Obama continues to reduce government transparency

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by aaronvan, Mar 20, 2015.

  1. aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #1
    Obama has a wicked sense of humor: this was announced the day before the March 16 Freedom of Information Day and during the annual Sunshine Week, which focuses on open government.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...empts-executive-office-from-records-requests/
     
  2. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #2
    Okay ... So six years after a federal court ruled the Office of Administration is not subject to FOIA, the president changes a rule to reflect that court's ruling.

    And ...?
     
  3. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #3
    Your link appears to be subscription only.

    Still, a quick google search later, this seems inexplicable. Leaving aside the timing, informally Obama and Bush have used exemptions to get around the old rules...why bother with the change?

    Odd, to say the least...not to mention stupid.
     
  4. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #4
    I'm curious ... why stupid, or even odd for that matter?
     
  5. aaronvan, Mar 20, 2015
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2015

    aaronvan thread starter Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #5
    It's not, but here is another link (to a mainstream left-wing site):

    http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/white_house_office_celebrates_sunshine_week_20150320

    This administration is utterly anti-civil liberties. It is secretive, deceptive, sneaky, and paranoid. Obama has prosecuted and imprisoned more government whistleblowers than any American president in U.S. history. He is the kind of president Richard Nixon always wanted to be.
     
  6. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #6
    As I said, I just did a quick google search on the matter. I was not aware of the court ruling. My bad.

    In light of what you said, I consider this now more a matter of crossing the t's and dotting the i's.

    Now, if you excuse me, I have to grab a towel to wipe the egg off my face...
     
  7. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #7
    Are you sure they're the ones who are paranoid?
     
  8. FieldingMellish Suspended

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    #8
    I knew the Obama administration was controlling in the beginning when they fed talking points to a willing and compliant media, who did not question but repeat it. As well, most, if not all, photos of the new president were taken from his full time official photographer, so that even his imagery was controlled.
     
  9. samiwas macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #9
    I've heard a lot of reasonable complaints about the President. On the opposite end of the spectrum, I've never heard anyone complain that all of his photos were from his official photographer.

    It is true that people will find damn near anything to whine about.
     
  10. Meister Suspended

    Meister

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2013
    #10
  11. FieldingMellish, Mar 21, 2015
    Last edited: Mar 21, 2015

    FieldingMellish Suspended

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    #11
    Anything not proven otherwise, go after the messenger. Your characterizing mentioning it as a whine and diminishing the statement is a passive aggressive response to anything deemed negative, especially if true and irrefutable.

    Edited to add: Information from a Fair and Balanced source:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/12/opinion/obamas-orwellian-image-control.html?_r=0
     
  12. samiwas macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #12
    Yeah. Of course it's a fact. It's also a fact that he eats his cereal with a spoon and breathes oxygen and probably uses toilet paper after pinching one off. Which is on exactly the same level of meh as him having photos taken by his own photographer.

    The fact that his having photos taken by his own photographer is on a list of "negative" complaints shows just how low you and your ilk have to sink to come up with stuff to complain about.

    This stuff used to be the game of 14 year old girls. Now adult men have taken it on.
     
  13. Huntn, Mar 21, 2015
    Last edited: Mar 21, 2015

    Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #13
    This appears to be a pertinent point, although I do support the notion of transparency.

    It can be argued that in today's hostile political climate, transparency does not serve the office of the President, yet I support transarency as an ideal to some extent. I'd like to be pointed at some links regarding specific anti-civil liberties practises. Whistle blowers who get protection, as a rule are not people who have broken the law if you are eluding to Snowden. A source for prosecuting more whistle blowers would be appreciated too.
     
  14. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #14
  15. FieldingMellish Suspended

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    #15
    You're so intent on arriving at a dry repost before, and even now, you do not recognize the context of the statement.

    Let's spell it out. What is the thread title? Obama continues to reduce government transparency. What were my comments on the subject? That it was not transparent to begin with. In both words and pictures.

    You're simply ticked off at the thread title so you choose something to go off on. I get it. You feel that you need to close your eyes tightly and start swinging your fists about.

    ----------

    rolly eyes? The media felt left out regarding the facts of Obama's image control.
     
  16. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #16
    Shocking!! :eek: Of the critiques that can be made of the Obama Administration, does anyone here takes this as a serious one (from the linked article)?
     
  17. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #17
    I'm rolling my eyes because you described an Op-Ed piece as a "fair and balanced source".
     
  18. FieldingMellish Suspended

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    #18
    Mine was the ironic wisecrack I employ when linking to Presidential criticism from outlets other than Faux News, amplifying source credibility. ;)

    ----------

    The photography is an easy target to diminish, especially when taken out of context. But the fact that main stream media of Times stature writes about it elevates the situation, as these are normally the administration's protector.

    And of course The Times is concerned. How must it feel to have well-paid talent on hand in the largest market, only to be handed approved photos and approved scripts from which to parrot the latest news product? In a shrinking market where news is highly competitive and all about scooping one another?
     
  19. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #19
    Ah. The capitalization should have tipped me off.
     
  20. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #20
    No, it is not. And any subjective review of the history would probably rank the Obama administration among the most supportive of Civil Liberties. But there is no use telling anyone that - because you've already made up your mind.

    Regarding the FOIA requests: I think it worth putting this sort of action in light of the explosion in the sheer amount of data we can now create. Simply put: electronic devices and digital technology allow for the creation of a volume of information that was unimaginable just a few years ago.

    Consider photographs: Back in the days of Harry Truman or Gerald Ford simply taking a photograph involved considerably more time; effort and expense. Film cost money, you had to have a trained photographer, with an expensive light, to even capture an acceptable image. And reproducing that image - in a newspaper, magazine, flier cost an appreciable amount of money.

    Compare that with today: digital images can be taken by anyone who can hold a smartphone; and can be instantly transmitted anywhere; and reproduced infinitely at pretty much zero cost.

    And so on. Todays politicians probably create the same number of paper documents as their predecessors did. But they also create a blizzard of e-mails. Documents that not only didn't exist in prior times - but more importantly reflect a different part of the process of governing. E-mails may reflect first, or second, or fifth drafts of ideas or proposals that may eventually become policy or law. They may contain spelling and typographical errors, mistaken ideas as to facts, history, or science. They may contain accidental (or deliberate..) references that may appear sexually or racially or ethnically offensive to some people.

    And I think anybody, even dreaded politicians, deserve at least a modicum of privacy as they go about their daily business. They are allowed to get things not quite right on their first draft. They same way Steven King or Salman Rushdie; or Paul McCartney and Ludwig van Beethoven sometimes got things wrong on their first drafts.

    I'll judge a politician on their finished work- the laws they pass and the speeches they give. I don't need to see their first drafts, or the arguments they had with their advisors and speechmakers, along the way.
     
  21. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #21
    There may be legitimate criticisms regarding transparency, but the lack of photo opportunities struck me as an issue annoying to the press, but is not really germaine, would reveal little. However, if it's just part of the overall argument of control, depending on how control is exercised, it may or may not reflect an unacceptable lack of transparency. To me transparency has to do more with how decisions are reached, not office pictures.
     
  22. aaronvan thread starter Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #22
    What?
     
  23. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #23
  24. jnpy!$4g3cwk macrumors 65816

    jnpy!$4g3cwk

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    #24
    This is not a "blame Bush" statement, but, rather, a statement of fact that what President Obama is doing is a continuation of what began under President George W. Bush. The defining moment for our age is 9/11, and, rightly or wrongly (wrongly, I believe, but, I'm in the minority), the majority of people see security and transparency in opposition. We now live in the Age of 9/11, and, the Age of Snowden.

    But, to discuss this, we also have to consider what is, or, is not, a responsible press, and also, the fact that the internet means that big news will not stay as a footnote article on page 20.

    What I mean is, for example, suppose "transparency" accidentally revealed to a reporter that the U.S. Government knew exactly what house in Abbottabad that Osama bin Laden was hiding in? If the existence of that knowledge became known in public, Osama would have moved instantly. The kind of cooperation that the Press (they still used printing presses) had with the Government under FDR is now moot, because the internet has completely changed what the press is and how it is printed.

    Some people would argue that the U.S. should always have a completely transparent foreign policy. I don't believe that is possible.
     
  25. FieldingMellish Suspended

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    #25
    One of the ultimate ironies?

    The official White House photographer under the Obama administration, Peter Souza, also did photography in the White House during the Reagan years.

    I saw a great documentary showing Souza's top level access to the Obama first family. When stuff hit the fan in the Situation Room, Souza was on hand being a fly on the wall looking for pic ops. I forget the specific title of the show. The man's old school, having shot good film work and now has a cherry job shooting digital.

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pete_Souza
     

Share This Page