Saturday, June 20, 2009

Obama’s Secrecy

Change!

As a senator, Barack Obama denounced the Bush administration for holding “secret energy meetings” with oil executives at the White House. But last week public-interest groups were dismayed when his own administration rejected a Freedom of Information Act request for Secret Service logs showing the identities of coal executives who had visited the White House to discuss Obama’s “clean coal” policies. One reason: the disclosure of such records might impinge on privileged “presidential communications.” The refusal, approved by White House counsel Greg Craig’s office, is the latest in a series of cases in which Obama officials have opted against public disclosure. Since Obama pledged on his first day in office to usher in a “new era” of openness, “nothing has changed,” says David -Sobel, a lawyer who litigates FOIA cases. “For a president who said he was going to bring unprecedented transparency to government, you would certainly expect more than the recycling of old Bush secrecy policies.”

The hard line appears to be no accident. After Obama’s much-publicized Jan. 21 “transparency” memo, administration lawyers crafted a key directive implementing the new policy that contained a major loophole, according to FOIA experts.

(9) Comments
Posted by Owen at 2212 hrs
Politics + Politics - General

  1. Maybe I’m missing something, but isn’t the the norm for all Marxist strongmen?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 20, 2009 at 2244 hrs


  2. Where is the outrage from the left?

    A litle different view from “inside the looking glass” isn’t it?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 21, 2009 at 0717 hrs


  3. Outraged? No.  But we are disappointed.  This week alone, Olberman, Maddow and Maher have been very vocal about their discontent.  Visitor logs, don’t ask don’t tell, defense of marriage act, torture evidence, fisa, the list goes on.  And then there’s always the constant drumbeat of “faster, faster, faster.”  That’s why I always chuckle when I read “Obama is a ______” fill in the blank socialist, fascist etc.  What does the right think of those of us who see ourselves as further left than Obama?  By the standards of much of the world, he is, after all, firmly center/right.

    Posted by Jim Spice on June 21, 2009 at 0937 hrs


  4. Simply Jim, we think you are pernicious, self-agrandizing idiots.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 21, 2009 at 1340 hrs


  5. Obama is NOT center right. He may be so far left that he wraps around and looks to be to your right - but he is about as left as they come.

    Redistrbution of wealth is not a center concept.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 21, 2009 at 1348 hrs


  6. For all the pernicious, self-agrandizing idiots.


    “Hey, Obama has just nationalized nothing more and nothing less than General Motors. Comrade Obama! Fidel, careful or we are going to end up to his right

    Hugo Chavez

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 21, 2009 at 1500 hrs


  7. Oh Obama is the far left….just so happens he is in office.  It’s easy to talk about being far left until your appointed.  Anyone that want to institute socialism is far left.

    Obama:
    More taxes
    Higher taxes on taxes
    Socialised Health Care
    Government run GM
    Government run Banks
    Tax Health Insurance
    I could on and on, but it will all lead to more taxes on ALL Americans and more Government control.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 22, 2009 at 0656 hrs


  8. Take a look at the 2008 presidential candidates plotted against a bi-diminsional (economic/social) grid at The Political Compass.  I think it’s pretty accurate. You can view .
    international and historic figures here. I fit in by the Dalai Lama, Nelson Mandela, and Gandhi—not bad company, I’d suggest.  They used to list Jesus right about there too, but removed him when the questions were changed to reflect more contemporary issues.
    Take the test: you may surprise yourself.

    Posted by Jim Spice on June 23, 2009 at 0910 hrs


  9. Jim, That test is cool and well thought out as far as it goes, but many of the questions are slanted in such a way that authoritarianism and collectivism is the only best answer.
    For example, the first question:

    If economic globalisation is inevitable, it should primarily serve humanity rather than the interests of trans-national corporations.

    Even Friedman would have trouble supporting the idea that the interests of the transnationals should be the primary interests served.  He may well argue that the transnationals, through helping themselves will help more people than a Government regulation program to force money from the rich to the poor, but the question only infers that a different body of people (the Government) will regulate who is served.  The surface question, however, does not tell you ‘how’ humanity will be served.

    The international aspect is also one of its pitfalls, not one of its strengths.  In the US, it is conservatives that most often support the death penalty, hence the phrase ‘bleeding heart liberal’.  To suggest that Obama is a conservative because he is “not an uncompromising abolitionist” or move him to the right on those grounds is a false lead.  If, perhaps, one of the programs he was pushing were to have a one-year maximum wait on death row before the death penalty is enacted, you could say it had an effect on his position. 

    Another thing that completely invalidates the political compass’ test is to emphasize that a 4 dimensional system is required, but then conclude in the end that you are ‘left or right’.  If Obama and I are both ‘right’ on the death penalty (What is his position anyway?  To not be an uncompromising abolitionist is hardly to be ‘pro-death penalty’.) and the idea that God exists, it has little to do with the policies he is actually pushing. 

    There is usually one major crisis that defines most Presidents and their policies.  Bush had his wars, which included homeland security, Guantanamo, etc.  Obama definitely has the US economy.  If we take the up/down separately(the means), he is definitely authoritarian.  If we take the left/right line only (the ends), Obama is significantly over to the left on ‘his’ issue.  His policies are definitely collectivist in nature.  To put him on the right side of the line through other considerations is relatively dishonest to me. 

    If you think any policies the Democrats in power have proposed to date, either separately or through budgets, are actually American center or center right, I would like to hear about it.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 23, 2009 at 1551 hrs


Commenting is not available in this channel entry.