Looking at the job description

I've been meaning to ask this myself. Anonymous Liberal runs down the list, pointing to absurdity of the increasingly lame excuses the White House has proffered for allegedly losing all those emails. It's a great post that should be read in full but one question in particular stands out.

There is no reason these RNC accounts had to be used to the extent they were (or utilize such draconian deletion policies). If Karl Rove truly feels that compliance with the Hatch Act requires him to conduct 95% of his business via a private RNC email account, perhaps he should be asked to explain why he deserves to be on the public payroll at all? Why should he get 100% of his salary if he's only devoting 5% of his time to official business?

I've been thinking about this all week. Why should the taxpayer be paying 100% of the salaries of any of the 50 people who did enough outside politicking to require the issuance of the laptops? In fact why do any of it within the confines of the people's house at all? We're footing the utilities and the office space at the very least and any time they spend on these matters, is time they're not spending on conducting the people's business.

If the average Jake needs to do any extensive amount of personal work, they don't do it on their employer's dime. They would lose their jobs. They have to take the day off. Why should the taxpayer's employees get a better deal than they have themselves? Perhaps if our government workers were required to do their jobs instead of spending their time figuring out how to keep their employers in office, we would have a better government.

Libby Spencer