Why we vet political candidates

[Mr.Fitnah]

Obama was given the highest security clearance even before he took the oath of office in order to make the transition even more smooth. Do you honestly think any of his alleged "Marxist" leanings while a college student weren't already known by the FBI? Apparently it was a minor point in THEIR vetting process, so now we're all supposed to believe this Dr. Drew (who is this guy?) just because every right wing publication and blogsite has glommed onto that interview as gospel (and, oooohh, scary)?

Obama has already said a number of times (and in fact, it's in his first book) that he ventured into lots of gray areas in order to grow up and make mature decisions about the direction he wanted to take in life.

This is absurd. Jeezus, Joe McCarthy would have had him already shot at dawn just because Barack Obama may have expressed some opinions that were deemed "Marxist."

Obama would not met the qualifications to protect himself as a secret service agent .
Well then you have no faith in the FBI. Perhaps you should apply for a job. I'm sure they'd be fascinated with your assessment on this particular issue and immediately hire you as chief of their vetting agency.

Obama's progressive pedigree is not in question the direction he chose is clear .
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLiOCKLwq9c]YouTube - David Horowitz: makes an interesting comparison[/ame]
And only an idiot doesn't know that David Horowitz's has an agenda. He couldn't make a name for himself as a leftie, so he crossed over and now he's been stuck in the same position for years.

I wonder what the support would have been if the media had let the general public in on the well known secret ,say before Iowa.

Both of Obama's books were available for anyone to read all about this, including Iowans.

Horowitz had a very nice gig going and was a successful writer "The Rockefeller's" is one of my favorites.
I dont know actually for certain if Obama could pass a back ground check.

I do not believe he was vetted by the media like any other candidate.

Do you?

 

[MaggieMae]

the democrats knew they were voting for a Marxist. It's obvious that's what they wanted. "We are 5 days away from fundamentally changing The United States of America."

It's not surprising that you can't tell the difference between campaign rhetoric and reality. EVERY potential candidate for POTUS campaigns on C.H.A.N.G.E, fool. Otherwise, why run?

 

[MaggieMae]

Obama would not met the qualifications to protect himself as a secret service agent .
Well then you have no faith in the FBI. Perhaps you should apply for a job. I'm sure they'd be fascinated with your assessment on this particular issue and immediately hire you as chief of their vetting agency.

Obama's progressive pedigree is not in question the direction he chose is clear .
YouTube - David Horowitz: makes an interesting comparison
And only an idiot doesn't know that David Horowitz's has an agenda. He couldn't make a name for himself as a leftie, so he crossed over and now he's been stuck in the same position for years.

I wonder what the support would have been if the media had let the general public in on the well known secret ,say before Iowa.

Both of Obama's books were available for anyone to read all about this, including Iowans.

Maggie.. Can you fill us in on who it is exactly that does the background check on elected officials?

The Secret Service and the FBI for POTUS. Other vetting is done by DOJ for certain House and Senate committee members, Office of Personnel Management for most other federal civilian agencies (sometimes in tandem with DoD), and State Department and intelligence agencies vet their own.

 

[MaggieMae]

Breitbart.tv The B-Cast Interview: Was Obama a Committed Marxist in College?

Why we vet political candidates.
A serious indictment of Obama from one of his school mates .

Obama was given the highest security clearance even before he took the oath of office in order to make the transition even more smooth. Do you honestly think any of his alleged "Marxist" leanings while a college student weren't already known by the FBI? Apparently it was a minor point in THEIR vetting process, so now we're all supposed to believe this Dr. Drew (who is this guy?) just because every right wing publication and blogsite has glommed onto that interview as gospel (and, oooohh, scary)?

Obama has already said a number of times (and in fact, it's in his first book) that he ventured into lots of gray areas in order to grow up and make mature decisions about the direction he wanted to take in life.

This is absurd. Jeezus, Joe McCarthy would have had him already shot at dawn just because Barack Obama may have expressed some opinions that were deemed "Marxist."

Maggie, I’m pretty sure you know that representatives, senators, some appointed positions, and the president get whatever security clearance they need to do their jobs, so you know that THAT argument doesn't hold water.

By definition, those highest elective and appointed political position holders have access to classified information that they need to review in the performance of their duties. The classified information which they are privy to is on a need to know basis, and based on that criteria there are certain documents which could be denied to any of those officeholders.

And surely you exaggerate about McCarthy having anyone shot. Being a Marxist would not be a limiting factor for a security clearance for a government official holding a high enough office. However a buck private in the armed forces would probably be denied even a confidential security clearance, which associations would in advance, prevent him (or her) from holding certain occupational specialties, at least back in the Cold War, but not so much now. It is not illegal to be a Marxsist, but being one points to certain ideological propensities.

All of that is true, including my exaggeration that Sen. McCarthy would have people shot (wishful thinking, yes).

Here is some information about the background checks done on elected officials (although the link specifically responds to the Bill Ayers affiliation). Ironically, in searching for some facts, I had to plow through about 5 pages of Google entries from right wing blogsites all claiming that "no way would Obama pass a security clearance background check, which is I'm sure why most of the rwingers who post her continue to buy into that).

snopes.com: Barack Obama - Security Clearance

 

[MaggieMae]

Obama would not met the qualifications to protect himself as a secret service agent .
Well then you have no faith in the FBI. Perhaps you should apply for a job. I'm sure they'd be fascinated with your assessment on this particular issue and immediately hire you as chief of their vetting agency.

Obama's progressive pedigree is not in question the direction he chose is clear .
YouTube - David Horowitz: makes an interesting comparison
And only an idiot doesn't know that David Horowitz's has an agenda. He couldn't make a name for himself as a leftie, so he crossed over and now he's been stuck in the same position for years.

I wonder what the support would have been if the media had let the general public in on the well known secret ,say before Iowa.

Both of Obama's books were available for anyone to read all about this, including Iowans.

Horowitz had a very nice gig going and was a successful writer "The Rockefeller's" is one of my favorites.
I do know actually know for certain if Obama could pass a back ground check.

I do not believe he was vetted by the media like any other candidate.

Do you?

Probably not, by the media. The "media" these days responds to what will sell their ads or bump their ratings, and Obama was a hot product as the Democratic candidate. The "media" is also guilty, however, of taking a rumor off the Internet and THEN making THAT a news item so that by the time they're finished with it, the "news" report has become truth.

I'm no more trusting of MSM than any of you, which is why I rarely will comment on a hot story du jour (see rumor^) sometimes for several days until the actual sourced facts emerge.

 

[Polk]

Dr. John C. Drew shot a guy while he was in college and buried the body in the woods. Prove he didn't.

 

[American Horse]

Obama was given the highest security clearance even before he took the oath of office in order to make the transition even more smooth. Do you honestly think any of his alleged "Marxist" leanings while a college student weren't already known by the FBI? Apparently it was a minor point in THEIR vetting process, so now we're all supposed to believe this Dr. Drew (who is this guy?) just because every right wing publication and blogsite has glommed onto that interview as gospel (and, oooohh, scary)?

Obama has already said a number of times (and in fact, it's in his first book) that he ventured into lots of gray areas in order to grow up and make mature decisions about the direction he wanted to take in life.

This is absurd. Jeezus, Joe McCarthy would have had him already shot at dawn just because Barack Obama may have expressed some opinions that were deemed "Marxist."

Maggie, I’m pretty sure you know that representatives, senators, some appointed positions, and the president get whatever security clearance they need to do their jobs, so you know that THAT argument doesn't hold water.

By definition, those highest elective and appointed political position holders have access to classified information that they need to review in the performance of their duties. The classified information which they are privy to is on a need to know basis, and based on that criteria there are certain documents which could be denied to any of those officeholders.

And surely you exaggerate about McCarthy having anyone shot. Being a Marxist would not be a limiting factor for a security clearance for a government official holding a high enough office. However a buck private in the armed forces would probably be denied even a confidential security clearance, which associations would in advance, prevent him (or her) from holding certain occupational specialties, at least back in the Cold War, but not so much now. It is not illegal to be a Marxsist, but being one points to certain ideological propensities.

All of that is true, including my exaggeration that Sen. McCarthy would have people shot (wishful thinking, yes).

Here is some information about the background checks done on elected officials (although the link specifically responds to the Bill Ayers affiliation). Ironically, in searching for some facts, I had to plow through about 5 pages of Google entries from right wing blogsites all claiming that "no way would Obama pass a security clearance background check, which is I'm sure why most of the rwingers who post her continue to buy into that).

snopes.com: Barack Obama - Security Clearance

To avoid ambiguities, that question was posed about whether Obama (being an ordinary citizen with his past and qualifications) would qualify to be on his own security detail. For my own part, I would suggest that he could not qualify as an ordinary civilian meaning "not an elected official). Neither was Lee Harvey Oswald able to get a CONFIDENTIAL security clearance, I presume because he had made public statements about Communism or had connections which disqualified him.

One should ask that question before applying to a high security risk job, or should ask themselves early in life when they have opportunities to avoid questionable activities whether or nor those are the choices they wish to make. Obviously, Mr Obama made choices which had no demonstrable problematic effect on his career.

Also it is not a bad question to ask, whether you are a rwinger or a lwinger. I don't think anyone can be faulted for asking that question. We don't live in a society in which there are taboo political questions, I don't think (well maybe there are a few which leads me obliquely to my final comment).

In a final reference to "avoiding ambiguities," which did you mean when you comment above
"...including my exaggeration that Sen. McCarthy would have people shot (wishful thinking, yes)."
Is it your wishful thinking that he actually had had people shot, because some of those people deserved it? OR that if he had had people shot, we would have more for which to hold him responsible? ...

 

[MaggieMae]

Maggie, I’m pretty sure you know that representatives, senators, some appointed positions, and the president get whatever security clearance they need to do their jobs, so you know that THAT argument doesn't hold water.

By definition, those highest elective and appointed political position holders have access to classified information that they need to review in the performance of their duties. The classified information which they are privy to is on a need to know basis, and based on that criteria there are certain documents which could be denied to any of those officeholders.

And surely you exaggerate about McCarthy having anyone shot. Being a Marxist would not be a limiting factor for a security clearance for a government official holding a high enough office. However a buck private in the armed forces would probably be denied even a confidential security clearance, which associations would in advance, prevent him (or her) from holding certain occupational specialties, at least back in the Cold War, but not so much now. It is not illegal to be a Marxsist, but being one points to certain ideological propensities.

All of that is true, including my exaggeration that Sen. McCarthy would have people shot (wishful thinking, yes).

Here is some information about the background checks done on elected officials (although the link specifically responds to the Bill Ayers affiliation). Ironically, in searching for some facts, I had to plow through about 5 pages of Google entries from right wing blogsites all claiming that "no way would Obama pass a security clearance background check, which is I'm sure why most of the rwingers who post her continue to buy into that).

snopes.com: Barack Obama - Security Clearance

To avoid ambiguities, that question was posed about whether Obama (being an ordinary citizen with his past and qualifications) would qualify to be on his own security detail. For my own part, I would suggest that he could not qualify as an ordinary civilian meaning "not an elected official). Neither was Lee Harvey Oswald able to get a CONFIDENTIAL security clearance, I presume because he had made public statements about Communism or had connections which disqualified him.

One should ask that question before applying to a high security risk job, or should ask themselves early in life when they have opportunities to avoid questionable activities whether or nor those are the choices they wish to make. Obviously, Mr Obama made choices which had no demonstrable problematic effect on his career.

Also it is not a bad question to ask, whether you are a rwinger or a lwinger. I don't think anyone can be faulted for asking that question. We don't live in a society in which there are taboo political questions, I don't think (well maybe there are a few which leads me obliquely to my final comment).

In a final reference to "avoiding ambiguities," which did you mean when you comment above
"...including my exaggeration that Sen. McCarthy would have people shot (wishful thinking, yes)."
Is it your wishful thinking that he actually had had people shot, because some of those people deserved it? OR that if he had had people shot, we would have more for which to hold him responsible? ...

I think McCarthy's initial investigation had much merit to it, but I also think he got swept up in his sudden stardom and went overboard with it. Remember that post-WWII, a lot of Americans didn't really think there was anything wrong with Communism (the Soviets were allies, after all). There wasn't the vast network of information available to decide whether or not it was in fact an unworkable system of government. I know my own parents didn't really get an education on the Communist model until the McCarthy hearings. Before that, they just thought it was sure better than Nazism, and that was that. But Joe McCarthy eventually was out to get anyone who even had a Communist thought in his head, and that would have been my own parents at one time. (Ironically, they eventually became Republicans by the 80's--not rigid conservatives, but Republicans.)

 

[Vel]

Both of Obama's books were available for anyone to read all about this, including Iowans.

Maggie.. Can you fill us in on who it is exactly that does the background check on elected officials?

The Secret Service and the FBI for POTUS. Other vetting is done by DOJ for certain House and Senate committee members, Office of Personnel Management for most other federal civilian agencies (sometimes in tandem with DoD), and State Department and intelligence agencies vet their own.

Maggie, can you provide a link showing anyone's authority to do those background checks? I have searched and can't find anything. I don't believe that background checks are required for elected officials unless they require greater clearance than their job would nomally indicate. It is assumed that the media will vet a candidate in public allowing voters to decide whether that person is qualified for the job.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

First of all, why would you trust a supposed "school-mate" coming out of the woodwork right now for ANYTHING?

Secondly, do you know who else was a devout Socialist in college?

Irving Kristol.

I mean, I guess I'm not old enough to look back on college with rose-colored glasses - but college is a time when you make mistakes and figure things out. I'm a firm believer in what happens in college stays in college.

Plus it's clearly all bullshit anyway.

 

[California Girl]

Personally, I am not overly concerned with what Obama was or was not during his college days. I am concerned about what he is now.

 

[California Girl]

Did u hear where the guy said that part of the reason for a welfare state was caused by child labor laws? OMGWTF! Tell me if I heard that wrong. I find it hard to buy anything he says. He's president now anyway.

Actually, he's right. They did. It was an unintended consequence of the child labor laws. Back in those days, the income brought in by a child helped families survived. When the government brought in child labor laws, the income of vast amounts of families fell drastically. That is why the government then had to do something to help those families.... hey presto, welfare.

Why is that a big deal?

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Personally, I am not overly concerned with what Obama was or was not during his college days. I am concerned about what he is now.

He hasn't changed his stripes, they have just gotten darker.

 

[Claudette]

Oh Yeah. The MSM did a bang up job reporting on OL'BO during the campaign.

Anyone who believes that, well I'll sell you some prime swamp land down here in Florida.

Jeeze. Talk about being in the tank.

 

[MaggieMae]

Maggie.. Can you fill us in on who it is exactly that does the background check on elected officials?

The Secret Service and the FBI for POTUS. Other vetting is done by DOJ for certain House and Senate committee members, Office of Personnel Management for most other federal civilian agencies (sometimes in tandem with DoD), and State Department and intelligence agencies vet their own.

Maggie, can you provide a link showing anyone's authority to do those background checks? I have searched and can't find anything. I don't believe that background checks are required for elected officials unless they require greater clearance than their job would nomally indicate. It is assumed that the media will vet a candidate in public allowing voters to decide whether that person is qualified for the job.

I'm sure to find the "authority" you'd need to go to the charter duties of agencies such as the FBI or the others. Knock youself out if you want to do that, but I'm sure you're looking for that needle in a haystack that will 'prove' Obama shouldn't have been provided a security clearance. So to that I'll just say believe what you want.

At the very least he would have had to complete this form, and I'm sure it wasn't just tossed in the trash once he did.

http://www.opm.gov/forms/pdf_fill/sf86.pdf

 

[sealybobo]

Breitbart.tv The B-Cast Interview: Was Obama a Committed Marxist in College?

Why we vet political candidates.
A serious indictment of Obama from one of his school mates .

Why didn't you guys vet George Santos? Or Hershel Walker?