- This topic has 42 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Before we start, this is a specific topic thread. STAY ON TARGET!
Obama campaigned on the idea of eliminating lobbyists and many people fell for it. Great concept, not so easy in reality.
Yesterday (Jan 21) Obama signed an executive order barring lobbyists from working in the White House on any subject on which they’d lobbied. Sounds great, right?
Today, Armed Services Chairman Carl Levin, has a statement out suggesting that the appointment of William Lynn as deputy secretary of defense was, officially, supposed to be an exception to the new rule. He very recently was a registered lobbyist for a defense contractor, but now wants to work for the Obama administration. I guess Obama didn’t realize this could be a problem and is now scrambling, saying that “a waiver process that allows people to serve their country, is necessary.”
If Bush had appointed a Lockheed Martin or Boeing lobbyist to an executive position in the defense department, the media would have eaten him alive.
Any thoughts? Excuses?
It’s been two days and your already complaining about the new President? FFS man give it a year and let him do some work and then maybe you will have something better to complain about, I tell you what though, you can complain all you want, but it is not going to change anything…
Bitey said:
It’s been two days and your already complaining about the new President? FFS man give it a year and let him do some work and then maybe you will have something better to complain about, I tell you what though, you can complain all you want, but it is not going to change anything…Honestly, I thought this at first. But MasterP and republicans had to hear complaining from liberals like myself for 8 years. I don’t see anything wrong with complaining. The real truth is we are probably *edited*ed regardless who is in office, and this partisan bull*edited* is just set up to delay the inevitable end. He has the right to complain, that’s why America is so great, we have the freedom to say whatever we want about whoever we want (to an extent of course).
To keep this relative:
3 (a) The Director of the Office of Management and Budget, or his or her designee, in consultation with the Counsel to the President or his or her designee, may grant to any current or former appointee a written waiver of any restrictions contained in the pledge signed by such appointee if, and to the extent that, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, or his or her designee, certifies in writing (i) that the literal application of the restriction is inconsistent with the purposes of the restriction, or (ii) that it is in the public interest to grant the waiver. A waiver shall take effect when the certification is signed by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget or his or her designee.
(
The public interest shall include, but not be limited to, exigent circumstances relating to national security or to the economy. De minimis contact with an executive agency shall be cause for a waiver of the restrictions contained in paragraph 3 of the pledge.that up there is the part of the executive order you are talking about which allows him to make that exception. “Exigent circumstances relating to national security or to the economy.” Sounds like standard political verbiage. Bush wouldn’t have been smart enough to even add this. lol
.cb new_rayz said:
Honestly, I thought this at first. But MasterP and republicans had to hear complaining from liberals like myself for 8 years. I don’t see anything wrong with complaining. The real truth is we are probably *edited*ed regardless who is in office, and this partisan bull*edited* is just set up to delay the inevitable end. He has the right to complain, that’s why America is so great, we have the freedom to say whatever we want about whoever we want (to an extent of course).
Thanks for finding that quote in your added part, I wasn’t aware they had already written that in there. The part that really scares me about this is
Quote:
i) that the literal application of the restriction is inconsistent with the purposes of the restriction, or (ii) that it is in the public interest to grant the waiver.That pretty much says that anyone Obama didn’t intend to restrict can get a waiver. The public interest part can pretty much be anyone on the planet as almost all companies do work that is in the “public interest”. Between the two, this would allow lobbyists for defense contractors, bank and market industries, contruction contractors, and a very long list of etc. Tbh, I can’t see how this is different than it was before, just now you have to pay-to-play in Washington instead of showing up and playing for free, neither really gets anything useful done.
Bitey the point was that in the first two days he’s already setting himself up to break a brand new rule he created on his first day. I don’t want Obama to fail because I don’t want America to fail with him but you can’t say we didn’t take heat over this sort of stuff with Bush. Any loopholes or inconsistancies would have immediately been blown out of proportion.
Bitey said:
It’s been two days and your already complaining about the new President? FFS man give it a year and let him do some work and then maybe you will have something better to complain about, I tell you what though, you can complain all you want, but it is not going to change anything…I have to wait a year to *edited* about his Free Choice act?
Sorry , I started on day one.
Wup dee *edited*ing doo. Why do you have such an agenda against Obama? Do you REALLY think that anyone else that could have gotten elected wouldn’t do *edited* like that? Honestly. All you have to say is completely close minded, not thinking about the other side. It’s a trend I’ve been noticing in your posts lately. No matter what he does (for the most part), Obama WILL NOT be as bad a president as Bush was. Get a grip.
once again
Anything McCain would have done would have been wrong too and the only reason you wont admit that is because he is a republican and then in 3yrs when he *edited*s *edited* over you will say that you don’t consider him a republican and never did because he has some “liberal” agenda. You are *edited*ing ridiculous. This is not bashing or flaming this is the truth.
ren said:
Wup dee *edited*ing doo. Why do you have such an agenda against Obama? Do you REALLY think that anyone else that could have gotten elected wouldn’t do *edited* like that? Honestly. All you have to say is completely close minded, not thinking about the other side. It’s a trend I’ve been noticing in your posts lately. No matter what he does (for the most part), Obama WILL NOT be as bad a president as Bush was. Get a grip.All I’ve heard from day one is how stupid Bush is and how bad a president he would be. From day one. Now that the coins been flipped it’s suddenly bad? I’m suddenly the biased one? I’m closed minded? Take a good look in the mirror because this is nothing new.
I’m not saying no one else would do that because every president appoints lobbyists and its usually not a bad thing. The problem I have is that one of Obama’s big talking points was on keeping Washington clean and when it finally comes time to do it he creates a ginormous loophole that pretty much negates the entire thing.
Ren, take one GIANT step back and think about this: if Bush had created an enormous loophole like this in one of his major selling point laws would the media have hounded him on it?
YouWinGameOver said:
Anything McCain would have done would have been wrong too and the only reason you wont admit that is because he is a republican and then in 3yrs when he *edited*s *edited* over you will say that you don’t consider him a republican and never did because he has some “liberal” agenda. You are *edited*ing ridiculous. This is not bashing or flaming this is the truth.Actually that’s wrong, I’ve said from day one that McCain wasn’t a republican. If it had been up to republicans, he wouldn’t have even been the party’s nominee. It’s kind of broad to say that anything McCain would have done would have been wrong because even you’ll admit Bush did some stuff right. The rest of your point is moot anyway because if McCain had won the media would be hounding his every move like they did with Bush. There’d be no reason for me to do any research or posting on his actions as there are five major news stations in this country that would give you all the “objective reporting” you’d ever need on him. As it is now, none of the major stations are objective anymore. Even Fox refuses to report about the Messiah’s blunders or mistakes. If Bush had screwed up during the oath of office, you know *edited* well how much it would have been replayed on TV and he’d have been titled the “Stupidest president in American history” on that mistake alone but since Obama did it it’s the Chief Justice’s fault.
MasterP said:
Actually that’s wrong, I’ve said from day one that McCain wasn’t a republican. If it had been up to republicans, he wouldn’t have even been the party’s nominee.You understand what you just said right? McCain appointed by the republican party to represent the republican party on republican issues is now somehow not republican? Wow.
MasterP said:
It’s kind of broad to say that anything McCain would have done would have been wrong because even you’ll admit Bush did some stuff right. The rest of your point is moot anyway because if McCain had won the media would be hounding his every move like they did with Bush. There’d be no reason for me to do any research or posting on his actions as there are five major news stations in this country that would give you all the “objective reporting” you’d ever need on him. As it is now, none of the major stations are objective anymore. Even Fox refuses to report about the Messiah’s blunders or mistakes. If Bush had screwed up during the oath of office, you know *edited* well how much it would have been replayed on TV and he’d have been titled the “Stupidest president in American history” on that mistake alone but since Obama did it it’s the Chief Justice’s fault.I never said that Bush didn’t do everything wrong but when the bad out way the good there is a problem that should be fixed. Fox is one of the most biased and unjust news channels/internet websites out there. If most of the time you sit at home and watch fox then all you’ve probably been doing is listening to Nancy Grace as she is still talking about the Caylee case. That being said, change the channel.
ren said:
. No matter what he does (for the most part), Obama WILL NOT be as bad a president as Bush was.well, as long as you say so, I feel better already.
Everyone is putting more pressure on him then they did Bush. People are going to judge the *edited* out of everything that he does and if theres a lot more MPs out there you know it will all surface.
This is just stupid one of the main reasons no one liked bush is he was so much like his dad he acted without thinking about what it was he was really about to do and how it would reflect on our country and the fact that bush was for the oil companies and would do nothing to lower the price of oil because then he would be cutting his on throat . Bush was just a bad pres over all he was for the rich and only the rich we need a pres that is for the people and not for making the rich richer and alot of people think that obama is that person . And trying to gauge him this early is just plain stupid since he hasn’t had time to really change much yet and its not going to be a over night fix its going to take time to get our country stable again . Any one that trys to is just trying to troll
YouWinGameOver said:
You understand what you just said right? McCain appointed by the republican party to represent the republican party on republican issues is now somehow not republican? Wow.Democrats only let registered democrats vote in their primaries. Republicans let registered independents as well as registered republicans vote in their primaries. A large portion of McCain’s early primary voters were independents and most of them said they voted for him because of his liberal or somewhat left of center views on certain issues. Once Obama got on the ticket many of these independents flocked to him. The handful of states that had closed primaries were ridiculed in the blogs for “disenfranchising voters”.
To be fair, republicans tried to swing the democrat primary by having republican voters change their party affiliation to vote for Hillary. Once this became known, democrats pretty much halted all new voter registration in the states that remained and threatened to throw republicans who switched parties in jail (which they can’t do btw).
Had all the republican primaries been closed the nominee would have likely been Huckabee and had the press coverage also been balanced it would have been Fred Thompson. He was the closest thing we’ve had to Reagan in years but no one knew it until he was already eliminated.
