For years now, the NY Times has been championing Henry Waxman’s idiotic case against Dick Cheney on his right to keep private the notes of meetings that led up to the creation of the Energy Bill. The case is now over, Cheney has been vindicated, but to Gail Collins and company, he is still guilty.
This administration, and any administration, should have the right to meet privately to receive advice. Making all hearings public risks the chance of encouraging grooupthink, keeping people from giving advice they feel correct but that could be hurtful to them, and we simply need an executive branch that is able to receive unjaundiced advice when it wants.
In this case, the Times and Democrats did not like the energy bill, so instead of attacking the legislation itself, they attempted to create an impression of wrongdoing with HOW the bill was made. It was absurd, and the courts agreed. However, with the NY Times, this administration is always wrong:
Fortunately, the new ruling, turning mostly on the precise wording of the statute, at least appears to leave room for Congress to revise the Federal Advisory Committee Act to make it harder to shield the activities of future White House task forces from public scrutiny. Representative Henry Waxman, the California Democrat, has introduced a bill to do that, and also reverse other administration actions undermining open government and the public’s right to know.
Of course, having now achieved his legal victory, nothing stops Mr. Cheney from voluntarily coming clean about the secret deliberations of his task force. Just don’t hold your breath.
“Turned on the precise wording of the statute” means that Cheney followed the law, and the NY Times has been full of shit since day one, acting as Waxman’s attack dog. Hacks.