Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama blocks list of visitors to White House

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 08:30 AM
Original message
Obama blocks list of visitors to White House
Source: MSNBC

Obama blocks list of visitors to White House
Taking Bush's position, administration denies msnbc.com request for logs

By Bill Dedman

The Obama administration is fighting to block access to names of visitors to the White House, taking up the Bush administration argument that a president doesn't have to reveal who comes calling to influence policy decisions.

Despite President Barack Obama's pledge to introduce a new era of transparency to Washington, and despite two rulings by a federal judge that the records are public, the Secret Service has denied msnbc.com's request for the names of all White House visitors from Jan. 20 to the present. It also denied a narrower request by the nonpartisan watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, which sought logs of visits by executives of coal companies.

CREW says it will file a lawsuit Tuesday against the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees the Secret Service.

Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31373407 /
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
MNDemNY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 08:35 AM
Response to Original message
1. Defenders?? Anyone???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Javaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:41 AM
Response to Reply #1
37. I'm waiting for the folks who say...
"Obama is a poker player, a long term viewer, he wouldn't be doing this unless he has a master plan, it will all be revealed later that it is actually a stroke of genius", blah blah blah.

So tiring.

I now am giving limited support to Obama, but I am just going to say, he was never my first choice. Kucinich was my guy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #37
121. You forgot a couple
We have to trust "our" president! He knows what he's doing!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pundaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #121
202. No, he has to earn our trust
Aside from talking points, I am seeing no improvement. Time to retire the Repugs, admit that the Dems have occupied the right wing, and add a new second party for the majority of us - the People's Party, I only trust Democrats to CAVE IN to the Repugs, that is the trust they continue to earn every day.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happygoluckytoyou Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #202
255. stem cell is back... green energy is on the table... global opinion... IM NOT READY TO WRITE HIM OFF
i agree he has a lot to prove.... but he has taken steps in several areas which i appreciate----- AND HE HASN'T CLEARED A SINGLE ACRE OF TEXAS BRUSH...
taken steps on health care... education... jobs... stimulus package... focus on leaving iraq and on afghanistan... loosened restrictions on CUBA...

HE WAS NOT ELECTED ONLY BY PROGRESSIVES.... HE HAS A GREAT MANDATE, BUT IT HAS A BASE IN "SOMEWHAT LEFT OF CENTER"


not perfect by any means------- but....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happygoluckytoyou Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 07:04 PM
Response to Reply #255
256. oh.... and an american president who SAYS there should be a 2-state solution in the mid-east...
come on.... how about a little credit for the guy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FedUp_Queer Donating Member (679 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-17-09 07:46 AM
Response to Reply #256
309. Credit, eh?
Keeping Bagram (Guantanamo in Afghanistan open); allowing further discharges under DADT; continuing TARP; oh, and we can NOT forget Mr. "Fierce Advocate" for we GLBT folks. Wow...with "Fierce Advocates" like that, who NEEDS the right wing...oh wait, Dick Cheney and Ted Olson are to the left of Mr. "Fierce Advocate" on these issues. Give me a break. Obama has made some changes, yes, but "Change We Can Believe In?" Not hardly. He DOES give a good speech (and to think I supported him).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
allincompassing Donating Member (18 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-17-09 12:18 AM
Response to Reply #202
297. Pay close attention, I'm only going to say this once!
THE MILITARY STRATEGY OF DIVIDE and conquer--as first developed by the Chinese general, Sun Tzu, 2,500 years ago--has been used successfully down the centuries by empire builders as a means to subdue subjugated nations, thus maintaining power more easily.

If you want to know what's changed since Pres. Obama got in office, check out this link

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/ruling... /

If you want to know why he can't divulge who is visiting the Whitehouse, read the following book.

Family of Secrets: The Bush Dynasty the Powerful forces that put it in the Whitehouse, and what their
Influence means to America.

MSNBC, CNN, FOX, ABC, CBS all represent specific corporate interest that are going to lose money as Pres.
Obama's legislative agenda moves forward. Most importantly, peace in the middle-east represents the single
greatest threat to the Military War profiteers. There are powerful Israeli Lobbyist that will do anything to
defeat the presidents middle-east agenda. Haven't you noticed that none of the potential defeats in congress
reared their ugly little heads until he started to put pressure on Israel. Aipac owns our government, and for the
first time in almost 50 years we are addressing that issue. If you really want to know what to do, check out this photo!

http://www.bobcesca.com/blog-archives/2008/09/awesome_h...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FedUp_Queer Donating Member (679 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-17-09 07:47 AM
Response to Reply #297
310. Thanks for the clarification.
Secrecy is good when the "good guys" do it, but bad when "they" do. Gotcha!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
barbtries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #37
179. me too
after i gave up on Gore.

but i was positively euphoric when obama won in november. today i am sad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MNDemNY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 04:42 PM
Response to Reply #37
221. No not poker, chess....
bad news is that we are all just pawns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChazII Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 04:51 PM
Response to Reply #221
223. Sadly, I agree with you. Pawns
in a chess game describes what we are in this political game.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mike K Donating Member (539 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 05:43 PM
Response to Reply #37
238. Obama vs Kucinich
Mine, too. Even though it seemed clear that Kucinich wouldn't stand a chance in our corrupted political system I was extremely disappointed by the margin he lost by.

Although Obama is a vast improvement over Bush it seems rather clear that he is in the pocket of the finance industry. I believe a Kucinich presidency was necessary for the resurrection of America as we've known it in the past. We're not going to see that with Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pokercat999 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 06:45 PM
Response to Reply #238
248. I don't think Kucinich would have brought back an old
America. I think he would have made a new America, much better for average people, much stronger in the world via peace, more valuable for future generations and maybe for the first time in a long time, maybe for the first time ever.......he would have brought JUSTICE, to America.

Too bad we got Obama, the slightly better choice than the rethug guy. I know some reading this will fame me, call me a DINO or worse, but sometimes it tough to face the truth. LOOK AT THE POLICIES, NOT THE MAN! President Obama is a beautiful figurehead, his speeches are superb, his family and his life is one the whole of America can admire.........JUST LOOK AT HIS POLICIES.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Celtic_88 Donating Member (23 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #248
262. Look At his policies!
I am looking at them!
I don't like what i'm seeing .. I wonder did I do the wrong thing when I voted for him. I have 3 more years to make up my mind on if I'll vote for him again/ Right now I would say no!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:58 AM
Response to Reply #1
48. All I can offer up is fact
<<Asked Monday whether the White House plans to continue to oppose release of the records, White House spokesman LaBot said the policy is still under review. >>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MNDemNY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:55 PM
Original message
What on earth needs to be "reviewed"???? That is crap.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-28-09 08:25 AM
Response to Reply #48
332. You are not offering facts but WH attempts to have it both ways in the mind of the public. The case
is now in the court system. You don't fight a case in court without first deciding how you want the case to come out. And, with court deadlines, you don't have the luxury of taking forever to make that decision.

Putting what the WH said in the very best possible light, the WH is saying, "We don't want to be legally obligated to provide this information, but we may decide to provide it voluntarily." That is not satisfactory because once the court precedent is set, it's set for a very long time. We might have another Obama in there, or we might have another Nixon in there. I want the law to favor disclosure.

Here is a President who ran on transparency, fighting in court to keep secret what was available to the public until Dummya got into the WH. Transparency in government does not mean, "We'll tell you everything we're perfectly comfortable telling you and not a whit more."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:03 AM
Response to Reply #1
49. It's only been 5 months!
It takes time to unblock the list of visitors you know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ooglymoogly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #49
65. Meanwhile he has been a legislative and monetary goldmine
for the rabid right wing zealot pugs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saigon68 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-17-09 05:24 AM
Response to Reply #65
306. K & R
He's on his way to being a 1 term president like bush 1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
razorman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:41 AM
Response to Reply #49
66. It would take about 5 minutes with a Presidential order.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-28-09 08:28 AM
Response to Reply #66
333. Just make the logs available for the press to copy and then worry about whether an order is needed..
Edited on Sun Jun-28-09 08:30 AM by No Elephants
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jakeXT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:19 PM
Response to Reply #49
96. I wonder if it's all according to the timeline or if public opinion is still good
among uninformed voters.



After a round of applause, Biden continued.

"I've forgotten more about foreign policy than most of my colleagues know, so I'm not being falsely humble with you. I think I can be value added, but this guy has it. This guy has it. But he's gonna need your help. Because I promise you, you all are gonna be sitting here a year from now going 'oh my God, why are they there in the polls, why is the polling so down, why is this thing so tough? We're gonna have to make some incredibly tough decisions in the first two years. So I'm asking you now, I'm asking you now, be prepared to stick with us. Remember the faith you had at this point because you're going to have to reinforce us."

Noting that he's a practicing Irish-Catholic, the Delaware lawmaker said, "Let's not be, for those of a different faith remember St. Peter denied Christ thrice, you know? We don't need anybody denying us, this is gonna be tough. There are gonna be a lot of you who want to go 'whoa, wait a minute, yo, whoa, whoa, I don't know about that decision.' Because if you think the decision is sound when they're made, which I believe you will when they're made, they're not likely to be as popular as they are sound. Because if they're popular, they're probably not sound."


http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2008/10/joe_biden_seatt...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:30 PM
Response to Reply #96
280. Hoo boy, "if they're popular they're probably not sound"
They ask for faith in them but they have no confidence in us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bushknew Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 05:13 PM
Response to Reply #49
230. That's right, give some more time Geez!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-28-09 08:53 AM
Response to Reply #230
335. Takes a lot more time to fight in court to keep logs secret than it does to make the logs available
Edited on Sun Jun-28-09 08:54 AM by No Elephants
Besides, I think Reply 49 was highly sarcastic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllTooEasy Donating Member (540 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #1
110. Yes, I'll defend.

Is the issue with Obama or the Secret Service? In many respects, the secret service does what it wants and the President(their boss) can't do anything about it. For instance, there was time when you could drive right past the WH gates. After a mad man opened unloaded an AKA from the sidewalk in the WH's direction during Clinton's administration, the Secret Service blocked off surrounding streets. You can walk pass the WH after you go through security check, but it's all blocked off to cars now, traffic congestion is worse, and it's an eye soar. Clinton tried several times to reopen the streets and...drum role please...the Secret Service (Clinton's employee's) told him NO! The WH area still looks like crap! You can google all of this.

I would like to see the records open, but I'm not sure where my WTF should be directed now that I know that the Secret Sevice is envoled. I understand and appreciate their job and sacrifice, but those guys can snatch the president off his wife in mid stroke if their rational has anything to do with "the president's safety". Their unchecked discretion has always worried me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #110
117. What was the policy under Clinton?
That's what I want to know. Is Obama continuing changes implemented under Bush?

IIRC, Clinton got a lot of grief about anyone who came to the WH while he was there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #117
140. Why would Clinton be considered the Litmus test for this case?
Who cares what Clinton did or didn't do.

The White House is public property, unless the President is paying the rent from his pocket, the list of visitors should be public. Period. I don't care who is in office...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marshall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:44 PM
Response to Reply #140
142. Maybe Babs jumping on the Lincoln bedroom bed is what sparked the secrecy
Remember the tabloids harping about the Hollywood elite who were visiting during the Clinton years. I'm sure the Clintons didn't like their guest list being ridiculed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #142
147. Again... I don't care what the president likes or does not like...
he lives in public housing. There are some compromises that come with the free rent...

If Clinton did not want to be made fun for inviting the "Hollywood Elite" he was free to not invite the "Hollywood Elite." I am just tired of politicians always trying to have it both ways. They have no problem stripping us of our privacy, even when we are in the midst of our very own home. Yet they require the upmost secrecy even when they enjoy public property.

I am just tired of the government requesting compromises from its citizens, while they do not even pretend to even try to compromise on anything themselves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seldona Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #147
210. I disagree entirely.
Just because he was elected to be President doesn't mean he gives up ALL privacy. Like we own him or something?

I agree there are a lot of things he gives up. The right to privacy in one's own home, even if it is the Whitehouse, shouldn't be one of them. What's next, live feeds from every room? Give me a break.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #210
214. If Obama had not supported things like FISA, yeah... I can see where the benefit of the doubt comes.
However, If Mr. Obama has no problem with me having to give up my privacy.... in my own house (for which I paid BTW). Rest assured, I am not going to shed a tear when he has to surrender his privacy regarding his guest staying in public property and supported with our own dime.

So how does Mr. Obama like them apples now, eh? I would be first in line defending Obama's right to privacy, if he had extended the same courtesy to us. Since he hasn't, probably... taking him to task on this issue, may "enlighten" him?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orleans Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:47 PM
Response to Reply #210
283. wrong. he lives in the PEOPLE'S house--he signed up for the job and
understands the job description. olbermann said this shit has gone to court TWICE during the bush era and TWICE the judge ruled that the list should be made PUBLIC. the second ruling came in this past january. after the first ruling homeland security got involved and the judge still ruled that the visitor's log should be public. this white house is following "rules" made up in bushworld when it does shit like this.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-28-09 08:58 AM
Response to Reply #210
336. Straw man. An exception can be made for anyone whose visit did not involve government business. So,
Edited on Sun Jun-28-09 09:02 AM by No Elephants
if Michelle's brother visits to see his family, no need to publicize. On the other hand, if he lobbied for funds for his school while in the WH, note his visit.

It's not as though people who run for the Presidency don't know before they run that their lives will be under a microscope. The powers and privileges of the office are worth it to them.

I can see wanting to shield people who had no choice in the matter, like Michelle's brother, but, as I said, exceptions can be made. Besides, what need really is there to hide the fact that a friend or a relative is making a personal visit? Typically, people are not ashamed of being in the inner circle of the President or First Lady.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #140
193. Thanks for playing "Missing the Point".
Bush put in a lot of secrecy policies. Clinton was not only the president prior to Bush, he took a whole lot of crap for visitors to the White House. I don't expect Obama to be as poorly treated as Clinton was - it kind of set the standard - but I do expect him to undo bad Bush policy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #193
211. I think you are the one who completely missed my point...
... I don't care what Clinton did or did not do. I am tired of the law and common sense being subdued by precedent. Because it always boils down to try to justify that if a Dem does it, it is OK.

If Obama, or any administration, want to have their guest in public property hidden from public records, they are free to rent a conference room in a motel with their own money and meet at will...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #211
216. I don't think it's okay at all!
I just think that Clinton took a lot of crap during his presidency, which effectively prevented him from getting a lot of stuff done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 05:27 PM
Response to Reply #216
236. I think in that case it took two to tango. The GOP's shenanigans and Clinton political instincts...
Edited on Tue Jun-16-09 05:30 PM by liberation
... getting the best of him. A president needs to adapt his MO to the law, not the other way around. Eliminating something that should be public domain, because it is inconvenient for the political interests of the president... is a very dangerous precedent IMHO.

So maybe Obama is a swell guy, and he pinky swears he is not going to invite any shady character over. That is not good enough, not when it leaves a mechanism open for future Dick Cheneys to abuse. That is not a risk this country should be willing to take. Furthermore, if Obama does not intend in inviting any shady character, why should he care if the list is accessed by the public?


If Obama wants our trust, he should earn it... just like everybody else. In the same sense I can understand some people saying that his sort term in office is not enough to give a negative verdict regarding his performance... it also works both ways, he hasn't been in office long enough to assume our trust just because. This is one of those situations for which the whole concept of "track record" was created IMHO.

I have lived and worked in places in which I had to disclose my visitors, a tad annoying... but I understood the concept of why those regulations were in place, and I had no issue compromising. I believe the same applies to Mr. Obama... he obviously should have a right to a certain level of privacy. But giving that he lives in public property, sans having to pay rent, and those guests are supported by public dollars during their stay.... I believe having to disclose the names of visitors is a really small compromise. Heck, seems like a swell deal to me... I can trade with Mr. Obama if he wants.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pokercat999 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #216
253. Thank godness he didn't have time to get anymore of the
rethug agenda passed.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HarryTrumanDem Donating Member (51 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 05:37 PM
Response to Reply #140
237. Agreed
Really, an argument could be made for like 24/7 webcast from the Big House. The MO-cam!

It's the Peoples' right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orleans Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:49 PM
Response to Reply #237
284. what the fuck is a "MO cam" (since you expect to only last a "day or three" n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HarryTrumanDem Donating Member (51 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 11:34 PM
Response to Reply #284
292. Uh
Edited on Tue Jun-16-09 11:55 PM by HarryTrumanDem
Isn't the f word verboten?


It was a joke, like the other few hundred here, ese. Ah, you appear to be mujer. Either way. Though quite a few progressives have for a few years called for closer monitoring of ALL elected officials, national and state, at least during working hours. Had Bush/cheney been on tape/monitored at all times many problems would have been prevented. Transparency as they say (and that's what this thread concerned). Anyone who thinks Demos should be exempt from that is not an authentic democrat. Let's not forget that Pelosi actually blocked C-SPAN from the House in 2006 as well.

And a bit hypocritical to fly zappa's icon when you appear to be another another moderating, moralizing DINOcrat, and a crass one to boot.

No seniority.

Now, snitch away.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orleans Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 11:59 PM
Response to Reply #292
295. dinocrat? ha! go "snitch" yourself!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MNDemNY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #110
152. This is not the doing of the SS alone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-28-09 09:18 AM
Response to Reply #152
338. The SS is not elected. They work for Obama. In the end, he has the final say. Witness the
Blackberry brouhaha. The SS is a convenient excuse, though, isn't it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LuckyLib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #110
158. You do not need to go through security to walk around or past the WH.
The streets are blocked off to auto traffic, but foot traffic is fine -- groups or tourists stand around the area all the time. The concrete planters all over DC are to guard against crazy truck bombers -- our most well known, Timothy McVeigh got too close to a building, and these efforts try to preclude that happening in the nation's capital.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Strong Atheist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 02:38 PM
Response to Reply #110
175. Belated Welcome to DU!
Edited on Tue Jun-16-09 02:38 PM by Strong Atheist


:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Autonomy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #110
205. LOL In mid stroke
Giving us sanity and humor in the same post... I am not sure you belong here. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rhett o rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #110
250. with all due respect your argument is bull crap. The Pres can make the decision.
Edited on Tue Jun-16-09 06:52 PM by rhett o rick
this isn't national security we are talking about. It is a friggin visitors list.
There is no excuse for lack of transparency. I want to know who is visiting MY PRESIDENT.
The secret service works for us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pokercat999 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 06:52 PM
Response to Reply #110
251. Gee let's see how this might go:
The President to his chief of staff "Get me the list of everyone who's visited the WH since I took office"

The President on the phone to Bob Woodward "Bob, how about stopping by I have a list I'd like to get printed in the Washington Post"

Period end of discussion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
troubledamerican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:57 PM
Response to Reply #110
272. Scenario. Discuss.
Someone in the FOX News organization obtains a White House Press pass.

Somehow, this pass is "lost" and ends up in the hands of a schizophrenic who is also a member of "NAMBLA", the pro-pedophilia organization (I don't know if this organization still exists, but it did exist back in the 1970s and was a big, big right-wing strawman for a while).

Somehow, this deranged individual shows up at the White House and gets in for five minutes before he's uncovered and kicked out.

Bingo:

FOX News reports the next day that Obama is inviting pedophile organizations into the White House.

I may be wrong on specifics about press passes, etc., and I'm sure the DU COINTELPRO dopes will come out of the woodwork to squeal how this scenario is impossible.

I'm all in favor of holding Obama accountable. But I want to know WHY this policy is considered a good idea by anyone in the White House. So far, all I see are the "Obama-Is-Just-Another-Harry-Reid" crowd and their knee-jerk reactionary lashing out.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-28-09 09:14 AM
Response to Reply #272
337. Why isn't the truth a complete solution to your scenario,(which is highly unlikely to begin with)?
Edited on Sun Jun-28-09 09:16 AM by No Elephants
Maybe a pigeon will carry off a press pass and give it to Hugo Chavez, too. Let's keep everything as secret as possible so weird stuff that MAY require an explanation from the WH one day never happens.

Sorry, makes no sense. I'd rather have Obama have to explain something now and again than have Cheney like secrecy in place all the time. Better to risk MAYBE taking a few minutes from Obama's schedule than close off the right of people in our democracy to know.

Besides, he frickin' ran on transparency and the logs are not exactly the formula to the hydrogen bomb. Inasmuch as he cannot give me back my donations, time or vote, he should do a lot better with his campaign promises than taking up in court where Buscho left off in every damn court case so far.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marshall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #1
144. If it was good enough for Bush.....
But seriously, not EVERYTHING Bush did has to be changed. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-28-09 09:22 AM
Response to Reply #144
339. If Bush was correct twice a day, I must have missed it. If I hear a great reason to keep the logs
secret, I'll be the first to admit it. Haven't heard a one yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jhrobbins Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #1
156. No defense here and the reason is exactly what Jonathan Turley
said would happen. He was speaking a couple of years ago when the subject of habeas corpus was the hot topic. I believe Rachel (I'm not sure about this) asked that once a Democrat took office, then of course things would be made right. He said that these rights were not easily regained; that most presidents, even liberal democratic ones, would not relinquish those rights once they had been abrogated by Bush. I guess he was right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kallyn Donating Member (15 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 02:06 PM
Response to Reply #1
159. Here you go -- a defense
Per usual the Right and the Outrage Enthusiasts on both sides of the aisle have chosen not to lget a few facts get in the way... Here's how it goes. The watchdog group (CREW) and MSNBC have both requested visitor logs from the Secret Service. The Secret Service sent them a boilerplate response along the lines of "we don't release this information," which is correct: apparently that is Secret Service policy and has been Secret Service policy for as long as anyone can remember. You can understand how the Secret Service would, as a general sort of rule, tend to keep things secret.
CREW unsuccessfully sued the Bush administration for release of these records a couple of years ago, and now are trying the same kind of suit against the Obama administration. For now, the Secret Service is doing its job and saying, "we don't release this stuff." However, according to the blog of ABC News's Jake Tapper, a White House spokesman emailed him that they were in the process of reviewing the visitor log policy and that the "refusal" was basically a simple statement "how visitor logs have been treated historically."

Stealth blogs from the Right are now trying to spin this as "Obama ran on a platform of transparency and now he refuses to share information so he is no better than Bush," i.e., they are concern trolling.

The sensible position in so complicated a system as the White House surely is, "until further notice, continue business as usual." Now that someone has actually *requested* the information, the administration can try to figure out how it can released safely and securely, or if there is some kind of division between public business and private guests. (The example would be: if Tasha and Malia have a sleepover, the names of their guests should be published in a press release?)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MNDemNY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 02:09 PM
Response to Reply #159
161. Did you set up an account just to reply to this???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kallyn Donating Member (15 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 02:19 PM
Response to Reply #161
166. Well, I'd been meaning to anyhow...
I confess to being a lurker for some time now.
But yes -- that article pushed me over. The extent of the manipulation of any given story is very frustrating. The man is a politician. His halo was not placed upon his brow by a benevolent god, but rather photoshopped on by his more, um, fervent supporters. Still and all, he's what we've got, and he's for sure better than we've had in a looooong time. So maybe we can all breathe for a moment, get the story straight, and then if some reasonable outrage is still indicated, go to. But this? A red herring.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MNDemNY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #166
168. He seems to be collecting a lot of these "red herrings".
Soon he will have enough for chowder, then what???I am VERY glad that Obama is President. But I will give no POTUS the benefit of doubt. Openness was one of his campaign planks, this can not stand. I, for one will call him out on this and anything else that I feel I need too. To do any less, does this country no good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kallyn Donating Member (15 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 02:28 PM
Response to Reply #168
169. He sure is.
It's going to be a bumpy ride. People need to understand that the Right wants a piece of this guy. The chunk they took out of Clinton is going to look like a love bite if they find anything that really has traction on BO. It's incumbent upon the left to really focus and not buy any bull****. There's enough to disagree about in good faith (with Obama or anyone else) to get distracted by half a story, deliberately spun to make him look bad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MNDemNY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #169
177. It could not be "spun" to make him look good, now can it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kallyn Donating Member (15 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #177
185. It doesn't need to be spun to make him look ANY particular way.
It is what it is. The secret service has, and has had, a policy. Folks sued Bush, et al, to get it changed. They failed. They're trying again. The Obama Admin has publicized the secret service's policy (and obeyed it), whilst reviewing it. If the administration can change policy to give more information to the public while protecting the private lives of, for example (although there could be other scenarios, I suppose), the minor children living there, then they should do that. Also, the administration should keep us posted and be transparent in its PROCESS of reviewing the transparency itself, even if the end result is less transparency than some of us might wish for. We have the right to expect a general freedom of information from this president. We don't have the right to expect that years-old secret service policy can, or indeed should, be tossed into the garbage without a second look. We had 8 years of a president who acted without taking a second look -- setting aside his tendency to err on the side of too LITTLE transparency rathter than too much, one can still see that it's the same instinct? To act too quickly from an emotional perspective? Bad? Review away, Mr. President. And if you end up with something I don't love, I'll expect you to convince me. That's what I voted for, was the substantive conversation amongst serious people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-17-09 09:57 AM
Response to Reply #169
315. well, when I first heard this, my first thought was
O was protecting the * administration. Because it seems to me, that there are some people who are still interested in who the previous administration met with. Remember the secret energy meetings, and don't forget the online media guy, Gannon? My first impression was that Obama was actually protecting the * administration. The * administration has made "secrecy" a main point in our government, not transparency and I don't believe it has anything to do with security, but with backroom corporate deals against the public.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Window Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 06:25 PM
Response to Reply #166
246. Welcome to DU kallyn. One thing though, you're not supposed to make sense.



Peace :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Window Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 06:34 PM
Response to Reply #166
247. I, for one, am very glad you decided to join and post on DU.



Peace :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Window Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #159
164. WHY IS NO ONE REPLYING TO THIS POST THAT MAKES SENSE??
Unbelievable!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmowreader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 02:48 PM
Response to Reply #164
183. You know why...
The day Obama took office he was supposed to end the war in Iraq, end the war in Afghanistan, make gay marriage legal all over the US, close Guantanamo Bay, make government operations completely transparent, disseminate all the classified information, order George Bush to commit seppuku at the inaugural, arrest the entire last administration, end the recession and put every American back to work. The fact he hasn't done all these things--even though fixing just one one-hundredth of all the things Shrub did in his rich supporters' names is going to require at least three consecutive two-term Democratic presidents' full attentions--is enough to turn Obama into Evil Incarnate.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Redneck Socialist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 05:19 PM
Response to Reply #183
234. I"m still waiting for my pony, damnit! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Window Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 05:53 PM
Response to Reply #183
241. Yes, I do know. It is also why I spend very little time here lately.



:thumbsup: Peace
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-28-09 09:38 AM
Response to Reply #241
341. Message boards are vehicles for expressing opinions, many of which are likely to differ from
yours. If that upsets you, maybe keeping diary or blogging online would be more to your liking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
primavera Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 11:41 PM
Response to Reply #183
293. I'm not critical of what he hasn't yet done...
... only of what he has done. It's a strawman argument to suggest that disgruntled Dems are concerned by things Obama hasn't yet accomplished. I don't see anyone complaining that George Bush hasn't been put to death yet. But that doesn't mean that Obama has had no opportunity to make any decisions. Declining to disclose who visits him is a decision, not a goal he has not yet gotten around to. Logs are kept of everyone who enters and exits the White House. It would take no exhaustive hunt for records to provide that information. Such a list could easily be generated within minutes. Yet Obama, or someone in his administration acting under his authority, is declining to make that information available. Responsibility for one's decisions, or those of one's staff, goes with the job. If Obama isn't prepared to account for his decisions and those made under his authority, he picked the wrong job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tan guera Donating Member (256 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-17-09 01:27 AM
Response to Reply #293
298. hmmm
"If Obama isn't prepared to account for his decisions and those made under his authority, he picked the wrong job."

I believe he was picked for the job!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
U4ikLefty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-28-09 12:38 AM
Response to Reply #298
331. That's the best you could do?
weak
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-28-09 09:32 AM
Response to Reply #183
340. The flaw in your post is that this involves a court case. Obamadmin has to deal with it, one
Edited on Sun Jun-28-09 09:34 AM by No Elephants
way or the other, no matter how much or how little is on Obama's plate.

This has nothing to do with not having enough time. To the contrary, it would take much less time to make the logs avaiable than to keep fighting in court for secrecy, as Bushco was doing when Obamadmin took over this case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
texastoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 03:08 PM
Response to Reply #164
187. There's this train
And it appears that many want to ride it. It's called the "Ahhhhh HAAAAAHH" train.

And, I will say, this "policy" needs review, and review asap.

But being used to a board that prides itself on knowing the facts, this thread could be the platform for the Olympic sport of jumping to conclusions.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Window Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #187
245. I agree the policy absolutely needs review and change. However, I am saddened
by how often the "Ahhhhh HAAAAAHH" contingent on DU feel propelled to pounce on everything Obama lately. Sloppy posting.

:thumbsup: Peace
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-28-09 09:45 AM
Response to Reply #187
343. Please see Reply 332, which replied to Reply 48, which raised the review issue. If
Obamadmin did not review this policy BEFORE going to court on it, the negligence is massive and reprehensible. I don't believe for one second that they did not review it before going to court to try to set a precedent of secrecy that may stand as long as the Presidency stands.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #164
207. Deleted sub-thread
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
NYC_SKP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:51 PM
Response to Reply #164
271. That fantastic post has been mentioned in a number of other threads today.
That member is welcome in my house any time.

:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC_SKP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #159
190. Thank you, kallyn, and welcome to DU!
We need more members with critical thinking skills, who also read.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #159
200. Welcome Kallyn
Thanks for the facts, but don't expect them to be appreciated by too many around here anymore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-28-09 09:50 AM
Response to Reply #200
344. An opinion that matches your own opinion is still an opinion, not fact.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brentspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #159
203. Thanks for the laugh of the day (n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raine1967 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #159
212. K&R
Bookmarked for this very post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lxlxlxl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 04:56 PM
Response to Reply #159
226. great reply...thanks for cutting through some b.s.
x.x.x./
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tempest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #159
227. Except you're wrong

CREW unsuccessfully sued the Bush administration for release of these records a couple of years ago

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/17/visitor.logs/ind...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kallyn Donating Member (15 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:57 PM
Response to Reply #227
273. Hm.
I thought that was appealed? I guess I'll cast about and see what the status of the appeal is, whether the Obama administration could drop it if it's still underway and it wanted and, y'know, etc. I thought this Secret Service policy was still policy under the current circumstances, assuming an appeal is in process. And the Obama DOJ's responsibilities regarding previous matters? Dunno. But you can bet your ass I will by tomorrow.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
texastoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:27 PM
Response to Reply #273
279. Welcome to DU!
You caused a welcome stir.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kallyn Donating Member (15 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:40 PM
Response to Reply #279
282. Thanks
I've been made very welcome.
Obama wasn't my first choice, but I've been very pleased so far. One thing I been really looking forward to, is the moment when he REALLY steps out on me. Does something quite contradictory to my will. Because then I'm going to take a deep breath and inhale the sense he makes and his ability to articulate a position I disagree with. There's no perfect simpatico, and he will step out, guaranteed -- but it certainly is nice to not cringe with fear of stupidity every time he draws breath to speak.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:58 PM
Response to Reply #273
286. Don't have to wait until tomorrow
The original case brought by CREW saw Judge Royce Lamberth rule against the Bush administration. They did indeed appeal it, but the US Court of Appeals threw out the appeal, kicking it back down to trial court and back into Lamberth's court. <http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/0... >

Lamberth retried the case, and in January of this year, again found for the plaintiff CREW and ordered the visitor logs released.
<http://www.rcfp.org/newsitems/index.php?i=9893 >

Bush basically defied the ruling for his last week in office. Obama's administration is just as bound by law to follow this ruling as the Bush administration was. The question is whether he will defy this ruling like Bush did. So far, it looks as though he will. Is this more of that change Obama was talking about?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kallyn Donating Member (15 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 11:06 PM
Response to Reply #286
288. I guess that's the "review" he mentioned conducting?
I hope and expect he'll follow the law. I don't begrudge him his moment to consider and review; the last administration was characterized by a lack of interest in considering, which got extremely old. So we'll see. I do think that one thing Cheney said a few months ago was prescient, which was something about how Obama's supporters might well find, to their chagrin, that Mr. O could prove unwilling to give up some of the executive powers that the Bush Administration created or expanded. I wouldn't be at all surprised.

C'est, as they say, la vie. I'm going to hold off on the impotent rage for a bit yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 11:24 PM
Response to Reply #288
290. The sad thing is, this "review" is nothing more than another stall tactic,
Meanwhile CREW has already proceeded with their court case. You would think after observing the Bush administration getting handed their ass on this issue, Obama would actually have a clue.

As far as Obama not giving up some of his newly minted (thanks to Bush) extra-legal executive powers, I never was under the illusion that he would give any of them up. Then again I wasn't under the illusion that Obama was all the "change" that he was cracked up to be. Instead I simply thought of him simply the lesser of two evils, much like I've thought about all Democratic presidential candidates for the past thirty seven years. We're simply living under the two party/same corporate master system of government, with the Democrats and Republicans playing a game of good cop/bad cop with our happy ass.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Obama is continuing to defy the court, the law of the land. Same as it ever was.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kallyn Donating Member (15 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 11:17 PM
Response to Reply #286
289. hm again
"Federal courts did require the release of some records for technical reasons, but never made a definitive ruling on whether such records generally have to be made public."
-- POLITICO, today

So if they didn't rule, it's still Secret Service policy until, well, it isn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 11:29 PM
Response to Reply #289
291. But they did rule, or did you fail to read the articles at my links?
Lamberth originally ruled against the Bush administration, which appealed. The US Court of Appeals tossed the case back down to trial court and the case was retried. In his second ruling, Lamberth again ruled against the Bush administration. The only ruling that isn't in is for the case that CREW just brought against the Obama administration. As it stands now however, the case that Lamberth ruled against the Bush administration is the law of the land :shrug:

Politico isn't the brightest bulbs on the web, despite their pretensions to intelligence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-28-09 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #273
345. Two courts held that the logs should be public. Obamadmin could have left it at that. Instead,
Obamadmin chose to appeal. The Secret Service issue has been addressed upthread by more than one poster, but including me. No clue what you meaen by the the Obama D of J's responsiblities regarding previous matters. It has no responsiblity whatever to take the same position Bushco took. It's one of the reasons we change WH administrations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orleans Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:54 PM
Response to Reply #159
285. so who was the judge olbermann was talking about that ruled 2 times
that these logs are to be made public?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newtothegame Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-17-09 08:16 AM
Response to Reply #159
311. Oh god..."concern trolling"...
Yet another DU'er whose focus on here is to catch alleged "trolls" than to engage in any discussion. Have at it hoss, if that's what gets your rocks off about DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kallyn Donating Member (15 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-17-09 08:42 AM
Response to Reply #311
313. uh.
Okeee...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RoadRage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-17-09 09:39 AM
Response to Reply #159
314. Nice Reply!
And a big ole' welcome to DU!

I love the fact that people are now chiding new residents of DU for signing up to post a "defense" to our democratic president... acting like you're trolling or something. :eyes:

Keep "trolling" if you must.. sadly we need all the help we can get!!!

:hi:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-18-09 05:21 AM
Response to Reply #159
324. Except, until Dummya, "business as usual" was to release the logs. And you don't have to wait until
Edited on Thu Jun-18-09 06:02 AM by No Elephants
someone requests something that has been the subject of litigation before you first start to "try to figure out how it can be released safely and securely." And you are supposed to figure things out before you fight them, not require citizens or groups like CREW and ACLU to use precious donation money suing government, whose litigation resources are unlimited, thanks to Mr. and Ms. Taxpayer.. And the Obama administration ran on transparency (among other things).

As far as Sasha and Malia, that is totally a red herring. With Chelsea Clinton, Amy Carter and other First Family kids of all ages in the White House for centuries, I'm sure that's all been sorted out. Minors names don't get released anyway, even in crime cases. "Minor child to visit First Family" would be fine. A similar exception could be made for those related to the First Family by blood or marriage. It's not rocket science.

Moreover, there has been no suggestion whatever that this fight is to protect the privacy of Sasha and Malia's friends.
According to the article, this fight is "taking up the Bush administration argument that a president doesn't have to reveal who comes calling to influence policy decisions."

Why do we have to make up stuff and grasp at straws to defend Presidents anyway? They have masses of staff, hired at our expense, to do that. At a minimum, they should be able to get a plausible rationale to the public. If they don't do that, maybe we have a right to take them at their word.


Welcome.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happygoluckytoyou Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 02:36 PM
Response to Reply #1
174. I JUST REMOVED MYSELF FROM HIS DONATION LIST. will be back when his medical plan returns his BALLS !
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mckara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 03:30 PM
Response to Reply #1
192. Presidents Don't Have a Right to Privacy?

The naivet of people at the website astounds me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-17-09 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #192
321. Not when it concerns the PUBLIC'S BUSINESS, they don't!
NT!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-28-09 09:59 AM
Response to Reply #192
346. Ask Clinton or read New York Times v. Sullivan if you want to know if the President has a
right to privacy. Heck, you and I don't much have a right to privacy anymore. Why on earth should the President? Especially about who is visiting the White House and trying to influence government?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quickesst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #1
233. That's easy....
What with the opposition(right-wing), and the establishment of the rule under Bush, I can't blame him. The left spent many years trying to find out who visited der monkey looking for anything, especially the smoking gun that would have brought him down. Consider, what if Obama's visitors who are "influencing policy" happen to be gay rights leaders, women's rights advocates, etc. Considering what the left did with Jeff Gannon, I could imagine the line of shit that would come out of the right-wing over some of Obama's possible guests. I guess I'm just not uptight and in knots because I don't know what Obama is doing or saying, and to whom, 24 hours a day. Everyone has their priorities, and the criteria I use to judge those priorities is simple. Tackle the problem that affects the most people first. He's doing that. The others will take their place in line according to the greater need for the most people, and until I hear Sean Insanity say something positive about him, I will continue to support his actions and performance. Thanks.
quickesst
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MNDemNY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-17-09 04:39 PM
Response to Reply #233
319. Defend his position on DOMA, DADT, NSA wiretaps, please.
:popcorn:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quickesst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-18-09 05:54 AM
Response to Reply #319
327. So now....
....you're asking me to defend Obama on DOMA, DADT, NSA wiretaps which means my defense of him on releasing the guest list must have been successful. Thank you for your acknowledgment.
quickesst
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MNDemNY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-18-09 07:36 AM
Response to Reply #327
328. Cop out, still waiting.
:popcorn:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quickesst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-18-09 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #328
329. Went back and read the op one more time....
...yep, visitor logs is the topic. If you look carefully, I replied to someone who specifically asked if there was anyone willing to defend the White House's decision on visitor logs. That's what I replied to. As to the other issues being interjected into this thread, I'll reply just for you. I support Obama and the timetable he is on to bring about the change so many are screaming about. I just don't think they are as important as a couple of other issues that directly affect the family's ability to feed and house themselves, plus have decent health care. I'm sorry if you are offended that I believe the greater good for the greatest number of people take precedence over other issues at this crucial time. I am not your enemy. I am merely a person who disagrees with others on the urgency of particular issues over others. I also stand by my defense of Obama's decision on the thread topic. If you still believe my comments are a cop out, then that's where it will stand for you. I can't make stuff up just to change your mind. Enjoy your popcorn. Looks good. Thanks.
quickesst
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-28-09 10:09 AM
Response to Reply #233
347. The whole point of transparency in government is that the people don't know what may or may not
affect them if things are kept secret. Therefore, the presumption has to be in favor of letting the people know what is going on (at their expense) and let them decide. Besides, Obama ran on transparency, so his efforts (and there have been more than one) to preserve the secrecy of Bushco, the most secretive administration in American history, are not only anti-democratic, but go to his credibility.

Gannon was given a press pass that many legitimate and respectable journalists could not get, so he could lob softball questions to Bush during press conferences. Didn't the public have a right to know that what it seemed to be seeing during televised press conferences was as phony as it could be?

Secrecy is justified only when absolutely necessary to protect the physical safety of the American people. Embarrassment to the President is not the standard. To the contrary, we have a right to know almost everything about people who ask us to vote for them so they can become rich and powerful on our dime.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlbertCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #1
258. I don't REALLY care.... BUT...
....it looks so bad. I mean, you gotta ask yourself: "Who? WHO could be on that list that would look worse than the bad press this decision generates????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-28-09 11:13 AM
Response to Reply #1
352. If my last name was Dedman...
I'd change it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msongs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 08:35 AM
Response to Original message
2. change you can believe in LOL nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cherchez la Femme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #2
90. The Audacity of Nope
:cry:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
greguganus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #90
135. That need's to be a DUZY. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newtothegame Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #2
151. That's all right cause everyone here got pictures of their ballot they could show their kids...
that they were part of 'HISTORY.' That's what was important!!! Right??!! Anyone???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katandmoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 08:37 AM
Response to Original message
3. He likes DADT so much he's applying it to everything!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 08:47 AM
Response to Reply #3
10. Is there a special DUzy for stuff that's funny
...but also makes me wince? :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Soylent Brice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #10
57. no, but there should be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 08:37 AM
Response to Original message
4. So, Jeff Gannon still might be getting passes? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
greguganus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #4
136. oh my..n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 08:38 AM
Response to Original message
5. With any luck, we'll get a high level court ruling against the White House on this one
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rosa Luxemburg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:09 AM
Response to Reply #5
24. they can release Bush's visit logs first, then the media can chew on them first
Obama should let everyone see who visits WH. I think if this government is transparent it doesn't mean that it suddenly develops cataracts!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ldf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:38 PM
Response to Reply #24
269. yes!
i absolutely want the american public to know how many times jimmyjeff gannon visited, and WHO he visited. were there any stayovers? there WERE times that he didn't sign out.

i want america to know that bush and rove had a gay prostitute visiting many, many times. i want the blatant hypocrisy of the republican christian leaders shoved in everyone's face.

and i want cheney's list of energy meeting attendants released.

THEN obama can do what the hell he wants.

yes, i am selfish and vindictive. so sue me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-28-09 10:15 AM
Response to Reply #5
348. Not bloody likely with the Roberts Court. Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised, but I am not hopeful
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mari333 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 08:42 AM
Response to Original message
6. does absolute power corrupt absolutely?
I dont think I can bear another Imperial Presidency.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibDemAlways Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:00 AM
Response to Reply #6
20. The king is far removed from the serfs and owes them nothing. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:08 AM
Response to Reply #6
23. Abe Lincoln said it all:
"Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OwnedByFerrets Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #23
97. Well stated
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
readmoreoften Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #6
240. Nah. He was corrupt before he took office. That's why it was handed over to him.
And why the media didn't attack him (other than FOX, which made him sympathetic to mainstream people). It was the best marketing campaign in human history.

How can you not have an imperial presidency when you live in a military empire? Until then, we are ruled by a violent plutocracy. The idea that there can be a democratic plutocracy is already slight of hand. If everyone is a property-owning peasant farmer selling in a local market, sure, you can have some amount of business mixed up with a democratic society. But, seriously... How can you have a society with massively wealthy elites who own the factories, stores, farms, houses, apartment buildings, infrastructure, land and public space AND a political system where everyone gets a voice--through secret ballot at that.

Well DUH! How could the people--who don't even have any real infrastructure left: military development is privatized, water/utilities/land/real estate privatized, "public" works projects farmed out to private contractors, media owned wholly--possibly *elect* someone to represent their interests? How would that even work?

You can't simultaneously have a plutocratic class and a democracy. The only people who live democratically in such a society are the plutocracy, who get to argue their interests with one another and don't have to live under one king.

Freedom my ass...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Autumn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 08:43 AM
Response to Original message
7. Ok
Edited on Tue Jun-16-09 08:52 AM by Autumn
3.0
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blueworld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 08:44 AM
Response to Original message
8. It's starting to get painful for me...
This is the type of thing I simply do not understand. If Pres. Obama is sincere, of course he would also consult with coal executives etc. Intelligent people gather facts from both sides of an issue before taking a position. I do not want to jump to conclusions, BUT I'm seriously concerned as to whether he yakked a great story to get elected and now...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beacool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 04:42 PM
Response to Reply #8
222. "Yakked a great story" sounds about right.
Hope, change, hope, change, bla, bla, bla........

I must admit, though, that the guy can deliver a mighty speech.

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mike K Donating Member (539 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #222
239. A "mighty speech."
So did Ronald Reagan, the villain who opened the gate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beacool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:44 PM
Response to Reply #239
270. Well, charm and charisma can only carry you so far.
I've said that I'll give him a year before I make up my mind about him. We'll see what he accomplishes from here to next January.

;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Celtic_88 Donating Member (23 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 08:50 PM
Response to Reply #8
263. Me To
I'm seriously concerned as to whether he yakked a great story to get elected...
I thought he would get in there and try to turn things around , now I'm not sure that he is trying very hard.
I hate all this money being spent on Rubbish.. and Bail outs on taxpayers money is at the top of my list.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dipsydoodle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 08:46 AM
Response to Original message
9. White House
aka Animal Farm.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hepburn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 08:48 AM
Response to Original message
11. Very, very dissapointing...
...I thought the Era of BushCo was over. Guess not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dipsydoodle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 08:56 AM
Response to Reply #11
17. Era of BushCo was over ?
Only in your dreams.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lanlady Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 08:50 AM
Response to Original message
12. Obama has done little so far--
--to uphold the principle of transparency which he declared on his very first full day in office. He raised hopes, only to dash them within a matter of weeks. Does he think we won't notice?

Bush set so many negative "imperial" precedents; it saddens me to see Obama perpetuate one after the other.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-28-09 08:45 AM
Response to Reply #12
334. Not only perpetuate, but fight in court to set a legal precedent that will allow all Presidents
for years to come to perpetuate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Old Codger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 08:51 AM
Response to Original message
13. Hard to believe
After the wonderful "campaign promises" that we once again believed,it is back to basics and politics as usual. Secret visitor lists? Whats next? Another hope dashed to the floor and stomped on. I should know better by now but AI continue to naively hope we may, sometime before I die see a truly honest and open government. But this doesn't appear to be it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 08:51 AM
Response to Original message
14. lolololol
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bertman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 08:52 AM
Response to Original message
15. Imperial hubris.
The people will know what I WANT them to know.

All Hail Caesar!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WriteDown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 08:53 AM
Response to Original message
16. ROFL
Have to think of a new name for him. Obusha? Bushrak?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:06 AM
Response to Reply #16
21. o'dubya?
this is a creepy development.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cherchez la Femme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #21
89. O'DOMA
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tomm2thumbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 08:57 AM
Response to Original message
18. all those hookers and crack dealers

j/k - but they are acting like that is what they are hiding, so may as well suggest it

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 08:58 AM
Response to Original message
19. Has Obamadmin taken a single position in court that is different from Bushco's position? Even 1?
Edited on Tue Jun-16-09 09:03 AM by No Elephants
Anyone?

Anyone?

Anyone?


BTW: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph... (DU thread on Bush's fight to keep the logs secret).

Policies and Executive Orders are one thing. Any President, including this one, can change those instantly. Court precedents last a long, long time and apply to boh Democrats and Republicans.


Thank heaven for organizations like AClU and CREW. (Wish they would merge, though.) And for honest judges. Let's hope we see some honest decision making in this case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #19
74. Good Point - Deserves A Post Of Its Own
I can't think of any differences - but there's gotta be something... this is scary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #19
146. Other than the stem cell legislation, and the fact that he is not proposing a rabid conservative ...
... for the Supreme Court. So far the only indication that there is a new administration is that unlike Bush, Obama has no problem mastering public speaking.


And that is a realization that is really breaking my heart... not that I am surprised, I am just disappointed. Oh, well...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-18-09 05:25 AM
Response to Reply #146
325. Stem cell legislation is not a court case, Court precedent on Presidential
powers and privileges is a Constitutional decision. It will outlast legislation, which Congress can overturn at any time, and will certainly outlast any specific Presidency.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
winyanstaz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #19
197. I have been noticing this for some time now...and it breaks my heart..
So far the new boss is doing the same things the old boss did...dang it!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Not Me Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:08 AM
Response to Original message
22. Un-fucking believable
And the speed at which he has walked away from all that he said he would do is astounding.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dgibby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:10 AM
Response to Original message
25. Well, I guess the upside of this is that it makes it easier for me
to determine who gets my limited funds-ACLU, CREW, FEED AMERICA, and a few animal help groups. No more money to the Dems.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pattmarty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:11 AM
Response to Original message
26. It's been what, 5 months Obama has been President? I don't want..............
.............to piss on the parade, but I am beginning to have "doubts". Banking/Wall street, Afghanistan & Iraq, healthcare, EFCA, and the list goes on............
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:29 AM
Response to Reply #26
33. "beginning to have "doubts"...???
there's no doubt about it- he's a corporatist tool of the oligarchy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pattmarty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:21 AM
Response to Reply #33
61. I'm not naive, but I was HOPING for something better than fucking Clinton..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DURHAM D Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #61
235. And I was hoping for something as good as Clinton. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ixion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #33
71. yep, I believe he's made that very clear
and the oligarchy for which he stands despises We, the People.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dem mba Donating Member (732 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #33
129. and at the same time a marxist muslim
ha. all things to all people indeed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HarryTrumanDem Donating Member (51 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:44 AM
Response to Reply #26
38. The bailout ..........

provided a clue.

Though on the plus-side, Miss Michele did invite Wynton Marsalis and some jazz homies to the Big house recently.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pattmarty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #38
63. Yeah, and Clinton played the sax and Bush took vacations................
.............I think we all were hoping for better, and god knows we (everybody in the country) deserved better. I am not "giving up" on him yet, but my bullshit-o-meter is now constantly going off.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HarryTrumanDem Donating Member (51 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #63
127. Many people


pointed out Obama's occasional conservative side early on (remember when he praised Reagan??--even Hillary said something-- and let's not forget his appeal to sunday schoolers, Rick Warren, Wright, etc). That said, I think he's an improvement on the Buscho cowboys, but pretty much a corporate democrat--not exactly Leon Trotsky.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pattmarty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-17-09 07:08 AM
Response to Reply #127
308. I never thought he would be another LBJ in todays political climate...........
...........but I had hoped he wouldn't be another Carter or Clinton. You're right about being better than Bush, but that ain't saying much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-28-09 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #127
349. There is a huge difference between expecting Leon Trotsky and expecting a President who ran on
transparency not to fight in court to set precedents that will allow every President from now on to be as secretive as Dummya, heretofore the most secretive administration in American history.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grahamhgreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:12 AM
Response to Original message
27. States Secrets!!!! The PEOPLE CAN"T KNOW who visits the White House!!! TERRA TERRA TERRA You Crazy!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FSogol Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:23 AM
Response to Original message
28. Take the long view
Suppose Obama reverses Bush's decision and makes all the names available.
In 8-12 years say the Repugs take back over and they go back to hiding the names.
Then the court will need to look into the legality.

Suppose Obama continues Bush's decision and blocks all the names.
In 8-12 days CREW files a lawsuit and the Obama DOJ weakly fights it.
A court decision comes out and gee, Obama and future Presidents must make the names available.

Which is better?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WriteDown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:26 AM
Response to Reply #28
29. Are you dizzy?
I've never seen a spin like that. Its the 11 dimensional chess game huh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Autumn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:37 AM
Response to Reply #29
36. I'm dizzy myself. The court has
ruled twice that the names be released. So I guess it goes on indefinitely. Which is better? :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #29
242. LOL... no kidding. I'd rather go with Occam's razor.
Chess is a game where the middle and lower classes are sacrificed to defend the ruling pieces. Thus I have never been to fond of the imagery behind a grandmaster playing president (or vice-versa)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Abq_Sarah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:46 AM
Response to Reply #28
40. What's better
Is for the public to know who is visiting the White House, who is influencing legislation.

We're paying for it, we have a right to know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
greguganus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:40 PM
Response to Reply #40
139. Right! It is OUR house and we should know who's visiting it! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pmorlan1 Donating Member (763 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:48 AM
Response to Reply #28
70. Drinking the Kool-Aid
Is that kool-aid your little smiley guy is drinking over and over? LOL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Individualist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #28
119. You're trying to defend the indefensible
Can't be done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ms. Toad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #28
150. Just like the Obama DOJ is "weakly" defending DOMA n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-28-09 10:27 AM
Response to Reply #28
350. You're wihistling in the dark. You NEVER go into court to
Edited on Sun Jun-28-09 10:40 AM by No Elephants
fight weakly, in the hope you'll lose. Nothing prevents a judge from deciding in favor of the position in the weaker brief and you never know how a judge will rule.

No, you go into court with the position that you really, truly want and you fight for it with all you've got, short of violating legal ethics.* And, in the end, no matter whose arguments are strongest, you bank on Roberts, Alito, Scalia, Thomas, et al. to thwart the wishes of the Bush administration, instead of a 5-4 decision in favor of the neocons, as usual? Theoretically, in another few years, the SCOTUS will be less neocon than it is now, another reason your scenario doesn't work, even in the imagination.

Wishful thinking based upon lack of knowledge of what happens in court cases does not equal an Obama chess move.


*BTW, an example of an argument that legal ethics should have prevented the D of J from making, but didn't, was classifying homosexuality between consent adults with pedohphilia and incest. That was an outrageous misrespresentation to a court.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FailureToCommunicate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:28 AM
Response to Original message
30. MSNBC? I thought few DU-ers trusted that M$M source! Also, story said Secret
Edited on Tue Jun-16-09 09:29 AM by FailureToCommunicate
Service, not the White House was denying access.
Maybe it has something more to do with protecting Obama from harm than from criticism?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Abq_Sarah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:49 AM
Response to Reply #30
41. Oh, I guess I missed the part
Where the President of the United States Of America works for the Secret Service.

This isn't their call, this is the President's call and Obama does not want us, the little people who pay his fucking salary, to know who has been visiting.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pattmarty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #30
64. I don't want to "cheer lead" for MSNBC, but they do have.......................
................Olberman, Maddow, Schultz, the O'donnell clan, Schuster and that "hottie" Tamaron Hall. Who do the other cable outlets have or the corporate networks???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FailureToCommunicate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #64
83. Oh, I know. I was just pointing out the obvious: "Media okay-if we agree with
what they report"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pattmarty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #83
105. You got a point, but I have always maintained that what makes "us"................
.......different from "them" is the fact that we question shit and not just take everything (rush, Hannity, O'reilley etc) that we hear from any source as gospel truth. Just my observation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
high density Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:28 AM
Response to Original message
31. I hope Obama can change this policy
Though in the meantime, I highly doubt he is privy to the decisions that the Secret Service is making on his behalf here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LostinVA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:58 PM
Response to Reply #31
116. He better be privvy to the decisions the SS are making for him!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:28 AM
Response to Original message
32. He's only had five months to break every promise
give him a chance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:33 AM
Response to Original message
34. Damn!
:wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Hope Mobile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:36 AM
Response to Original message
35. Oh, this must be that transparency he was talking about restoring.
Sheesh!! :eyes: :mad: :puke: :wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:46 AM
Response to Original message
39. Important FACT buried deep deep deep in the article
<<Asked Monday whether the White House plans to continue to oppose release of the records, White House spokesman LaBot said the policy is still under review. >>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Abq_Sarah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:49 AM
Response to Reply #39
42. They've opposed it thus far
Why is that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:52 AM
Response to Reply #42
44. Simple they are not going to make a change, until they know exactly what they are doing
and what the consequences are. It's a way of doing things that has been sorely lacking the previous 8 years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Abq_Sarah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #44
53. Huh?
Release the names and damn the consequences.

This isn't about the minutes of foreign policy meetings, this is about who has access to our President.

We have a right to know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #53
59. simply invade Iraq and damn the consequences
has nothing been learned from that mistake?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
konnichi wa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #59
76. The invasion of Iraq might have been averted if there hadn't been so much fucking secrecy.
:grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #76
149. That was probably the best reply to an obvious red herring I have read in a while....
Chapeau!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chascarrillo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #59
268. Wow. You're a piece of work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-17-09 06:49 PM
Response to Reply #59
322. That wasn't a mistake, it was a PREMEDITATED CRIME.
NT!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Autumn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #44
73. It just seems to me that if the courts have ruled twice that
the names should be released President Obama should be siding with the court.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
greguganus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #44
143. Want to keep things the same and not ruffle feathers? Just say it's "under review"
DOMA, DADT, WH visitors, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
high density Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:03 AM
Response to Reply #42
50. Because before you start doing things, it's nice to be fully informed of any ramifications
Edited on Tue Jun-16-09 10:04 AM by high density
Haven't people learned by now that the Obama White House is not going to make 'gut' decisions, unlike the previous admin? There is a huge load of shit that this guy has to unravel and it will take some time. The ACLU, et al screaming at their top of their lungs that Obama = Bush because Obama has not instantly returned the country to the late 1990s is crazy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Abq_Sarah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #50
55. This is a gut decision
A brave, ethical decision would have been to keep that promise about transparency instead of protecting the rights of the king.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
high density Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #55
87. Who says he's not interested in keeping the promise?
Stop putting words in his mouth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #50
60. Exactly!
:applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cherchez la Femme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #50
102. Principles be damned! Hoo-ya!
(Promised) Transparency be damned!

Arrogance towards the people who elected him & pay him? Ya-Hoo!


Seriously -- 'unravel' his OWN visits?! This is too much... :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nichomachus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #39
46. Wait almost always means never
What's to review? They campaigned on this issue just like they campaigned on reversing DOMA and DADT. Now, all of a sudden, they need to "review" it. That is so bullshit.

Basically they're telling us that they campaigned on nice-sounding words, but they had no actual plan in place to do anything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:57 AM
Response to Reply #46
47. It's a bit inaccurate. There are thousands of Bush era policy that have to be reviewed
analyzed and changed as needed. The idea that everyone would be completed now, is an unrealistic one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nichomachus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:51 AM
Response to Original message
43. Will all of you just
look at the goddam picture of the goddam puppy and STFU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FailureToCommunicate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:52 AM
Response to Reply #43
45. "Who's a good dog... Who's a good dog..."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Soylent Brice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:13 AM
Response to Reply #43
58. i laughed at that, now i find myself feeling sad. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bdamomma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:04 AM
Response to Original message
51. MSNBC is requesting these logs? why?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polmaven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #51
72. Why not?
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bdamomma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:12 PM
Response to Reply #72
92. MSNBC? what would they use it for? are they that desperate
to keep that 24 hour cycle of news going?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polmaven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #92
101. They have a right to have it...
So again, why not?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bdamomma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:55 PM
Response to Reply #101
115. in past presidencies (not bush's) did the media ever ask
for WH logs, this seems odd to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polmaven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #115
134. I can only speculate that yes, they have.
It would not have been an issue because they were not refused access. It became an issue only when the * crew refused it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
walldude Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #115
157. In past presidencies(Up till Bush II) the logs were public record.
Maybe MSNBC wants to know if they are attempting to hide something.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sisters6 Donating Member (351 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-27-09 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #157
330. Yes, i would like to see the follow up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mark Twain Girl Donating Member (410 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #51
77. I'd be curious to know what lobbyists came to visit and have a fancy supper myself. I assume he lied
about lobbyists too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vidar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:06 AM
Response to Original message
52. "More transparency in government." What a fraud!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kablooie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:07 AM
Response to Original message
54. He doesn't want people to see that he has invited Republicans to visit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TacticalPeek Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:11 AM
Response to Original message
56. The audacity of nope.

Shrub must be wearing a big toothy grin.

Not me.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gorfle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #56
93. LOL
"audacity of nope" :)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rob Gregory Browne Donating Member (333 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:24 AM
Response to Original message
62. I've already learned once today
not to have knee-jerk reactions to the knee-jerk reaction posts on this forum.

I will reserve judgment until I know what's really happening and why the administration is doing it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ixion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:42 AM
Response to Reply #62
67. No need to wait
they're following neocon policies, that is what they're doing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rob Gregory Browne Donating Member (333 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 11:54 AM
Response to Reply #67
81. Uh-huh
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ixion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:43 AM
Response to Original message
68. I will call it the same thing I called it during the reign of BushCo: BS
it's a crock, pure and simple.

Change? Not so much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ooglymoogly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:46 AM
Response to Original message
69. KR...Hmmmmm there are 67 comments and 17 recs
What up...this is an important post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressIn2008 Donating Member (848 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 11:42 AM
Response to Original message
75. I suppose it's possible for a pol to get corrupted in a few months but more likely
that he played a lot of folks for suckers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #75
80. Did you notice Obama's PRE-BRIBED state . . . his list of owners?
We need a Plan B ... because if we keep voting this way, we're gonna get the

same results every time. I think we've noticed that!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
howmad1 Donating Member (959 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #80
137. Hey, here's an idea for plan "B":
Lets start a third party and begin working for Howard Dean to be the next president of the US. Sure as shit there's not a damn bit of difference between rethugs and dems. It's time for a real progressive third party candidate and Dean looks like he could be it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:05 PM
Response to Reply #137
264. Run and take cover . . .
cause you're going to get jumped on and get a warning!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tan guera Donating Member (256 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-17-09 01:43 AM
Response to Reply #80
299. Plan B
Run a progressive against him
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 11:46 AM
Response to Original message
78. Ah . . . . that "transparent" government -- how quickly it is disappearing . .. !!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pam4water Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 11:49 AM
Response to Original message
79. Eight years of Bush and we've forgotten what a republic is. :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alarimer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 11:55 AM
Response to Original message
82. I hate this guy more and more every day.
Transparency in government my ass! We have a right to know who is trying to influence your decisions, you liar!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frog92969 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #82
122. Yes, hate is the right word.
I gave him alot of money I couldn't afford.
And worse than that...I got my hopes up.

We desperately needed the change he promised, yesterday.
Now we have to wait four years and hope again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tan guera Donating Member (256 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-17-09 01:45 AM
Response to Reply #122
300. 3/1/2 years
to Howard Dean!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Window Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #82
254. Wow. Just. Wow.


:thumbsdown:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AzDar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:00 PM
Response to Original message
84. Fuck this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
d_b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:00 PM
Response to Original message
85. lol. just lol
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Individualist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:02 PM
Response to Original message
86. This is transparency in government?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zbdent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:04 PM
Response to Original message
88. Should be interesting listening to Repugniconvicts suddenly saying
"He has to divulge who he has been talking to ..."

Despite the fact that they backed Cheney not EVER disclosing who he met with in Feb 2001 ...

I agree that it shouldn't be a "state secret" ... all the more fodder for the Repukes to try to retake control ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GoddessOfGuinness Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 02:22 PM
Response to Reply #88
167. Except The Dick never pretended to be open about things.
Their whole platform was, "It's ok to lie and cheat as long as you're the guy with the power."

The audacity of the rethugs vs. the hypocrisy of our present administration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueJac Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:11 PM
Response to Original message
91. Obama took the word "hope" and made it just another 4 letter word.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Common Sense Party Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:17 PM
Response to Reply #91
94. "Nope!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Torn_Scorned_Ignored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:18 PM
Response to Original message
95. Regarding transparency
and many other Words




Meet




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auggie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:20 PM
Response to Original message
98. This isn't the stuff I voted for
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pasto76 Donating Member (835 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #98
131. What DID you vote for then?
Why do people like you expect these sweeping, radical changes so quickly? This is the goddamn GOVERNMENT. nothing moves quickly. PRESIDENT Obama has been dealt a shitty hand by DumDum and is trying to clean up the mess.

MAYBE, JUST MAYBE, he is more concerned with, stimulating a national and global economy, figuring out what to do in Afghanistan (troops are coming out of Iraq this summer, yes?) Finding a good replacment to the SCOTUS and making rounds on some healthcare reform.

This, BTW, is also a move by the SECRET SERVICE - who can, and have overruled the President in matters of security.

So 4 years from now, we'll meet up here, and you tell me what hes done over YEARS, instead of months. We will also see who is running against him. Then make these STUPID "ThiS ISNT WHAT I VOTED FOR" Comments.

If you were expecting anything different I dont know what planet you are from.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auggie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #131
195. Thank you for your kind, considerate words...
I choose not to respond to you at this time
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kermitt Gribble Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 07:49 PM
Response to Reply #131
257. Expecting transparency, maybe, as promised?
And your comparison of this to the economy and health care is laughable. This involves making a list of names public - doesn't sound like a "radical sweeping change" to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tan guera Donating Member (256 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-17-09 01:47 AM
Response to Reply #131
301. He's throwing us bones
to keep the "enchanted" hooked as long as possible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
StarryNite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:21 PM
Response to Original message
99. Kucinich 2012!
Dennis a true representative of the people! :bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:34 PM
Response to Reply #99
106. Only with a contract to prosecute Bush & Obama with a death penalty for failure to deliver.
Otherwise it's just Dennis' turn to promise us the blue sky and screw us over.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
StarryNite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #106
130. No, Dennis wouldn't screw us over.
That's why he will never be elected. :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gorfle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:22 PM
Response to Original message
100. What's going to happen at the end of 4 years with no change?
Who will we vote for? What choice will we have?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 02:28 PM
Response to Reply #100
170. Dean?
Guys lookin' real good 'bout now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChiciB1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:28 PM
Response to Original message
103. Chink, Chink, Chink! Here We Go Again!! To Those Of You Who Keep Defending
Obama and so many of his REVERSAlS from his campaign, to those who keep finding ways to defend and excuse what is happening, then I really MUST be a Liberal, Fascist Marxist who no longer has a right to call myself American!!

FIVE MONTHS and so many CHANGES, but NOT the CHANGES I had voted for!! I took my Obama stickers OFF my car and off my husband's truck, I DON'T recognize this man I voted for! FIVE MORE MONTHS and how much worse can it get?? Only FIVE months and I'm back to thinking "fear" all over again!

Say what you will, but this RIGHT turn by THIS ADMINISTRATION is really getting under my skin. I'm a Democrat, or at least what I thought a Democrat WAS... but times change and I suppose I haven't kept up with the NEW DEMOCRATS!!

No more donations from me for any of them! And before you tell me not to let the door kick me in the ass and get out of here, I would like to understand how to defend ALL THESE CHANGES!!

And to all of you who were calling Bill Maher all kinds of names and going on about him, well maybe, just maybe HE'S the one who really "gets it!" You either stand up for something or you'll FALL FOR ANYTHING!!

MONEY, MONEY, MONEY... the name of the game! And we don't even have the power to VOTE them out of office! THEY have all the money and the little guy really has not chance!

At least the people in Iran have the cohones to PROTEST... here in THIS country??? NADA! We just keep letting this go on and on and are told REVOLT or UPRISING is outdated and of no consequence. All the while America is spreading DEMOCRACY around the world!! This country needs a hefty dose of it right here at home!!

Sorry, but I'm really very disappointed. He wasn't my first choice, but I did work hard for him, but at this rate... he's a ONE TERMER and that makes me very sad!!!!
:thumbsdown:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kallyn Donating Member (15 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #103
189. Well, we'll get the next president
we deserve, that's for sure. If people want to stamp and scream, or opt out, and we end up with Cheney/Palin next time around, we'll have only ourselves to blame.

Question: do you believe his basic views as he presented them? That he believes we need to repair and maintain a social net? Get out of our wars asap? Close Gitmo? That he's not a xenophobe? Not a homophobe? Prefers diplomacy to belligerence(You have to still believe this one, given the reasons his supporters are pised at him)? I do. I think the guy is essentially in line with my social and international policy views. As far as it goes. But like the man said, if you don't win, you can't govern.

Unless you really believe his whole presentation of his views was BS... that he's actually a social reactionary right-wing warmongering zealot, please -- back off and let the man machinate. He's not going to get there any faster if we're all in the back seat whining, "Are we theeeere yet??"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 06:02 PM
Response to Reply #189
244. Napoleon used to say "after me, the deluge"
Basically he was trying to make the same argument by black mail as you... where we should ignore the current shenanigans, because there is always a possibility of things being worse.

In modern times, the same tactic has been adopted by business leaders. It is called Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt (or FUD for short). Basically, it consists on keeping your customer base, not via the merits of your product (which probably is uncompetitive to begin with), but by making your customers afraid of trying the competitor's solutions... If I think about it, that MO seems to fit to a T the behavior of the DLC-types in the Dem machinery. Their only selling being that the equivalent Republican policy would be so much worse.

Ah, here is to diminished expectations!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kallyn Donating Member (15 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:59 PM
Response to Reply #244
274. It's not about diminished expectations
But if people want to opt out five minutes after their first disappointment (or become irrational, which amounts to the same thing), they can look in the mirror when the next guy is worse, not better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Individualist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:37 PM
Response to Reply #274
281. "first" disappointment?
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kallyn Donating Member (15 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:58 PM
Response to Reply #281
287. Ok, then
Obviously you and I always had a different timetable in mind.
Good luck with Merlin in '12, because you're not looking for a politician public servant; you're looking for a spell-casting Magic Man. Who can, not for nothing, also get elected.

And hey, if you come up with one, I'll be first in line to holler "Yay, You!!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tan guera Donating Member (256 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-17-09 01:54 AM
Response to Reply #274
302. Why should the next one be worse?
Let's think big, OK? We need a challenger and to get out of the mindset that somebody or other can't win becuz it's never been done. Horse feathers. The reason Dennis didn't win is becuz people thought not enuf people would vote for him and they were AFRAID that McCain would win. We can't any longer live our lives in fear of repugs winning. The way he's going, maybe even Keith, Rachel and Moveon will be supporting Howard!! Or Feingold. I prefer Howard.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kallyn Donating Member (15 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-17-09 08:41 AM
Response to Reply #302
312. I like me some Feingold, me.
Still in mourning for Wellstone. Sigh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Individualist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-17-09 10:30 AM
Response to Reply #302
316. ...but, but Howard and Feingold aren't spell casting magic men!
The post I'm referring to is one of the most bizarre I've ever read.

You're right about the reason Dennis didn't win. Too many people allowed themselves to be swayed by the "unelectable" meme instead of voting in their best interests.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:31 PM
Response to Original message
104. Uuuuh didn't we all vote against more of the same from Mc Cain?
Oh! Say it ain't so Joe. :blush:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shadowknows69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:36 PM
Response to Original message
107. WTF!!!!
Edited on Tue Jun-16-09 12:36 PM by shadowknows69
transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency transparency


Is it Change yet?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
avaistheone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:37 PM
Response to Original message
108. I am reminded.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:37 PM
Response to Original message
109. Transparency? Nope
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:40 PM
Response to Original message
111. : - ((((((((((((((((((((((( (((((((((((((((((((((((( ....... !!!
VERY disappointing!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
texastoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:42 PM
Response to Original message
112. This is a wrong-headed development
And Barack and all Dems need to hear from us loud and clear that this is completely unacceptable.

And for all of you who are pulling a substantial amount of support from the Dems for this and other kinder, gentler Bush behavior, good luck with that. Hope you all like the names Sarah and Newt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hardtoport Donating Member (87 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:49 PM
Response to Original message
113. THIS is why impeachment should NEVER be off the table.
We told the world, and our current and future presidents, that our Constitution isn't worth the paper it was written on when we allowed Bush to finish his term unchallenged.

As soon as one president gets away with something, there is little to no chance that the next one will relinquish that power. This notion that the electorate should be patient is nonsense. No politician every did the right thing without having their arm twisted behind their back. If we're wrong at times and the President does have some chess game in mind, so what? Are we afraid the President is going to get his feelings hurt? The President of the United States should have to explain himself to the American people. If he has a problem with that, he's in the wrong line of work.

Obama has a hell of a lot of explaining to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
keepCAblue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 12:52 PM
Response to Original message
114. Where did all the cheerleaders go?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brentspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #114
123. They need time to come up with a clever explanation (n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sisters6 Donating Member (351 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #114
224. +BLOWING IN THE WIND+
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FailureToCommunicate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 06:45 PM
Response to Reply #224
249. Good one! You beat me to it (And welcome to DU!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sisters6 Donating Member (351 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 08:18 PM
Response to Reply #249
261. Thanks. We (Democrats) should be the Upperground now but
so many things seem to be deteriorating before us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FailureToCommunicate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:23 PM
Response to Reply #261
267. Take heart. Be not discouraged. It's a new day, but still morning...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blue97keet Donating Member (390 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:00 PM
Response to Original message
118. Synergies Summit Protest in D.C. (any connection?)
Synergies Summit Protest in D.C.

The ''Synergies Summit" of United States India Business Council is going to be held on June 17 in Washington D.C. when three of its top officials, including Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, will be present. The CEO of WiPro (an Indian I.T. outsourcing company that is resisting calls to hire Americans in this country), Azim Premji, will be there. The summit is likely to spell out the Obama administration's policy for India.

http://techsunite.org/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brentspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:01 PM
Response to Original message
120. The Audacity of Dopes
who thought Obama was all about "change".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RetroLounge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:03 PM
Response to Original message
124. Just another wheel flying off the Hopemobile...
:eyes:

RL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
City Lights Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:05 PM
Response to Original message
125. ARGH!
:argh:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
judesedit Donating Member (450 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:09 PM
Response to Original message
126. Unless someone's life will be put in danger, FULL DISCLOSURE, OBAMA!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happygoluckytoyou Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:19 PM
Response to Original message
128. SEND YOUR OPINION TO WHITEHOUSE.GOV .... Obama listens to the VOICE OF THE PEOPLE !! we hope---
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emilyg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:27 PM
Response to Original message
132. Transparency - haahaa
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DebbieCDC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:31 PM
Response to Original message
133. Wow even MORE change we can believe in!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mystieus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:40 PM
Response to Original message
138. I could care less.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:44 PM
Response to Original message
141. Whatever happened to his promise of making a buttload of public records... "public"
via a website or something. I think Obama pledged to put all the new legislation and discussion processes up in a website for public review...

Or am I "misremembering?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hughee99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #141
173. TINO...
Transparency in name only
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LaPera Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:47 PM
Response to Original message
145. And people on DU can't understand why others get pissed with Obama constantly
doing the opposite of what he ran on....these people want to believe he's superhuman, yet he hasn't gotten any real change passed he listens to republicans bullshit in the D.C. bubble and believes it's that way across the country...republicans have it down how to scare democrats even though they wield very little power...

We better get a public option Universal Health Care or nothing will be accomplished...we NEED it desperately.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sellitman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:52 PM
Response to Original message
148. Who works for who?
It's time for a gut check.

How very, very disappointing.

Actually...FUCK
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
derby378 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:57 PM
Response to Original message
153. It's deja vu all over again
Not happy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Duncan Grant Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 01:58 PM
Response to Original message
154. Happy days are here again, the skies above are clear again, so let's sing a song of cheer again,
happy days are here again.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmondine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 02:02 PM
Response to Original message
155. I smell Rahm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
twitomy Donating Member (756 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 02:09 PM
Response to Original message
160. I'm not surprised..
When are you poor suckers ever going to learn? A politician is first and formost a slimeball. The D or R besides their name makes little difference.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kid a Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 02:13 PM
Response to Original message
162. Obama Cheerleader here! Reserving "knee jerk" buffoonery for my Onion visit later
I enjoy watching you idiots rant and rave from behind your cuddly pcs.

most of you have no clue what you are talking about!

=)
have a great day

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 02:15 PM
Response to Reply #162
163. What a wonderful reply, so full of facts and figures to serve as a counterclaim...
... wait...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kermitt Gribble Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 02:48 PM
Response to Reply #162
181. Oh, omniscient one,
please enlighten us with the explanation for this secrecy from the white house! Or just STFU!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BostonMa Donating Member (183 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 05:05 PM
Response to Reply #162
228. idiotic answer
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
abq e streeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 02:18 PM
Response to Original message
165. another "pony" we didn't get...every day I'm having less patience with those
who still are using that sarcastic "I didn't get my pony" argument against those who, like me ( and quite obviously I'm not alone) are becoming more and more disappointed, if not flat-out angry with the direction this administration is going. As much as the idea that maybe they're doing what they're ordered to by , as Bill Hicks put it,"the same capitalist/industrialist scumfucks that got you there", I suppose that would still not be as upsetting as what increasingly seems to be the case; that this administration and the whole "change" thing was a scam from the git-go. Once again, I want to say, I could be utterly wrong about what I perceive this administration to be turning out to be. I hope to god that I am, and would be thrilled to have to apologize to everyone still defending Obama, for not trusting that he, and his administration, will end up , when all is said and done, to be everything good that they'd promised to be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Celeborn Skywalker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #165
172. Here's my view (which could be completely wrong)
I think that by the end of his term, we will see significant change in regards to DADT, ENDA, and DOMA, despite the DOJ defending Bush's positions on said issues. I also think he will end up releasing these visitor logs before long. I think President Obama is very methodical and reasoned when looking at existing law and doesn't rush anything (I wish he would be faster though).

If I'm wrong in four years, I will apologize and admit I was suckered. I hope I don't have to do that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
abq e streeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #172
198. Its so refreshing to be disagreed with in a respectful, civil manner----thank you
not being sarcastic in the least either...Of course I think I'm right or wouldn't post my opinions, but am keeping my fingers crossed that I'm wrong. Thank you once again for an intelligent, respectful exchange of differing views. Hope you're having a good day, and hope you're right !
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Celeborn Skywalker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-17-09 12:48 PM
Response to Reply #198
317. I think it helps to keep things civil.
I don't like Obama's defenders calling people's legitimate anger and disappointment "poutrage" or "not getting their pony" and I don't like his detractors using words RW buzzwords like "worshiper" and "cultist".

I enjoy a good discussion but not when people are flinging insults.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
abq e streeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-17-09 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #317
320. n/t--just "emoticon" below
:fistbump:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChiciB1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #165
196. I Too Would LOVE To Be Wrong About What I'm Seeing & Feeling....
AND I would LOVE to eat my words, but from my seat in the peanut gallery I'm not liking what I'm seeing!

Given more time I WONDER more and more WHAT we will be seeing!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lindisfarne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 02:30 PM
Response to Original message
171. #159 should be required reading before posting in this thread ... it will enlighten you. Someone
else asked: what if Obama's girls had a sleepover. Should their guests' names be private or public? The Whitehouse has said it is reviewing the policy (see #159). I personally don't think private guests, especially of the girls or Michelle Obama, should be public information. The White House may be public property, but it also has a personal residence in it, and people deserve privacy. I realize this could be abused by someone claiming someone was a private guest when in fact the person wasn't.

Cheney abused public information laws without resorting to claims of "private guest" - so what needs to happen is not to allow this abuse of public information laws.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RUMMYisFROSTED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 02:42 PM
Response to Reply #171
176. No, it shouldn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 04:02 PM
Response to Reply #176
201. Why? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 02:48 PM
Response to Reply #171
182. That post you are referring is so full of red herring, that indeed it should be required reading...
... for marine biologists.


I specially liked the "touch" of using the Obama girls as an excuse to shield their daddy of any responsibility. That is sooooooo classy.

The point that a lot of the red herring fisherman in this thread seem to miss: the guest list is fairly inconsequential as far as things go. However, if the Obama admin has trouble making such an inconsequential piece of information public, what about more serious pieces of information?

In the same sense that it is mighty hypocritical for Mrs. Palin to feign indignation for the media's treatment of her daughter, since it was her who ran on a platform of moral purity... when she is more rotten than most of us. It is equally hypocritical for the Obama admin to shield simple information such as this... since "transparency" was one of the campaign mantras.

If we are going to enter a framework that implies that it is OK if a Dem does it. Then we haven't learned much...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lindisfarne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #182
184. Are you demanding access to the list of everyone Obama calls, texts, and so on?
Edited on Tue Jun-16-09 03:01 PM by lindisfarne
I had very little problem with the Bush administration's blocking of the list because I can see there being a need to not publicize every visitor, such as a foreign diplomat.

Maybe we need a special court to review whether it is truly necessary to withhold the names of whatever visitors an administration says need to be withheld? That way true needs for secrecy could be balanced against the need for public information.

In no case do underage visitors to the children of presidents need to be made public.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 04:30 PM
Response to Reply #184
218. Holy strawman argument Batman!
Projection can be funny that way sometimes... apparently, with his support of FISA, Obama was the one who seemed to have no problem with the state having access to the list of people I call, text, or e-mail. So what you are trying to say is basically, that whatever is good for the goose.... it is not applicable for the gander?

BTW, the underage visitors in this case are not the issue... not by a long shot. Using two girls as a shield in a desperate attempt to justify this nonsense... it is just that: desperate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-28-09 10:48 AM
Response to Reply #184
351. Why should the visit of a diplomat be secret? It's not as though we get a transcript of the convo.
Not since Nixon and Watergate, anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #182
206. Straw men are also one of
this poster's favorites as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 04:33 PM
Response to Reply #206
219. Indeed... I never in a million years would expect some Dems to exhibit a level of logical disonance
that would rival some of the right's greatest hits.

It is disturbing to say the least... stuff that was "unacceptable" under Bush, all of the sudden become brilliant plays by a grandmaster taking part in the most awesome game of chess ever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Individualist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 03:15 PM
Response to Reply #171
188. ...required reading for people who enjoy doublespeak
and spin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hassin Bin Sober Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #171
194. Maybe they were bad girls and got lumps of coal for Christmas?
Is that the reason The Whitehouse turned down a specific request concerning visits by coal company executives?

It also denied a narrower request by the nonpartisan watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, which sought logs of visits by executives of coal companies.


Oh wait. They weren't in the Whitehouse around Christmas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
abq e streeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 03:51 PM
Response to Reply #171
199. I read it, and am open to the possibility that they're right , and I'm not
Time will tell, and as I said here already, I fervently hope I end up being proven completely wrong about my increasing level of disappointment and skepticism regarding Obama and his presidency.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frylock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 04:41 PM
Response to Reply #171
220. i imagine chelsea found occasion to host friends for a sleepover..
disclosure of those names didn't seem to be much of an issue then, or is this another one of those things that 9/11 changed forever?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #220
232. Apparently pillow fights are matters of national security now...
Maybe the parents of the classmates of the Obama girls have to request this year's yearbook by filing FOIA requests?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
barbtries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 02:43 PM
Response to Original message
178. i Hate this shit!
:cry:

i've been so naive in my life. an idiot really.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Willo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 02:47 PM
Response to Original message
180. Is there an accusation being made? Suspicions based on...?
Something like...President seen with shady characters in diner at 2 a.m.

White house is a revolving door for unidentified foreign leaders, says White House maid and cook.

President holds private meeting meetings in White House.

Anything like that?

Or is the recipe simply:
Start with a name you don't approve of
Add Bush
Imply something sinister...

...then wait.

DU teaparty coming soon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
humbled_opinion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 03:05 PM
Response to Original message
186. AHEM!
Obama on his worst day surpasses Bush on his best.
I refuse to be lost in the Bushes again.
Giving the Right Wing fodder to use against Obama is counter productive to Progressive goals. Therefore, if Obama does not want to release the list, I trust there is a logical and important reason not too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #186
208. Replace Bush for Obama, and Iraq war for the "guest list"
and you sound exactly like my father in law circa 2003/4.

The more things change...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
humbled_opinion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 04:56 PM
Response to Reply #208
225. LOL
Maybe over time as we get further removed from the last 8 years on hell on earth I will calm down enough to digest the issues again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 05:13 PM
Response to Reply #225
231. To me, the past 8 years of hell... are the reason why I am done giving the benefit of the doubt
and free passes to any politician. Regardless of their political affiliation, assumptions are a dangerous thing IMHO.

If politicians want to gain our trust, they should do it the old fashion way: they should earn it. Lord knows they have pissed away any benefit of the doubt (or respect) they may ever had at some point...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ColbertWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 03:27 PM
Response to Original message
191. What the hell? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 04:06 PM
Response to Original message
204. Is Jeff Gannon still going there? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oldtimeralso Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 04:16 PM
Response to Original message
209. I Also Think That Post # 159 Should Be Mandatory Reading.
I think that many now posting on DU don't get it. The Neocons have had their way since 1981 and all of the media is on their side. Don't fall for the propaganda machine. Give President Obama time to make the changes in an orderly way. Just look around you,not just at your personal issues, the world is on the edge of depression. How long did it take FDR to recover from the GOP thieves? Now the damage is far greater and America has fewer ways to recover, where is the industrial base that could work our way out? In China where the greedy and use almost slave labor to maximize their profits. Some of those that chanted "GIve Peace A Chance" should now "Give Hope A Chance"!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
texastoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 04:22 PM
Response to Original message
213. Am I on the right thread?
I do believe I am.


Don't believe what you've heard about a GOP in disarray. They're mad, they're organized, and they're determined to return to what they see as their rightful place: ruling the halls of Congress.

How do I know? $14.4 million.

That's how much Newt Gingrich raised during a fundraising dinner last week for Republican House and Senate committees. One speech. $14.4 million.

They not only have cash, but also history on their side. There are only a handful of times in our nation's past when the party that won the White House hasn't lost big the following midterm election.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mountainvue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 04:23 PM
Response to Original message
215. What possible reason could he have
for doing this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
subdivisionsrush Donating Member (1 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 04:29 PM
Response to Original message
217. Well I Am Back In The Trust No One Category
:hide: 

First time poster long time lurker. I voted Ron Paul in
primaries and Obama in the general. McCain as an alternative
was unacceptable and Hillary just scared me now I feel like a
game of rope-a-dope is being played.

Is it me or do you all feel like this administration and
Pelosico. take great joy in telling us to just trust
them...they are lookin' out for us all the while just
screwing us in the end? I feel like a moron half the time
when anyone in government is talking to me because they
address us like we are a bunch of 5th graders who can't
comprehend anything outside of a Phonics book.

Obama hasn't done a damn thing worth my vote yet and that is
all he got was my vote because he didn't deserve a dime..no
politician does until they prove they will work for YOU.
Biden is an utter joke and rivals Quayle as the single
dumbest man to hold the office of VP.

Can we finally get back to work people? Can we start creating
millions of jobs again instead of finding and hearing the spin
of so called "good news" when it's 651,000 jobs lost
instead of 725,000 as forecasted?

Enough is enough. Since Obama took the national stage it has
been one big PR campaign. Fine..some 67 million voted for
you...I am not asking for miracles. I am asking for
resolutions that need the tag of urgency and I am not talking
about puppies, basketball games, what schools their kids go
to, what star is on his blackberry, and what musician is
performing for them tonight.

It's junk.

We have North Korea threatening nukes, the fiscal crisis of a
century, a huge mess by Bush with Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran in
chaos, Israel with an itchy finger, more jobs being lost, gas
prices skyrocketing again, crime picking up...keep your eye on
the ball people. We need to hold Obama accountable here and
call a spade a spade at the end of the day. If we rode
Bushco. about this transparency issue then we have to do the
same with him. 


In closing I know a bunch of you aren't going to agree with
me and some will but hopefully we will be able to find common
ground. I refrain from posting on message boards because I
don't see the circle jerk debate being fruitful unless we are
truly doing something active as a result.

Time for action.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #217
252. Now this is a post that people in this thread should read.
And for the record, NO I do not believe that guests names to the private White House quarters should be released. The Obamas are entitled to some privacy in their very un-private lives. HOWEVER, the guest logs for the rest of the White House should be public information. That is true transparency.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #217
266. Good song
Note that people who post in that strange font never last long for some reason.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:15 PM
Response to Reply #266
276. Yeah, what's up with that? They're always low post count too. How do they get that font?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:18 PM
Response to Reply #276
278. I have this theory that it's a cut-and-paste from a RW site
I can't prove it, but I've never seen that font last for long :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 05:06 PM
Response to Original message
229. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
cottonseed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 05:57 PM
Response to Original message
243. Wow! Imagine. The leader of 1 half of a 2 party system adopting oligarchal policies.
Anyone that's truly disappointed here are the truly stupid.

Keep bouncing between 2 parties. That'll get ya somewhere.

Kucinich would be just as bad. Only idiots would think differently.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
moondust Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 08:00 PM
Response to Original message
259. Is there a way
Edited on Tue Jun-16-09 08:00 PM by moondust
to put everybody in this thread on ignore all at once? Then I can pick out the few voices of reason and put them back in play.

This is the worst Obama-hating convention I've seen yet on DU and I'm not convinced anybody here knows the whole story. It may have something to do with the Obama kids. It may have something to do with real security threats against people invited to visit the (black, pro-choice) people living in the WH. Who knows?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tan guera Donating Member (256 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-17-09 02:10 AM
Response to Reply #259
303. How many straws
have to break the camel's back? It isn't just this; it's his horrible foreign policy, the crooks bailing out the crooks, the impeding of the prosecution of bushco, to name a few biggies.

He'll save DOMA and DADT and a few others in time for the election. Starry-eyes supporters who were disappointed will be brought back into the flock of hope and change.

And while people are basking in his glow, he'll be starting several more wars.

I've seen thru him since his very first speech. Slick and smooth, but *better* than bush. That remains to be seen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
moondust Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-17-09 06:26 AM
Response to Reply #303
307. Wow. How delusional.
I see through you, tan guera. Welcome to IGNORE.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WestSeattle2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 08:04 PM
Response to Original message
260. Open goverrnment is open government regardless of who
currently controls the levers of power.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 09:08 PM
Response to Original message
265. I wonder why Obama does shit like this?
It makes no sense even if I can't imagine what he would have to hide.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
agentS Donating Member (922 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:06 PM
Response to Original message
275. waiting for the other shoe to drop.
I'm going to take a neutral stance on this issue until the CREW lawsuit is over with.

While I agree with most posters that the logs should be open to some degree (we need to know if special interests group members are visiting, but not Mrs. Obama's sister or a relative), recent violent acts by right wing fascists and Operation Rescue members may be what's forcing the Secret Service's hand.

I wouldn't put it past Glenn Beck to publicize the list of visitors, and then some Republican scumbag showing up at the door of a visitor with a sawed-off shotgun. This is how these people roll.

Nonetheless, if you can't wait for the courts to strike this down again, you can always grab a good telephoto lens or binoculars and stand outside the white house and see who's coming in and out. Why wait on Obama to do the right thing, if this is so important to you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 10:17 PM
Response to Reply #275
277. Problem is, at this point, we're waiting on 4-5 other shoes. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TankLV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-16-09 11:44 PM
Response to Original message
294. Wow - "change (the window drapes)" you can believe in!!!
very very disappointing...

but on the other hand - it's a giant middle finger to the REPUKES who are sure as hell to try to make this a "scandal" as sure as I'm gonna shit tomorrow...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MisterK Donating Member (80 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-17-09 12:00 AM
Response to Original message
296. sounds good to me
We have to play on a level playing field.
If they do it so should we.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-17-09 03:43 AM
Response to Original message
304. Change? YOU FUCKING LIED TO US.
NT!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lamp_shade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-17-09 05:00 AM
Response to Original message
305. Good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-17-09 01:32 PM
Response to Original message
318. So, apparently this was SS policy for ages.
It is way too easy to jerk people around like little puppets these days.

WAY too easy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-17-09 06:57 PM
Response to Reply #318
323. FALSE. Read upthread and stop spreading lies.
NT!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-18-09 05:28 AM
Response to Reply #318
326. Ironic post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zynx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-28-09 09:41 AM
Response to Original message
342. I've never gotten my underwear in a bundle over this.
I didn't even under Bush. I just never have thought this is that important.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Jul 12th 2014, 04:26 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC