Monday, March 19, 2007

The Clinton Library: No Release of Hillary Documents Yet, After 16 Months

Tim Graham of the Media Research Center passes on this eyebrow-raising story:

The [Bill Clinton Presidential Library] museum's 138-million-page presidential archive could play an important role in determining how Hillary Rodham Clinton's controversial White House past will affect her attempt to reclaim 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

"I haven't received any documents or even a note indicating that they're searching the records," said Jeff Gerth, a former New York Times reporter who requested a wide range of the first lady's files for an unauthorized Clinton biography he's working on.

With the 2008 election looming, researchers are eager to unearth undisclosed details from eight years marked by controversy, scandal and high-wire politics.

The Clintons' longtime personal lawyer, Bruce Lindsey, who helped defend the couple in the 1990s, has veto power over the release of the most sensitive documents. Attempts to contact Lindsey weren't successful...

Requests also have been filed for the internal correspondence of Clinton's ill-fated early-1990s health care reform task force (despite a court ruling saying its deliberations could remain private) and detailed files on Filegate, Travelgate, Whitewater, Monica Lewinsky, the pardons scandal and even back-and-forth about Clinton's 2000 Senate bid.

Sixteen months after the library started accepting applications, no major request for sensitive documents pertaining to Clinton's first-lady years have been released.

Gerth, whose request was logged on Jan. 17, 2006, should be among the first to receive documents - or a rejection letter - based on the library's first-come, first-served policy. He has received neither.

National Archives officials say the sheer volume of interest in both Clintons is slowing things down. As of last month, the archive had received 336 requests for documents, correspondence and e-mails totaling 9 million pages. That's three timesthe material requested from George H.W. Bush's archive in its first year.

Is anyone really shocked by this? A little while back, Mickey Kaus offered this revealing anecdote of the mentality of the Clintonites:

I don't think it's too much to draw a line from Hillary's attempt to suppress the speech of her fellow candidates to a general, instinctive distaste for the tumult and self-expression inherent in democracy itself. One thinks of Clintonite Roberta Achtenberg's seeming tolerance, as a HUD official, of her agency's intimidating investigations of local opponents of group homes for the handicapped. (Defending the investigations, Achtenberg told the NYT, "These are very difficult judgments that have to be made." No they're not, at least if you have any feel for democracy.) 

Everybody who goes into government believes that they're making the world a better place. What an informed citizenry ought to be wary of are the ones who believe that the end justifies the means, and that because these elites have such noble goals, they're entitled to a little extra secrecy, intimidation, suppression of criticism, paranoia, etc. (Yes, liberal e-mailers, I know this administration is guilty of this as well. Bad behavior knows no partisan boundary.)

Apparently while I was out of the country, Congress passed some law that every radio station must play John Mayer's "Waiting On The World To Change" at least once an hour. Because the world needs another heavy-handed "sensitive" protest song. Anyway, I was rolling my eyes to the rhythm when I heard these closing lyrics:

we keep on waiting waiting on the world to change
one day our generation
is gonna rule the population
so we keep on waiting
waiting on the world to change

You know, I don't care if our generation moves up in the world, gets good jobs, lives their dreams. But I don't particularly want to rule the population, and I don't really want John Mayer or anybody else ruling it either.

It's not enough for John Mayer and the protest-rock enthusiasts to merely "bring our neighbors home from war"; no, they need to rule the population. It is not merely, "free me from the control of those in power"; the song's cry is a pledge that someday, they will be in power and we will be in their control whether we like it or not.

The refusal to release documents from the library, the investigation of opponents of their policies, applauding a pledge to rule all... somehow, I sense a theme here.

03/19 01:56 PMShare