It's like the classic Clinton alibi, "it depends on what the definition of 'is', is." What is "transparency" in government. I guess it all depends. Remember when the Bamster was campaigning? I don't mean today or last week or last month, I mean when campaigns traditionally occur--before the election. I'll admit he hasn't stopped campaigning. It's the only thing he has actual real-world experience in. The one-trick pony has been very good at it, but it is too much like Riverdance. The novelty wears off.
He promised us the most transparent administration we have ever seen. We were going to become privy to the process of how our lives are shaped by the regime which seeks involvement in every aspect. We were going to know who said what to whom and when. What did they say and when did they say it. Laws were not going to spring full-blown from the forehead of Zeus or even Rahm Emanuel. The doors would be open. Information would flow.
But what does "transparency" really mean? Something which is transparent cannot be seen. It isn't visible. It is invisible. We can possibly feel it or perceive the effects, but we can't detect it visually. That apparently is the transparency the Messiah meant.
The "Ethics Czar" has apparently been exiled. Possibly he was lifting veils or switching off the Romulan cloaking device on policy.
Able I Was Ere I Saw the Czech Republic
It is unlikely that we will hear much anymore from Prague regarding transparency in our government. The replacement for the erstwhile czar seems to be a dedicated functionary in the Daley/Blago/Emanuel/Obama mold.
Lots more midnight meetings behind closed doors inside the beltway. Lots more Cornhusker Kickbacks, Louisiana Purchases and pay-to-play deals in our future. Transparent, all of them.
No comments:
Post a Comment