Looks like Mr. 9/11 is in for some stormy weather. Even the New York Times covered the story about Rudy paying the security costs for his Long Island adulterous trysts out of the budgets of obscure city agencies. (It should be pointed out, however, that the Times obligingly buried the story in the back pages of Section A, and tried its best to cover for Rudy).
Today we learn that Rudy’s initial excuse (I knew nothing about it, and anyway I got security everywhere, even my love nests) because besides paying the extra security costs for the Long Island love romps, the taxpayers of New York were footing the bill for a chauffeur and security for the little lady, whether she was with the Mayor or no. As icing on the cake, it turns out that the trips to Long Island may have been necessitated, at least in part, by the fact that the Mayor’s preferred love nest, the one located at 7 World Trade Center, had been destroyed. You may remember that was the spot Rudy chose as the emergency command center, over the advice of the experts. It was more important to Rudy that he had he could have Judy conveniently close by. The American people are still largely ignorant about the fact that Rudy was running around New York that day because he literally had nowhere else to go. That’s a fact that may just get a little more coverage now. It’s amazing how adding a little sex to a story makes it so much easier to understand.
But there’s another story hidden in this story, one more important but a lot less sexy. The most important thing we should want to know about any presidential candidate is how he or she will actually conduct themselves as president. Are we in for four to eight more years of Constitution trampling and arrogant governance, or will we have a president who knows at least some bounds, and recognizes some limits on his/her actions.
One of the hallmarks of the Bush near dictatorship has been its refusal to operate in the open. It essentially asserts the right to operate in total secrecy, and to a large extent it has gotten away with doing so. If the next president isn’t reined in, or doesn’t rein himself in, then we are in real trouble. That’s why this is troubling:
When the fact that the security detail was accompanying him on the visits to Ms. Nathan’s condominium was first reported in May 2000, the Giuliani administration refused to provide an accounting of the expenses, suggesting that it was a security issue.
Perhaps Bush has made more patently absurd claims, but I doubt it. There is no logical reason why the costs of providing security to the Mayor and his girlfriend affects security. For that matter, exactly whose security would be threatened? If he was willing to pull that type of stuff as Mayor then imagine what he’ll be doing as president. There is no greater danger to a democracy than an executive who firmly believes that the public has no business knowing what its government is doing.
