DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - TSA nominee misled Congress about accessing confidential records

**GVsdJZ2H** · 02-01-2010, 07:16 PM

The quest for perfection in government is noble, especially coming from the unabashed supporters of a drunk driving, convicted vandal as president.
Does one consider the requirement that the nominee be human, and as a human will have faults?
Twenty years ago is a long time, a person going through a divorce who's wife and children are living with another man may have enough curiosity about that man as to cause him to violate rules which are violated every day by hundreds, if not thousands of people in the law enforcement community.
The incident is on his record, he explained it imperfectly, but I don't see where the "misled congress" headline is justified.
The real issue is will this nominee make the country safer in the position for which he has been nominated.
Then again maybe the GOP should filibuster every Obama nominee, then if there is a terrorist event they can say they were right, and isn't the death of thousands of ordinary Americans worth it if it benefits the Republican Party?

Whatever you can find out about someone through public channels is quite OK. But you violate a sacred trust when you go poking around in something you have no right to. Just because 'hundreds or thousands' do it doesn't justify someone else doing the same thing. As to that hundreds or thousands statement, do you have any evidence that this happens that frequently?

I have known people to lose jobs in health care over this kind of thing. There was a supervisor where I worked whose husband was in the hospital. She would come in and the staff would know his labs before she would. When she complained employees were terminated. In health care you don't even have the right to access your OWN records without going through the proper channels.

I'll cut NO slack on this one. The man is either ethical or he isn't. He isn't. End of story. Point. Blank. Period.

02-01-2010, 07:16 PM	#9
GVsdJZ2H Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 442 Senior Member	The quest for perfection in government is noble, especially coming from the unabashed supporters of a drunk driving, convicted vandal as president. Does one consider the requirement that the nominee be human, and as a human will have faults? Twenty years ago is a long time, a person going through a divorce who's wife and children are living with another man may have enough curiosity about that man as to cause him to violate rules which are violated every day by hundreds, if not thousands of people in the law enforcement community. The incident is on his record, he explained it imperfectly, but I don't see where the "misled congress" headline is justified. The real issue is will this nominee make the country safer in the position for which he has been nominated. Then again maybe the GOP should filibuster every Obama nominee, then if there is a terrorist event they can say they were right, and isn't the death of thousands of ordinary Americans worth it if it benefits the Republican Party? Whatever you can find out about someone through public channels is quite OK. But you violate a sacred trust when you go poking around in something you have no right to. Just because 'hundreds or thousands' do it doesn't justify someone else doing the same thing. As to that hundreds or thousands statement, do you have any evidence that this happens that frequently? I have known people to lose jobs in health care over this kind of thing. There was a supervisor where I worked whose husband was in the hospital. She would come in and the staff would know his labs before she would. When she complained employees were terminated. In health care you don't even have the right to access your OWN records without going through the proper channels. I'll cut NO slack on this one. The man is either ethical or he isn't. He isn't. End of story. Point. Blank. Period.
	Quote