We've got to figure out a way that we give a private sphere for our public leaders. We're not gonna get the best people in public life if we don't do that.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I believe if a private citizen is able to affect public opinion in a constructive way he doesn't have to be an elected public servant to perform a public service.
The public good is in nothing more essentially interested, than in the protection of every individual's private rights.
So there's always been this clash between what is the public good - that which belongs to all of us in common - and what can be exploited for a private interest.
The problem is that the American public is suspicious of executive power shrouded in secrecy. In the absence of an official picture of what our government is doing, and by what authority, many in the public fill the void by envisioning the worst.
The private sector doesn't sit around and say - 'Well, since the president said we should do this, we should do it.'
There is this absurd assumption that the revitalisation of the public sphere is always a good thing. I think people tend to confuse 'civic' and 'civil,' and they believe that everything that is done by citizens is necessarily a good thing because you build a network, an association.
In this digital age, there is no place to hide behind public relations people. This digital age requires leaders to be visible and authentic and to be able to communicate the decisions they've made and why they've made them, to be able to acknowledge when they've made a mistake and to move forward, to engage in the debate.
We have tried you good people of the public and we have found you wanting.
Give the public what they want. What you want is unimportant.
As Members of Congress, we should not be using public office for private gain.