more hope and change: obama fights to keep guest logs secret

When Cheney suggested that visitor logs ought to be kept private, the liberal elites angrily cried, "Freedom of Information! Transparency!"

But when the Obama Adminsitration suggests that visitor logs ought to be kept private, the liberal elites grow oddly mute.

I am pleased to see, though, that some liberals do object to the President's position on the same grounds they offered when objecting to the Cheney position. Good on them for at least having some consistency above partisanship.

Where did you see any objection to Obama's position?

I could be mistaken, but it looked to me like Wry Catcher chartered such a course: http://www.usmessageboard.com/4273435-post5.html

I'd like to presume that he is not alone.

I did not see anything about any Objection to Obama's position.

The only President's Position mentioned is that of Bush.
 
These records should be public knowledge.

I have always thought that.

Now it seems the right doesnt think it fair to keep them secret ONLY because a dem is in office now.

You on the right defened this crap under Rs.
 
These records should be public knowledge.

I have always thought that.

Now it seems the right doesnt think it fair to keep them secret ONLY because a dem is in office now.

You on the right defened this crap under Rs.

By "a dem" I suppose you mean OBAMA?.......Mr Hope and Change?

Apparently, the hypocracy has flown over your pointed head.
 
These records should be public knowledge.

I have always thought that.

Now it seems the right doesnt think it fair to keep them secret ONLY because a dem is in office now.

You on the right defened this crap under Rs.

No no, little miss dishonesty. Try to keep it on the level for a change.

If you libs were all up in arms over the topic when the VP expressed it, then you cannot be supportive of it now that a liberal Democratic is at the helm trying to pawn it off on America.

If you give even half a shit about principles and consistency, then to whatever extent it was allegedly "wrong" when V.P. Cheney wanted to resort to it, YOU must be just as vocal now that President Obama seeks to resort to it.

The hypocrisy is on the liberal Democrat front.

Go pout.
 
Where did you see any objection to Obama's position?

I could be mistaken, but it looked to me like Wry Catcher chartered such a course: http://www.usmessageboard.com/4273435-post5.html

I'd like to presume that he is not alone.

I did not see anything about any Objection to Obama's position.

The only President's Position mentioned is that of Bush.

Wry Catcher said, and I quote, " * * * records unless necessary for national security should be open for inspection * * * *"

But again, I might be mistaken here. I don't care to even try to speak for Wry Catcher. It is a possibility that I misunderstood him.

I will therefore stand to the side and (as is proper) let him speak for his own position.
 
I agree, records unless necessary for national security should be open for inspection. I still wonder what and who decided our energy policy under Bush/Cheney, and what that policy was/is?

i don't know, but i certainly recognize a weak attempt at deflection when i see one.

:thup:

i still wonder who convinced kennedy to go forward with the bay of pigs.

The Neo-cons of course (are those who convinced Kennedy to go forward with the Bay of Pigs invasion [paranthetic comment added as my effort to write to the weakest link]).

There are two sentences in my "weak' attempt at deflection"; my point in the question being all presidental administrations protect the office and are disinclined to weaken its authority. I thought that was obvious, silly me, knowing the audience I must remember to write to the weakest link.
 
These records should be public knowledge.

I have always thought that.

Now it seems the right doesnt think it fair to keep them secret ONLY because a dem is in office now.

You on the right defened this crap under Rs.

No no, little miss dishonesty. Try to keep it on the level for a change.

If you libs were all up in arms over the topic when the VP expressed it, then you cannot be supportive of it now that a liberal Democratic is at the helm trying to pawn it off on America.

If you give even half a shit about principles and consistency, then to whatever extent it was allegedly "wrong" when V.P. Cheney wanted to resort to it, YOU must be just as vocal now that President Obama seeks to resort to it.

The hypocrisy is on the liberal Democrat front.

Go pout.

full-auto-albums-drama-queen-picture3845-bumper26.gif


full-auto-albums-obama-care-picture2374-shelton-c20070904.jpg
 
Yet another example of why I consider Obama a third Bush term.

Strange though how the partisan ones only whine when the other side uses their tricks.
and defend it when it is their own side doing it.
 
"I agree, records unless necessary for national security should be open for inspection."

This is a declarative sentence, it is what I believe. Seems clear to me; the question then becomes what motivates those who read and cannot comprehend? Could it be perspective, or bigotry? Did I ignite a concern in the far reaches of their mind that someone they consider a 'lefty' holds opinions and values which cross the usual left - right spectrum? I hope so.
 
Last edited:
Yet another example of why I consider Obama a third Bush term.

Strange though how the partisan ones only whine when the other side uses their tricks.
and defend it when it is their own side doing it.

That is strange indeed.

There IS a case that can be made, a valid one, that Vice President Cheney was right in worrying about the effect on such advisers if they have to have their very appearance at a meeting or conference disseminated. They ARE likely to then be very guarded in what they say or suggest. This COULD be said to undermine the free flow of ideas that the Administration might very well need.

On the other hand, there are some potentially valid objections to it, also. Secrecy can lead to a lot of undesirable consequences, too.

But the thing is: if it was objectionable when V.P. Cheney tried it, then shouldn't it be just as objectionable when this President resorts to it?
 
"I agree, records unless necessary for national security should be open for inspection."

This is a declarative sentence, it is what I believe. Seems clear to me; the question then becomes what motivates those who read and cannot comprehend? Could it be perspective, or bigotry? Possibly in the far reaches of their consciousness did I ignite a concern that someone labled th label a 'lefty' holds opinions and values which cross the usual left - right spectrum? I hope so.

If that declarative statement means what it seems to mean, then I'm glad I cited you as an example of consistency.

Well done.
 
"The Obama administration is appealing a judge's ruling that Secret Service records of visitors to the White House complex are subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act....

The position taken by the Obama Justice Department, namely that White House visitor records are presidential records and not agency records, is essentially the same one that the department took under President George W. Bush."


yeah, he's a breath of transparently fresh air, obama is.

:lol:


meet the new boss

Obama administration appeals ruling on White House visitor logs - Josh Gerstein - POLITICO.com

:eusa_shhh:

pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.
 
"The Obama administration is appealing a judge's ruling that Secret Service records of visitors to the White House complex are subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act....

The position taken by the Obama Justice Department, namely that White House visitor records are presidential records and not agency records, is essentially the same one that the department took under President George W. Bush."


yeah, he's a breath of transparently fresh air, obama is.

:lol:


meet the new boss

Obama administration appeals ruling on White House visitor logs - Josh Gerstein - POLITICO.com

:eusa_shhh:

pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZR64EF3OpA]The Wizard of Oz: Pay No Attention - YouTube[/ame]
 
Of course, If I get to decide what the meaning of the word 'nefarious' is...then nothing I do is nefarious.
 
Yet another example of why I consider Obama a third Bush term.

Strange though how the partisan ones only whine when the other side uses their tricks.
and defend it when it is their own side doing it.

That is strange indeed.

There IS a case that can be made, a valid one, that Vice President Cheney was right in worrying about the effect on such advisers if they have to have their very appearance at a meeting or conference disseminated. They ARE likely to then be very guarded in what they say or suggest. This COULD be said to undermine the free flow of ideas that the Administration might very well need.

On the other hand, there are some potentially valid objections to it, also. Secrecy can lead to a lot of undesirable consequences, too.

But the thing is: if it was objectionable when V.P. Cheney tried it, then shouldn't it be just as objectionable when this President resorts to it?

Of course. If you are comparing apple and apples. Policy matters, on energy, on health care and all matters which impact the entire nation deserve to be vetted with nearly complete transparency. Who, what, where and when need to be answered; why and how, as you point out, not so much as there are practicle reasons to hold these questions close to the vest.
 
Of course, If I get to decide what the meaning of the word 'nefarious' is...then nothing I do is nefarious.

ne·far·i·ous

   /nɪˈfɛər
thinsp.png
i
thinsp.png
əs
/ Show Spelled[ni-fair-ee-uh
thinsp.png
s] Show IPA
adjective extremely wicked or villainous; iniquitous: a nefarious plot.

Origin:
1595–1605; < Latin nef&#257;rius wicked, vile, equivalent to nef&#257;s offense against divine or moral law ( ne- negative prefix + f&#257;s law, right) + -ius -ious, with intervocalic s > r

Related forms ne·far·i·ous·ly, adverb
ne·far·i·ous·ness, noun
un·ne·far·i·ous, adjective
un·ne·far·i·ous·ly, adverb
un·ne·far·i·ous·ness, noun

Synonyms
flagitious, heinous, infamous; vile, atrocious, execrable.


Antonyms
good, honest.

Instructions for use: Apply liberally as situations warrant.
 
How many of you can say that, after all the Presidents you have lived through, that you have never seen anything close to Obama? Obama was already lying throughout his campaign(yah,all those promises!!) and it never ended since? I already saw it coming, from the moment I had him all figured out in the early stages of his campaign, I saw A REAL LIFE PINNICCHIO !!!
 
How many of you can say that, after all the Presidents you have lived through, that you have never seen anything close to Obama? Obama was already lying throughout his campaign(yah,all those promises!!) and it never ended since? I already saw it coming, from the moment I had him all figured out in the early stages of his campaign, I saw A REAL LIFE PINNICCHIO !!!

9 of them for me. None close to this maggot. Oh, and he never has stopped campaigning...even after being Immacculated.:eusa_whistle:
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top