who is seeking the Democratic presidential nomination.

But Mr. Bush's Texas records were moved back to state custody after a ruling from the attorney general, and an archivist for the state said the Bush records were available for viewing.

Contrary to what many seem to think, the Texas AG ruled despite Bush's attempt to divert records to father's library, the records remain in the jurisdication of the Texas State Library and Archives Commission subject to the Texas Public Information Act. The Bush records are not sealed.

Here is relevant Texas AG opinion for all you lawyerly types . . .
http://www.oag.state.tx.us/opinopen/opinions/op49cornyn/jc-0498.htm

http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/tslac/40078/tsl-40078.html

SNIP..."Restrictions on Access
Records in process: Because of the possibility that portions of these records fall under Public Information Act exceptions, an archivist must review these records before they can be accessed for research. The records may be requested for research under the provisions of the Public Information Act (V.T.C.A., Government Code, Chapter 552). The researcher may request an interview with an archivist or submit a request by mail, fax, or email including enough description and detail about the information requested to enable the archivist to accurately identify and locate the information requested. If our review reveals information that may be excepted by the Public Information Act, we are obligated to seek an open records decision from the Attorney General on whether the records can be released. The Public Information Act allows the Archives ten working days after receiving a request to make this determination. The Attorney General has 45 working days to render a decision. Alternately, the Archives can inform you of the nature of the potentially excepted information and if you agree, that information can be redacted or removed and you can access the remainder of the records.

We have here a case of this paper digging up the few documents from a decade in VT, that were not sealed. They attack Dean for sealing records, then attack him for not sealing all of them. Yet they mention that some of the letters actualy have not for public release stamped on them.


``There are some that are left private . . . some of the kinds of things might be a letter from a constituent saying, `Dear governor, I am an HIV, AIDS victim, can you please help me?' Now, those kinds of letters do not belong in the public, and they're not. That's why some records are sealed,'' Dean said on MSNBC Monday. But the documents obtained by the Herald appear to include the information Dean says he wants protected.

The documents include five security directives from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the days after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks - several are direct correspondence from NRC Chairman Richard A. Meserve to Dean. Most of the papers are marked ``not for public disclosure'' and threaten civil and criminal penalties.

...

Also made public: a 1991 letter to Sheri Arpin of St. Albans, who wrote Dean looking for help with her depression.

Arpin said she was shocked the letter was released, given Dean's claims that he's protecting those who wrote to him. ``I figured he read it, sent it through the shredding machine or in a personal file,'' she said yesterday. ``I wish he had. That was a time when I was extremely ill.''
________________________________________________________________

to mischaracterize the criticism as being "They attack Dean for sealing records, then attack him for not sealing all of them."

They're attacking Dean for saying he wants to protect people's privacy when, in the past, he has shown no concern for their privacy

This is news?

Folks in congress do it too... or will Kerry and Gephardt be making all of thir private communications public as well?

This is yet another standard for bashing Dean.

Bush took heat because he tried to seal ALL his records... not just private corrispondance.

Dean is only sealed the commmunications, not the records of actions or policies etc. If I were gay and in VT and had written the gov a letter saying that I'm gay and my partner has AIDS so civil unions are important to me because of hospital visitation... should that letter be made public, outing me and my partner?

I think not.

BUt the dean bashers have nothing else, so what do you expect.

If I were gay and in VT and had written the gov a letter saying that I'm gay and my partner has AIDS so civil unions are important to me because of hospital visitation... should that letter be made public, outing me and my partner?

If released, the law requires that you name and any other identifying info be redacted. Your privacy would be protected.

http://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/candlook.asp?CID=N00025663

It looks like he stayed up late, playing cards and then had to pull an all nighter just to get these done. Kinda like when he was in college.

http://www.yaledailynews.com/article.asp?AID=21441

Find me a doctor who has good penmanship and I;ll show you an imposter.

and buy yourself a sense of humor

If you have bad handwriting, make a little effort and type your filings so they're legibile.

Make it look like you take it seriously.

(oh, and by the way, I was tyring to be funny.)

I was also trying to be light hearted!

Gold star for the curve blowing nerds who TYPED their papers!

Bush tried to hide his records in 2000 but couldn't because of the demand of Gore. If Bush records are open to the public since 2000 then I don't see why Dean should be kept hidden.

.

anti-regulation... bashing avoiding the draft... now defending invasion of privacy.

Hard to tell what side these folks are on, isn't it?

;-)

He took them and stashed them at his daddy's library. The state AG ruled that the public records had to be publicly accessable... however Bush's private corrispondance is still sealed, just as those communications are sealed by pretty much every gov.


And those records contain names of folks who were asking Dean for help on civil unions and other issues where they wouldn't want their names made public.

Should Dean out these people?


Will CLark be making records of his private communications while he was a defense lobbyist public?

May a police officer say the same thing to you when trying to search your car for no reason.

The Boston Herald,quite possibly the most right-wing paper in the nation,attacking a Dem.

If people read the article the only thing even remotely damning is the fact there were personal letters about the medical history of some constituants in there,stuff that shouldn't be public.But take a look at the picture with the article and look and the amount of files!There's bound to be stuff that people can use against Dean if that's their inclination . Just like Larry Klayman,who apparently some here agree with.

Having said all that I wish Dean WOULD release all the files because if there's nothing there it might finally shut some the wankers from both parties up.

:)

I didn't bother to click the link until I saw the locked thread with this:

"Also made public: a 1991 letter to Sheri Arpin of St. Albans, who wrote Dean looking for help with her depression.

Arpin said she was shocked the letter was released, given Dean's claims that he's protecting those who wrote to him. ``I figured he read it, sent it through the shredding machine or in a personal file,'' she said yesterday. ``I wish he had. That was a time when I was extremely ill.''

Officials of the Dean campaign did not return calls for comment yesterday."

This is really damning of Dean's principles. No wonder the campaign had no comment. I would be left speechless too.

Dean is a jerk of mammoth proportions, yet "the love" is too strong to allow valid criticism.

And this is what you call valid criticism. Well H_O_L_Y CRAP. I'm gonna have to share that wth all of my friends. If you're not careful you'll end up on a list like the one we find here on Mondays.

take your pick.

This guy isn't ready for prime time

God forbid anyone actually atttempt to decipher these clear and obvious allegations you make. I'm guessing you're not a lawyer!

and valid criticisms. Keep 'em coming!

I like Dean a lot and have him my #2 choice behind Clark. There's probably nothing of substance in those records and I think it's a mistake not to make them available to the public. The innuendo this creates is probably more damaging to Dean than any embarrassments the records may potentially contain. The Bush Presidency has been the most secretive administration in my long memory, from their refusal to hand over documents on Cheney's energy task force list, as well as the briefings President Bush received that should have alerted him to 9/11. We need transparency in government and the accountability that transparency engenders. Dean should lead by example, in letting us know that if elected, he will have a truly transparent administration where the American people are given the information they need to make informed decisions in a Democracy. Dean is not just a private citizen; he's running for the highest office and we need to know everything about him. Although I still like him a lot, I think this is a mistake that won't go away and it leaves me disappointed.

at least by me, thanks.

:kick: