HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Poll: Email-Gate

Tue Mar 10, 2015, 09:41 PM

Poll: Email-Gate

Seriously, taking the temperature at DU on this subject !
24 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
Think the whole thing is totally ridiculous to spend another freakin minute on
21 (88%)
Think there's something fishy, but don't really care that much
0 (0%)
Think this is serious and brings question to her integrity
2 (8%)
Don't care, it will pass
0 (0%)
Care, want to learn more before I pass judgement.
0 (0%)
Other
1 (4%)
Show usernames
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

19 replies, 1102 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 19 replies Author Time Post
Reply Poll: Email-Gate (Original post)
Laura PourMeADrink Mar 2015 OP
RobertEarl Mar 2015 #1
Laura PourMeADrink Mar 2015 #2
bravenak Mar 2015 #3
pinboy3niner Mar 2015 #4
A-Schwarzenegger Mar 2015 #5
Laura PourMeADrink Mar 2015 #10
one_voice Mar 2015 #6
A-Schwarzenegger Mar 2015 #7
Laura PourMeADrink Mar 2015 #11
bigwillq Mar 2015 #8
deutsey Mar 2015 #9
Laura PourMeADrink Mar 2015 #12
rgbecker Mar 2015 #13
TheKentuckian Mar 2015 #14
rgbecker Mar 2015 #15
TheKentuckian Mar 2015 #16
TheKentuckian Mar 2015 #17
pipi_k Mar 2015 #18
Tierra_y_Libertad Mar 2015 #19

Response to Laura PourMeADrink (Original post)

Tue Mar 10, 2015, 09:43 PM

1. Now what Happened?

 

Everyone knows email is not private.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #1)

Tue Mar 10, 2015, 09:49 PM

2. True Dat. Surprised at the results so far - have been busy at work - but

with brief glances at DU only - thought people were against her.

Lawrence O'Donnell seems to be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Laura PourMeADrink (Original post)

Tue Mar 10, 2015, 09:50 PM

3. I care less about the email every day.

 

Every minute. Care less and less.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bravenak (Reply #3)

Tue Mar 10, 2015, 09:57 PM

4. I'm with you

Just somebody please pour me a drink.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Laura PourMeADrink (Original post)

Tue Mar 10, 2015, 10:21 PM

5. Kick.

I was deliriously torn between first choice and "dont care, will pass."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to A-Schwarzenegger (Reply #5)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 09:53 AM

10. Ha. First one is that it's driving you crazy how "important" people

are making it. Don't care, will pass - is nothing bothers you about the whole thing.

You know, it's a subtle difference because we professional pollsters like to study the nuance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Laura PourMeADrink (Original post)

Tue Mar 10, 2015, 10:25 PM

6. It's important until...

the next important thing comes along.

What I find most interesting is somehow this is more important than what those 47 assholes did--to the media anyway--pathetic. Liberal media my ass.

edited to add: I don't think it's that big a deal. It will cause a few wrinkles but in the end it won't matter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Laura PourMeADrink (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 07:37 AM

7. Surprised by this.

From scanning the many recent posts on this I thought
it would be at least 2-1 the other way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to A-Schwarzenegger (Reply #7)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 09:53 AM

11. I know ! And MSNBC people have their panties in a wad over it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Laura PourMeADrink (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 08:12 AM

8. I think it's time to move on (nt)

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Laura PourMeADrink (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 08:20 AM

9. Not at all a fan of Hillary's but I think this is a non-issue at it currently stands n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to deutsey (Reply #9)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 09:56 AM

12. i am starting to think that what bothers the right more than any actual

act - is that they are being outwitted whether it's Hillary or Obama so they will drag out forever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Laura PourMeADrink (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 10:14 AM

13. Everyone thinks they should get to see everyone else's Email but no mention of tapping phone.

 

I think email is replacing the telephone more than it is replacing snail mail and I'm not sure anyone should be required to publish every last one of them any more than they should be expected to provide transcripts of every phone call

Bravo for transparency in Government affairs, but until we have transcripts of every conversation and phone call we won't have it and maybe we shouldn't have it. Nothing would get done if people can't communicate in private.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rgbecker (Reply #13)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 10:51 AM

14. Bravo for transparency in government affairs doesn't blend terribly well with maybe we shouldn't

have it.

I think what you are really saying is "fuck transparency in government, it might prove inconvenient but I'd like to give the concept some passing lip service".

This not about everyone, it is about public servants acting in their official capacities and I don't get what is so terribly difficult to get about the concept, it was not something that had to be repeatedly explained until Hillary Clinton was at the center, folks seemed a hell of a lot clearer on the issue when it was TeaPubliKlan fraudsters in charge.

Folks are suddenly constitutionally unable to allow the concept that what Clinton did was not illegal yet was not the kind of handling that we wish to see and that isn't acceptable moving forward. No, now the whole fucking concept has to be irrelevant and silly because there can be no daylight between illegal and best practices and in fact no admission of anything less than stellar handling so not only wasn't it illegal but the concept of such being illegal has to be squashed too.

Fucking dishonest ass hypocrites that just like the crooked ass TeaPubliKlans could give a shit about all that high minded previous talk, it was strictly a weapon to attack the other side to be abandoned not actually lived.

I'm not getting some folks vision for the country at all, seems the most ardent supporters and prolific excuse makers for the surveillance state and total information awareness of us peons are the first out in front of public servants acting as their own holder, gatekeepers, and screeners of their public records, this seems inverted and dangerously insane.

A clear predilection for we the people to be subjects rather than citizens is what I see. Such is not a Democratic or a democratic value that I can recognize much less stomach.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheKentuckian (Reply #14)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 12:15 PM

15. I was hoping for a little consideration of the implications of the use of email.

 

In Massachusetts the rule is that members of group of town officials (for example: Planning Board) cannot meet without notice to the public. If a quorum should find themselves gathered, no public business is to be discussed. Fine, but that doesn't outlaw a discussion between 2 of the five members which could happen in person, over the phone or via email. By the law, any email between these 2 would not be expected to be in the public record nor would any email between a board member and the public. A phone call also would not be expected to in the public record.

I was hoping there could be a little discussion about these rules for public officials behavior rather than knee jerk partisan raving without much consideration of the rules themselves.

Consider a government official, say an IRS tax assistant or Social Security advisor giving information on the telephone. Are you expecting a searchable public record to be kept of that exchange? If so would a email also need to be retained for the newspaper to search in the near future?

If you can define "Transparency in government" more precisely, then I'll say fuck it or not.

In the end, there are going to be a lot of judgment calls made at all levels of government and in private lives about what communications are public domain and which are not. And given that, it will be discussed in the political world for all eternity, because it is a political question. If you hate Hillary, you won't ever trust her judgment about which communications are of public interest and which are not. If you like her, you would be happy to leave it to her to decide. If you hate her, you no doubt would like every one of her telephone conversations to be transcribed and posted on line. If you like her, you might like to see her have some level of privacy to conduct state affairs as he thinks best. If you hate Obama, you could insist every conversation between him and John Kerry about the Iran Nuclear Negotiations should be provided to the Senate GOP but if you like him, maybe you would be happy to trust him to carry on as he seems fit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rgbecker (Reply #15)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 12:39 PM

16. If you have consistent rules for any and all then you won't be caught up in hate and love.

Yes, I think phone conversations should be recorded and should be available to the public through the same process that other communications are (some reasonable delays for security and negotiation purposes would be allowed but eventually it is our data not their's), it is OUR business not their private affairs. I don't believe in public servants acting as their own gatekeepers be they my favorite liberal or most despised regressive.

I'd shrink the debate to the smallest parameters possible, eliminating as much "trust" as possible.

I say public officials be restricted from performance of official duties save independent from their control and government owned and retrievable lines of communication while giving a substantial reward and immunity to anyone reporting provable violations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rgbecker (Reply #15)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 12:44 PM

17. When dealing with the private data of a citizen then it is a private matter.

Personal info could be redacted and in no case am I hearing anyone argue that the Social Security or IRS agent should be the gatekeeper and holder of such records, that is an exception built for the power elites in some people's minds.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Laura PourMeADrink (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 01:02 PM

18. Other because...

I pretty much stopped having an extreme opinion one way or another about the shit politicians do when I realized that something a Republican might do that would get me hopping up and down in a rant would probably be not that big of a deal when/if a Democrat did it.

IOW, having double standards sucks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Laura PourMeADrink (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 01:08 PM

19. Politician gets caught being a big shot with perks. *Shrug*.

 

Kinda like having a corner office or private secretary or her own parking spot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread