Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Most transparent administration ever

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    You keep telling yourself that, sweetheart.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by posthuman View Post

      Someday ethics will matter to Republicans again. I'm not interested or worried about this issue within the Obama admin because for about 6 years the checks and balances against the admin from the court and Congress were heavily weighted against the admin and they still didn't have a scandal worthy of firing, censuring or prosecuting anyone of note in the administration.
      So ethics matter to democrats? Or it doesn't matter to to you because they are democrats?

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by on2muchcoffee View Post
        WASHINGTON (AP) -- An Associated Press analysis of new U.S. data finds the Obama administration in its final year spent a record $36.2 million on legal costs defending its refusal to turn over federal records under the Freedom of Information Act.

        The Obama administration also set a record -- for a second consecutive year -- for times federal employees told citizens, journalists and others that despite searching they couldn't find a single page of files that were requested.

        And it set records for outright denying access to files and refusing to quickly consider requests described as especially newsworthy.
        The AP on Monday settled its 2015 lawsuit against the State
        Department for files about Hillary Clinton's time as secretary of state and received $150,546 from the department to cover part of its legal fees.
        Another record for the Trump cartel to shoot for.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by stymiegreen View Post
          Transparency is a punchline they like to use because Obama had the audacity to even pretend to care about it in the beginning of his term....in comes Trump and they're willing to hand over the keys to the castle no questions asked about any of his dealings or associations or conflicts. Transparency...its for the other side to answer for...not theirs.
          No, transparency is a punchline because Obama made it a signature portion of his campaign, then ended up prosecuting whistleblowers, fought FOIA requests, destroyed records in his last days, etc. He chose that burden for himself, then cast it aside as soon as he was elected and it was no longer politically expedient. Another key part of his transparency pledge was that he was going to post all bills online for five days, to allow for public review and input, prior to signing them. Remember that?

          But yeah, it's totally other people's fault that transparency is a punchline. LMAO

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Porter View Post

            No, transparency is a punchline because Obama made it a signature portion of his campaign, then ended up prosecuting whistleblowers, fought FOIA requests, destroyed records in his last days, etc. He chose that burden for himself, then cast it aside as soon as he was elected and it was no longer politically expedient. Another key part of his transparency pledge was that he was going to post all bills online for five days, to allow for public review and input, prior to signing them. Remember that?

            But yeah, it's totally other people's fault that transparency is a punchline. LMAO
            Transparency does not mean allowing anyone in government to disclose whatever they feel like. Honestly, do you really think the leaks hurt Obama personally? He was just looking out for the legal and security issues of the country. You seem to think that "transparent" Obama should have invited Snowden to the White House for a medal ceremony and asked why more people aren't undermining our nation's security.

            This sort of makes sense from you. Why else would you support a President that wastes more tax money on his family than the cost of some of the federal programs he's looking to cut? He's gonna make conservayive cuts, so multi-million dollar golf trips every week and maintaining a golden tower for his third wife are worthwhile tax expenditures. He's gonna cut waste so avState department that doesn't actually conduct diplomacy is just a cost savings even though it will likely mean another military misadventure or 2. That you will also excuse.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by posthuman View Post

              Transparency does not mean allowing anyone in government to disclose whatever they feel like. Honestly, do you really think the leaks hurt Obama personally? He was just looking out for the legal and security issues of the country. You seem to think that "transparent" Obama should have invited Snowden to the White House for a medal ceremony and asked why more people aren't undermining our nation's security.
              No, I seem to think that Obama claimed to be transparent to get votes and turned out to be the polar opposite.

              While Snowden did a great service to Americans by letting them know what Obama's NSA was up to, he had to know that doing so would result in serious prison time. While he took precautions to somewhat limit the dissemination of highly-classified data in his leaks, he still committed a serious crime and expecting to get whistleblower protections is asking a bit much IMO.

              This sort of makes sense from you. Why else would you support a President that wastes more tax money on his family than the cost of some of the federal programs he's looking to cut? He's gonna make conservayive cuts, so multi-million dollar golf trips every week and maintaining a golden tower for his third wife are worthwhile tax expenditures. He's gonna cut waste so avState department that doesn't actually conduct diplomacy is just a cost savings even though it will likely mean another military misadventure or 2. That you will also excuse.
              I get that you're an Obama guy. Some people get starry-eyed and do the "cult of personality" thing with Presidents. I'm just not one of them. I support some of Trump's policies and behaviors and I don't support others. Deal with it.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Porter View Post

                No, I seem to think that Obama claimed to be transparent to get votes and turned out to be the polar opposite.

                While Snowden did a great service to Americans by letting them know what Obama's NSA was up to, he had to know that doing so would result in serious prison time. While he took precautions to somewhat limit the dissemination of highly-classified data in his leaks, he still committed a serious crime and expecting to get whistleblower protections is asking a bit much IMO.



                I get that you're an Obama guy. Some people get starry-eyed and do the "cult of personality" thing with Presidents. I'm just not one of them. I support some of Trump's policies and behaviors and I don't support others. Deal with it.
                Of all the things I would have hoped to get from our first black President (decriminalize Marijuana, justice reform, further reduction in military misadventure) transparency is low on the list.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Nothing about improved race relations? Interesting...

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by charliesheen View Post
                    Nothing about improved race relations? Interesting...
                    Yeah, everybody thought a black guy getting elected President was gonna make the racists all of a sudden re-assess their views on black people...good one lol

                    Instead we got claims that he was the "most divisive President in history" because he had the gall to view any issue from the perspective of minorities. Every single time he actually validated an opinion that went in the favor of black people it was viewed as a thumb in the eye of all the "non-racists" who feigned outrage at being called racists when they acted racist. Hence why Trump became their new hero.

                    And I'll save you and dumbzen the time ..."DERP...see...this is why you guys lost! And you'll continue to lose! DERP!" Yawn.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      I could never expect one person to change the way an entire nation deals with social issues such as race. Just daft to believe otherwise. Trump, for instance, is just a reflection of the many biased assholes in this country.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X