« NYT/WP vs. Social Security facts | Main | Obama and the "race card" debate »

July 31, 2008


I'm with Brendan on this. Clearly what any Administration ought to do is hire people with no awareness of whether there have been published articles reporting unsavory facts or intemperate remarks by them. Then the Administration's critics can run a Nexis check and not only attack the appointee but also attack the Administration for failing to vet its people.

I'm sure that's the way the Obama Administration will handle hiring, and I'm personally looking forward to discovering that its new hires for the Environment and Natural Resources Division of the Department of Justice, for example, have previously gone on record as saying that spotted owls are expendable and global warming is a crock. Fun times!

See, Rob, your response would have more credibility if we didn't already know that the Justice Department and Goodling in particular were specifically weeding out people for being Democrats, or liberals, or civil libertarians, or environmentalists, or rumored to be gay. These aren't considered unsavory facts by at least half of the country and certainly shouldn't be a criteria for vetting future prosecutors.

Your wish has been granted by someone already: http://www.cafepress.com/casedismissed

The comments to this entry are closed.