Obama Presidency and Transparency....

[K831]

“I think there are discussions, even about transparency and developing rules about transparency that we need to be able to have quietly and behind closed doors.” – Daniel Gordon, White House staff

"Let me say it as simply as I can; transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstone of this presidency". Barack Obama

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/05/16/video-transparency-on-parade/

Watch the vid folks.

 

[LuckyKBoxer]

the only transparancy we are going to get from this administration is the transparancy to our individual rights as they are erroded away to nothing.

 

[Touch Of Death]

In politics, presentation is everything. Transparency sort of lets the cat out of the bag before a coherent message can be constructed. I'm just sayin'
Sean

 

[Twin Fist]

anyone that believed ANYTHING that mother****er said needs help

 

[K831]

In politics, presentation is everything. Transparency sort of lets the cat out of the bag before a coherent message can be constructed. I'm just sayin'
Sean

Sean, that's true in many cases, and I understand that. But, two things;

1.) That is precisely what Obama railed against and promised he wouldn't do, and
2.) That isn't where his lack of transparency is coming from or they type we are seeing. His lack of transparency is far beyond a momentary period used to properly construct a message.

 

[Touch Of Death]

anyone that believed ANYTHING that mother****er said needs help

I was hoping you could try to be a little more opaque.
Sean

 

[elder999]

the only transparancy we are going to get from this administration is the transparancy to our individual rights as they are erroded away to nothing.

And when I railed against the very same sort of thing, made the same complaints about the Bush administration, I got labeled so many things, by so many people-when I asked what they would think about these sorts of behaviors when Hillary was in office, there was nothing but silence. And now, the corporations have a different face, from the "other side" of the aisle in place, someone who can be perceived as from "the far left," and the same complaints are coming from those who defended that behavior when it was coming from "the right."

[yt]DV7yx2y3TtY[/yt]

 

[LuckyKBoxer]

And when I railed against the very same sort of thing, made the same complaints about the Bush administration, I got labeled so many things, by so many people-when I asked what they would think about these sorts of behaviors when Hillary was in office, there was nothing but silence. And now, the corporations have a different face, from the "other side" of the aisle in place, someone who can be perceived as from "the far left," and the same complaints are coming from those who defended that behavior when it was coming from "the right."

[yt]DV7yx2y3TtY[/yt]

I never once said that.
I am consistent in what I say. I will call out whoever is pissing me off at the moment, it just so happens I live in California, and we have a Democrat for president, so the vast majority of the things pissing me off are related to democrats atm. I am not one to condone something I dont like just because my guy is doing it. Never have been, go through all 411 of my study posts and you will see that.

 

[elder999]

I never once said that.
.

Seeing as you joined MartialTalk in 2008, of course you aren't one of the ones to whom I'm referring-I'm just making a point that all of this started long before the anointed one took office, and that it's all far from over......

 

[K831]

Elder,

True, there are people who defended Bush for certain actions, or ignored them, then in turn, deride Obama for the same or similar. I am not one of them (short of perhaps a few select situations that I feel have enough nuance to qualify as "different").

However, on the subject of Obama, I think there are a few things that set him and this situation apart from Bush;

1.) Obama blasted Bush for many policies that he has now fully engaged in.
2.) Obama campaigned, promising outright, to institute complete transparency and to adhere strictly to the rule of law (among many other things). He has done niether, and in some instances, has blatantly and unapologeticly done the opposite. I don't recall these things being the pillar of Bush's campaign.
3.) The MSM crucified Bush - for everything. Obama is given a pass. From vetting him at the beginning to his blatant breaking of numerous campaign promises. Were any other candidate to have known associations with past terrorists, anti-American zealots, voter fraud, campaign contribution issues etc etc we would have never heard the end of it. IF Bush had said "all of the health care debates will be broadcast on CSPAN" and then flagrantly said F.U. to America on the issue, we would have never heard the end of it. I went up to campus every day and all I saw on students/faculty were anti-war arm bands, Bush is a murderer signs with fangs and blood and ongoing body counts. "Get out of the middle east" signs.... "we're only there for oil" signs... signs and protests about military assassinations and GITMO etc, etc, etc....

Obama gets elected? Poof.... gone. NOT. A. WORD.

Policy didn't change. Time-line wasn't meant. Libya is open ended. Troops increased... war expanded.

Gas prices? Remember how the media handled it under Bush? What are they saying now?

At least some small few in the Latino movement are calling him on his recent immigration ploy.

Bush disappointed me in many ways. Yes, there are republicans who looked the other way when Bush departed from conservative values... but not the entire establishment, as is the case for Obama.

The pass he is getting boggles my mind.

 

[elder999]

Elder,The pass he is getting boggles my mind.

Not mine. Like I said, those people that drank the Hope and change flavored Kool-aid? Bamboozled, flimflammed, led astray....those people that see a substantive difference between Obama and Bush? Bamboozled, flimflammed, led astray....

 

[Touch Of Death]

Elder,

True, there are people who defended Bush for certain actions, or ignored them, then in turn, deride Obama for the same or similar. I am not one of them (short of perhaps a few select situations that I feel have enough nuance to qualify as "different").

However, on the subject of Obama, I think there are a few things that set him and this situation apart from Bush;

1.) Obama blasted Bush for many policies that he has now fully engaged in.
2.) Obama campaigned, promising outright, to institute complete transparency and to adhere strictly to the rule of law (among many other things). He has done niether, and in some instances, has blatantly and unapologeticly done the opposite. I don't recall these things being the pillar of Bush's campaign.
3.) The MSM crucified Bush - for everything. Obama is given a pass. From vetting him at the beginning to his blatant breaking of numerous campaign promises. Were any other candidate to have known associations with past terrorists, anti-American zealots, voter fraud, campaign contribution issues etc etc we would have never heard the end of it. IF Bush had said "all of the health care debates will be broadcast on CSPAN" and then flagrantly said F.U. to America on the issue, we would have never heard the end of it. I went up to campus every day and all I saw on students/faculty were anti-war arm bands, Bush is a murderer signs with fangs and blood and ongoing body counts. "Get out of the middle east" signs.... "we're only there for oil" signs... signs and protests about military assassinations and GITMO etc, etc, etc....

Obama gets elected? Poof.... gone. NOT. A. WORD.

Policy didn't change. Time-line wasn't meant. Libya is open ended. Troops increased... war expanded.

Gas prices? Remember how the media handled it under Bush? What are they saying now?

At least some small few in the Latino movement are calling him on his recent immigration ploy.

Bush disappointed me in many ways. Yes, there are republicans who looked the other way when Bush departed from conservative values... but not the entire establishment, as is the case for Obama.

The pass he is getting boggles my mind.

It really would make no sense to blame Obama for the wars already existing when he took office. Gas prices are also a direct result of already existing US policy.
Sean

 

[granfire]

Transparency in politics?
get out of here!

The public is dangerous enough when they don't know how politics is made.
bashing the incumbent for campaigning on a platform then settling for reality? Oh, come on!

Things that have been in the undoing for 8 to 16 years or longer are not fixed in 100 days or 3 years.

 

[Empty Hands]

Not mine. Like I said, those people that drank the Hope and change flavored Kool-aid? Bamboozled, flimflammed, led astray....those people that see a substantive difference between Obama and Bush? Bamboozled, flimflammed, led astray....

Institutions matter. We've spent a generation tearing ours down, telling each other that they don't matter, that circumstances and exigencies and whatever else are more important. This is the consequence. Even if Obama was the reincarnation of Jesus Christ and wanted nothing but beauty and light (he is obviously not), he would be constrained and limited by an entire system that has been degraded. We let it happen.

That's why I always laugh when anyone thinks that the election of any one reformer, no matter how radical, will make a huge difference. Ron Paul or Dennis Kucinich would still be hampered by a bought and paid for Congress and a politicized Judiciary. Not to mention the voters who demand to be told lies. Jesse Ventura made similar reformer promises, and when elected Governor of Minnesota, was unable to accomplish a thing. That is what happens to single reformers moving against an entire system.

Only a mass change in attitude among the voters will make a difference. Even then though the voters are limited by what information their attentions spans and the media are willing to tell them. How many voters know anything substantial about Glass-Steagal, or know the contents of the recent financial reform bill? Incredibly important legislation, affecting all our lives, and the voters don't know a thing about it. They will never elect or not elect anyone based on these issues either. Abortion or "who I want to have a beer with" is apparently more important.

 

[K831]

.[/i]those people that see a substantive difference between Obama and Bush? Bamboozled, flimflammed, led astray...

Would you concede a substantive difference between how the MSM and the general public treat each president, given you thoughts that each man is essentially the same?

 

[WC_lun]

I think in most cases Obama campaigned in good faith, but when he got the job he found change to be a much harder thing to achieve. He was indeed niave. However, he did take over at a time when there were many, many, problems facing the US and the presidency. I have been disapointed in Obama, but I think on a whole he has done a good job...at least better than Bush did and I believe better than McCain would have. I believe if McCain was in office we would be at war with Iran and sino-American relations would be at a crisis. Obama sure isn't what I would view as a perfect president, but given the same choices knowing what I know now, I'd still vote for him. I also think Obama has had to deal with a lot more nonsense from both the public and the media than any other president has.

 

[K831]

It really would make no sense to blame Obama for the wars already existing when he took office. Gas prices are also a direct result of already existing US policy.
Sean

Sure, there is some validity to this, but to absolve Obama of it would be incorrect also.

Consider gas prices-
It's an easy argument to make that this administration’s policies of rationing scarcity are largely to blame. We are not drilling offshore for new oil. We are just beginning to utilize new oil and gas deposits in the U.S., and the EPA is certainly not leading the way. We are not effectively utilizing our vast reserves of coal and natural gas.


Obama's resistance to increasing supply comes from a weak leftist intellectual resistance to hydrocarbon fuels in favor of a wishful reliance on “green” energy sources that simply will not be economically viable for a long time. Particularly when we spin our wheels arguing about the use of fossil fuels and as such hamper our economic recovery and growth.


Unemployment still tops 9% (numbers including those who have quit trying etc push us well over.) We are supposed to be two years into economic recovery, but the US is still in the midst of record high unemployment. The Obama years represent the highest levels of sustained unemployment since the Great Depression.


It would be difficult to argue that the administration’s consistent hostility to the private sector in general and to companies and industries that create jobs in the United States isn’t responsible for this ongoing situation.


It's common knowledge that job creators are waiting and watching to see if Washington is finally willing to adopt pro-growth policies to get the economy moving. We all know this administration isn't going to do it. To add fuel to this fire, we are looking at some 10 trillion of new debt added by Obama adim. by the end of a second term. This is a national crisis that Obama refuses to accept. The fact that he ignored it in his budget submission to congress, ignores it while campaigning and insist that higher taxes on billionaires and marginal spending cuts will "solve" it is further evidence. The growing concern of the this accumulating debt and the weakening of the dollar only exacerbates our economic troubles. Economic viability of our children is being robbed in the name of ever growing entitlements.


Sure, Obama didn't start the engagements in the middle east, but again at this point he can not be absolved of them either. We are passing the 10-year mark for our involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq. His proposed “mulitilateralism” did not work. Obama has added a 3rd war in Lybia in which our interests are unclear, the exit strategy is unclear and our prospects for success are unclear.

Of course, in the name of "transparency" the IRS is now targeting organizations that have supported causes and issues in opposition to the Obama administration.

While laying all the blame for current problems at Obama's feet would be unfair (laying the blame solely on Bush, or anyone else would be as well) Obama is clearly responsible for many of our current problems at this point, and the continued desire to slough that blame onto his predecessor is invalid.

Note; Some of the above was loosely quoted from a few recent articles - I summarized some of it rather than posting direct links.

 

[K831]

I think in most cases Obama campaigned in good faith,

Your willing to give him the benefit of the doubt more than I am at this point. However, I don't know the man personally, so there is no way to tell for sure, accept that there have been many campaign promises made and broken, that he could have chosen to adhere to. That causes me great suspicion.

I also think Obama has had to deal with a lot more nonsense from both the public and the media than any other president has.

I would be very interested to hear examples, particularity regarding the media. I cannot remember a time that a president as been given a free pass by the press to the degree Obama has been. I am frankly blown away by their treatment (or lack there of) of Obama.

 

[WC_lun]

You can't think of any examples of the media using its power negatively on Obama? Really?! Lets see there is the birther thing that pops immediately to mind. Without the media that would be a dead issue long ago. The media will take anything, even falsehoods and run with it to get ratings for a news cycle. "Obama is a socialist! Obama wants to kill your grandparents! Is Obama a Muslim?! Obama is the anti-christ!" Do those sound familiar? Then there are the almost weekly little news stories in which Obama is lambasted by various talking heads for doing things which previous presidents got a pass on, like taking a vacation or having an artist visit the White House. Not all of this is driven by any particular rancor against Obama. It is just a ratings ploy, but to think it doesn't exsist is turning ablind eye to it, in my opinion. The real harm is when knuckleheads start believing everything they hear about Obama...or any person, without doing at least a bit of real research. Reading a web site that is not known for its accuracy and is known for its' politiacal leanings, not real research.

 

[K831]

I appreciate your reply, however, it didn't really answer my question.

First, you stated that Obama endured MORE poor treatment from the media than others, none of what you listed equates to that. Second, much of what you listed came from outlying groups, and not the mainstream media at all and third, most everything you listed are ancillary non-issues that were only reported (when they were) by the MSM as a smoke screen in defense of Obama from the many real and serious issues the MSM cold be looking at.

No one (not even most on Fox news) took the birther thing serious, and when it got MSM attention, it was tongue in cheek and used successfully in defense of Obama essentially as a distraction and an attempt to paint all his detractors a fringe. Real issues? The things they railed against Bush for? NOT. A. WORD.....