Obama declares White House no longer subject to Freedom of Information Act

[Meghan54]

As to your first statement, this is why there are so many that want a smaller, less intrusive government.

So, please tell me which party does that? Certainly isn't the Republicans. Bet you can't name the last president that made a meaningful reduction in the civilian federal workforce......say over 200K jobs RIF'd.

 

[ivwshane]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...e-most-transparent-administration-in-history/

"Nevertheless, at this moment, although the administration may still wind up as one of the better ones of the sunshine era, it may not serve as the model for the most transparent administration yet to come."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Post
On October 17, 2008, The Post endorsed Barack Obama for President of the United States.[48] On October 25, 2012, the newspaper endorsed the re-election of Barack Obama.

Thank you!


You must be new here, as it seems you are capable of providing sources of information and are able to calculate any potential bias from said sources.

 

[FerrelGeek]

I agree. That's why I'm not a fan of either party, sir.

So, please tell me which party does that? Certainly isn't the Republicans. Bet you can't name the last president that made a meaningful reduction in the civilian federal workforce......say over 200K jobs RIF'd.

 

[PokerGuy]

this is why there are so many that want a smaller, less intrusive government.

I used to think that, but I've changed my opinion over time. Now I think most people want both big giant intrusive government and small less intrusive government, depending on what aspect they are looking at. They aren't consistent. They want government to stay out of their business, but then are fine with big government meddling in other peoples' affairs or enforcing something they agree with. There are relatively few people who are consistent in their views on the role of government.

The only way to limit the potential for corruption and overstepping authority is to limit the size and scope of the government - irrespective of who is in charge of said government.

Absolutely agree 100%. The nature of government is for it to get bigger and more powerful over time. The more powerful an organization, the more it will draw money/resources to buy influence over that power.

 

[Genx87]

Lol! Typical.

For one, I haven't made any claim to Obamas transparency one way or another. However others, have not only stated obama isn't transparent but that he's also the least transparent. So maybe you guys should take your own advice and define what transparency means to you and then show how Obama, compared to other presidents is less transparent.

Of course none of you will do that but you will continue your useless whining complaining about failed campaign promises all while never holding any other politician to the same standard.

I await your further deflecting

Eh the Obama administration and their cheerleaders(you) tout this administration as the "most" transparent in history. The onus is on you to show us how he has accomplished this. If he hasnt then admit it.

 

[cabri]

Lol! Typical.

For one, I haven't made any claim to Obamas transparency one way or another. However others, have not only stated obama isn't transparent but that he's also the least transparent. So maybe you guys should take your own advice and define what transparency means to you and then show how Obama, compared to other presidents is less transparent.

Of course none of you will do that but you will continue your useless whining complaining about failed campaign promises all while never holding any other politician to the same standard.

I await your further deflecting

US sets new record for denying, censoring government files

For the second consecutive year, the Obama administration more often than ever censored government files or outright denied access to them under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act, according to a new analysis of federal data by The Associated Press.

The government took longer to turn over files when it provided any, said more regularly that it couldn't find documents, and refused a record number of times to turn over files quickly that might be especially newsworthy.

It also acknowledged in nearly 1 in 3 cases that its initial decisions to withhold or censor records were improper under the law — but only when it was challenged.

Its backlog of unanswered requests at year's end grew remarkably by 55 percent to more than 200,000.

...

Now even by the governments own admission, it is getting worse.

Next excuse by the Obama sheep please.

 

[PokerGuy]

US sets new record for denying, censoring government files



Now even by the governments own admission, it is getting worse.

Next excuse by the Obama sheep please.

Was about to post this. Yep, most transparent and open administration ever..... Not only are they "just as bad as the ones before them", stories like this show by many measures they are much much worse. FOIA requests are delayed and denied at much higher rates, the courts determine that requests are inappropriately denied at much higher rates, many federal agencies simply ignore FOIA requests etc etc etc.

Will be interesting to hear how the gullible obummer sheeple spin this.

 

[ivwshane]

Eh the Obama administration and their cheerleaders(you) tout this administration as the "most" transparent in history. The onus is on you to show us how he has accomplished this. If he hasnt then admit it.

Nope! Another straw man from a hack. Can you show me my post where I made that claim?

Of course you can't. Try again idiot

 

[WHAMPOM]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...hite-house-foia-regulations-deleted/24844253/

holy Bush/Cheney part deux where they're not subject to the laws of the land.

WTF?!

Obama mentions a legacy White House Policy already held to be legal by the courts.
And you misconstrue and spew as usual.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

I don't get why progressives love this guy so much...how many blatant lies does it take for them to figure how that his rhetoric does not match his actions.

 

[unokitty]

I was going to say something about broken promises.

But somehow, I just can't find that email...

So, just trust me okay?

Why would you need to verify a promise from a politician anyway?

We all know that the President wouldn't lie to you...

That is, he wouldn't unless it was politically expedient...

 

[PokerGuy]

I don't get why progressives love this guy so much...how many blatant lies does it take for them to figure how that his rhetoric does not match his actions.

In some cases, the rhetoric does match the actions. Unfortunately for all of us, it's in exactly the wrong cases. He promised open and transparent government, I'd be 100% in favor of him following up on that promise. Instead, his administration does the opposite. Meanwhile, plenty of gullible idiots still support him.

 

[ivwshane]

Was about to post this. Yep, most transparent and open administration ever..... Not only are they "just as bad as the ones before them", stories like this show by many measures they are much much worse. FOIA requests are delayed and denied at much higher rates, the courts determine that requests are inappropriately denied at much higher rates, many federal agencies simply ignore FOIA requests etc etc etc.

Will be interesting to hear how the gullible obummer sheeple spin this.

Gullible? Did you guys see the data yourself? Did you see the data by year, by president? It's not hard to believe that the number of denials is way up if the number of requests are way up as well. You believing this admin is the least transparent without any citations is just as gullible as the person who believes this admin is the most transparent without any citations.

So again, you guys make a claim (hey at least you've now given a definition of what transparency is), that Obama is the least transparent admin, so let's see the comparisons to other presidents.

 

[ivwshane]

I don't get why progressives love this guy so much...how many blatant lies does it take for them to figure how that his rhetoric does not match his actions.

It's docstrawmansavage everyone!


Love obama? Ha! Most of his real criticism comes from the left. You wouldn't know that because you live in a right wing bubble where Obama is the least transparent, Kenyan, Muslim, anti Christ, illegitimate, president ever!

 

[ivwshane]

In some cases, the rhetoric does match the actions. Unfortunately for all of us, it's in exactly the wrong cases. He promised open and transparent government, I'd be 100% in favor of him following up on that promise. Instead, his administration does the opposite. Meanwhile, plenty of gullible idiots still support him.

So he hasn't been transparent at all? Try making a statement without using hyperbole and maybe you'll get some traction

 

[ivwshane]

I was going to say something about broken promises.

But somehow, I just can't find that email...

So, just trust me okay?

Why would you need to verify a promise from a politician anyway?

We all know that the President wouldn't lie to you...

That is, he wouldn't unless it was politically expedient...

What other politicians are you following for to see what promises they have and haven't kept! Do you have any emails for them?

 

[PokerGuy]

Gullible? Did you guys see the data yourself? Did you see the data by year, by president? It's not hard to believe that the number of denials is way up if the number of requests are way up as well.

Go read the reports. The denials are way up as a percentage of requests, as are the delays and invalid denials (denials where the courts ultimately conclude the denial was not warranted and forces them to provide the info). The delays are way up, and even the percentage of requests granted expedited status under FOIA are way down.

Just like with the number of deportations, the administration (through the spokesman) is trying to spin the numbers by not including all the requests where the agency denied the request or the requester gave up after a long time in the numbers, but objectively things have gotten worse , not better.

You believing this admin is the least transparent without any citations

Where did I say this is the least transparent? This administration claims to be the most open and transparent, and they promised to have those qualities be the hallmark of the administration. I'd say it's a big fail on both fronts. If you feel differently, feel free to introduce evidence supporting the claims from the administration or obummers promises prior to being elected.

So again, you guys make a claim (hey at least you've now given a definition of what transparency is), that Obama is the least transparent admin, so let's see the comparisons to other presidents.

Who exactly has made that claim? Quote the post please. The claim of MOST open and transparent is consistently made by obummer and his minions, and he ran on that platform (hopey changey open transparency and all). The onus is on him or his supporters to support that claim, which is difficult in light of the facts saying otherwise.

 

[PokerGuy]

What other politicians are you following for to see what promises they have and haven't kept! Do you have any emails for them?

Oh, so we're going with the "hey, they're all bad, why pick on him!" line of defense now? Is that at least a tacit admission then that he hasn't done what promised to do and is lying about having the most open and transparent administration ever??

 

[touchstone]

your title is stupid and you are stupid. obama did nothing more than confirm the policy that was started in the bush administration. why dont you re-title your thread 'i am an idiot and obama confirms bush administration policy of ignoring foia requests'


i am tired and going to bed but this thread sucks and op you especially suck a lot. nice to meet you

 

[cabri]

Sheep.

Take a shot!

I love it when people assume that their political opponent is a blind follower just because they didn't vote for your favored candidate.

There are true believers who listened to Obama make campaign speeches and bought everything said. Just as there were true believers who listened to McCain/Rmoney and bought everything they said.

There are also people who aren't blind followers. People who don't consider Obama the messiah. But voted for Obama because they found McCain and Frau Palin, or Rmoney to be the worse choice.

Obama said hope, and hope is subjective. So is change. So is transparency, since you're unable to point at anything that Obama has done to make the big bad gub'mint less transparent.

You can keep using conjuring words like sheep and Gospel, but when the other "sleazeball candidates" that you help elect get elected, I'll use those words against you, and they'll be just as accurate.

Keep on keepin' on.

And we have sheep here in this forum.
iwshane and Jhnn for at least two.

Anything flawed on Obama that is pointed out is deflected, denied and/or excused.

The perfect example is in this thread regarding transparency.
Obama administration comes out and admits it; supplies numbers showing the failure and these two deny it happens.

 

[Genx87]

Nope! Another straw man from a hack. Can you show me my post where I made that claim?

Of course you can't. Try again idiot

So you admit this administration is not the most transparent in history? Good to know. Stop wasting our time and being a troll.

 

[cabri]

Gullible? Did you guys see the data yourself? Did you see the data by year, by president? It's not hard to believe that the number of denials is way up if the number of requests are way up as well. You believing this admin is the least transparent without any citations is just as gullible as the person who believes this admin is the most transparent without any citations.

So again, you guys make a claim (hey at least you've now given a definition of what transparency is), that Obama is the least transparent admin, so let's see the comparisons to other presidents.

and the percentage is also up in terms of the denials and the length to respond.

33% failure rate on the denials.

What other politicians are you following for to see what promises they have and haven't kept! Do you have any emails for them?

The discussion is about Obama, not others.
Obama was the one that boasted transparency. You and others have fought against the evidence;
Now when the evidence is in your face and from the Obama administration itself; you try to deflect (as usual)

 

[ivwshane]

Oh, so we're going with the "hey, they're all bad, why pick on him!" line of defense now? Is that at least a tacit admission then that he hasn't done what promised to do and is lying about having the most open and transparent administration ever??

I was responding to a troll.

 

[ivwshane]

So you admit this administration is not the most transparent in history? Good to know. Stop wasting our time and being a troll.

Is not the most transparent? I haven't made that claim nor have I said he is the most transparent.

You guys want to claim he isn't the most transparent, I'll I'm asking is for you to prove it.

If you guys want to say you think obama could be more transparent, I'm right there with you! If you want to say obama has done things that aren't transparent, I'll agree!

But the moment you say obama is the most transparent or he isn't the most transparent, well, that's where I'll need to see some data of current and past presidents to see how they compare.

Do you have that data?

 

[PokerGuy]

Is not the most transparent? I haven't made that claim nor have I said he is the most transparent.

He is the one making the claim.

You guys want to claim he isn't the most transparent, I'll I'm asking is for you to prove it.

He is the one making the claim, and there's plenty of evidence to the contrary -- even without the damning FOIA report by the AP.

But the moment you say obama is the most transparent or he isn't the most transparent, well, that's where I'll need to see some data of current and past presidents to see how they compare.

obummer and his minions are the ones making the claim, the onus is on them to support it.