this is great

[ME BIGGD01]

two :thumbs: :thumbs: for these guys.


http://business.boston.com/business/globe/...nment_officials (http://business.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2003/07/04/website_turns_tables_on_government_officials)

[Mr Clean]

Good for them. What's good for the goose is good for the gander....

I do have one problem with that article. The clown from the ACLU, "Barry Steinhardt, director of the Technology & Liberty Program of the American Civil Liberties Union" said this:


But he noted that the public has a right to know some things about a politician that would be properly kept private about an ordinary citizen. For instance, voters have a right to know where a politician sends his children to school, if that politician has taken a strong stand on school vouchers.

That is bull****. A public official who stands for one side of a particular issue is not necessarily doing it based on their own personal feelings. They may not care about it and are only making their stand based on the views on their constituents. When you think about it, your representatives in government are supposed to be there for the majority opinion. They are supposed to stand for what the district wants.

You can't seperate a certain group of people because of their job and say that they have less right to privacy than everyone else. And if anyone should know that it should be the ACLU!

[ME BIGGD01]

I AGREE :thumbs:

can you imaginge what this country would be like if they actually went for what the majority wanted. this would be the best country in the world