YouWinGameOver said:
I never said that Bush didn’t do everything wrong but when the bad out way the good there is a problem that should be fixed. Fox is one of the most biased and unjust news channels/internet websites out there. If most of the time you sit at home and watch fox then all you’ve probably been doing is listening to Nancy Grace as she is still talking about the Caylee case. That being said, change the channel.I don’t watch TV news anymore but you might find this article enlightening. Fox ran more negatives stories about Obama than all the other stations but they still managed to run twice as many negative stories about McCain as they did positive stories.
http://www.variety.com/article/VR111799488…d=1064&cs=1
This site has it broken down.
http://www.papamiket.com/?p=12771
YouWinGameOver said:
Everyone is putting more pressure on him then they did Bush. People are going to judge the *edited* out of everything that he does and if theres a lot more MPs out there you know it will all surface.People like me may dig this stuff up but everyone else burries it. It doesn’t matter how much we find, if the media is afraid to run with it what’s the point?
hey instead of bashing obama about stuff how about you give him a chance before you just string him up i mean Jesus the guy has been in office what 3 days ? All these haters come out of the wood work and it isn’t like they could do any better . this is one of the reason politics isn’t talked about in most jobs because everyone has a idea what they think the pres should do and not do . i say sit back and let us see where he wants to take us and how the trip is to get us there
Ex said:
the fact that bush was for the oil companies and would do nothing to lower the price of oil because then he would be cutting his on throat .Yes, because Bush controls the entire Middle East oil market and can set the international price of oil at whatever he wants. What? If we run with this idea though, would you also be willing to thank Bush for lowering the price back down to lower than it was when he took office (inflation adjusted)?
Ex said:
And trying to gauge him this early is just plain stupid since he hasn’t had time to really change much yet and its not going to be a over night fix its going to take time to get our country stable again .That’s fair but there are ALOT of Clinton era people in his administration that had a hand in creating this market mess. You can’t fix a problem by using the same people that helped create it. Well you can, but it usually doesn’t end well.
MasterP said:
Had all the republican primaries been closed the nominee would have likely been Huckabee and had the press coverage also been balanced it would have been Fred Thompson. He was the closest thing we’ve had to Reagan in years but no one knew it until he was already eliminated.What percent did McCain when in those primaries? Was it not an overwhelming percentage? And what percentage of voters were labeled independent? And of that percentage, what percentage voted for McCain? I know the independent vote might have shifted the figures a few points, but McCain had it in the bag regardless I thought?
I think the Huckster would have been solid. He knows how to communicate (has his own show). But my personal favorite republican was Ron Paul, which technically he isn’t a republican either. A bit of a loon, but I’m all for his stance on decriminalization and legalization.
.cb new_rayz said:
What percent did McCain when in those primaries? Was it not an overwhelming percentage? And what percentage of voters were labeled independent? And of that percentage, what percentage voted for McCain? I know the independent vote might have shifted the figures a few points, but McCain had it in the bag regardless I thought?The first few were close and he didn’t really do so well butI know once the independents and left-leaning republicans helped get him rolling it was pretty much over.
.cb new_rayz said:
I think the Huckster would have been solid. He knows how to communicate (has his own show). But my personal favorite republican was Ron Paul, which technically he isn’t a republican either. A bit of a loonDitto to all that. I’m not really sure why Ron Paul keeps running on our ticket because both parties can agree that his ideas are pretty far out in left field. He does have a monster online campaign though, one that might have rivaled Obama’s.
Ex said:
hey instead of bashing obama about stuff how about you give him a chance before you just string him up i mean Jesus the guy has been in office what 3 days ? All these haters come out of the wood work and it isn’t like they could do any better . this is one of the reason politics isn’t talked about in most jobs because everyone has a idea what they think the pres should do and not do . i say sit back and let us see where he wants to take us and how the trip is to get us thereyep, been in the 3 days and he has had 5 Executive orders so far. Thats the more by a new President than the last 5 Presidents combined.
Rob he said changes would be made, his whole campaign was ran on the idea of “Change”.
Anyways, just wanted to clarify that I did not vote in this election, I am neither completely Republican or Democrat, I listen to speeches, and I go to non-partisan websites to wade through most of the political bull *edited* and figure out what is really going on. So my statement about waiting to see what he can do was just my opinion, I mean we won’t know how successful he is until a year has gone by in office, that is how long it takes for a nation to make dramatic changes. If the economy does pull out of the rut it is in, then we will know that it is because of the policies and plans that Obama put into place, if not then I am sure that if he sees his ideas are not working he will look for alternatives. I doubt Obama is so close-minded that he would go with his plans no matter what, even if they don’t work, if he is, well then the country suffers because of it. I think that is part of the reason why people wanted something different because McCain was basically keeping the same plan Bush had. People that are hurting for money and scraping by to live are the ones that voted for Obama because they wanted “Change”, people that most likely normally do not vote did this time because of that, 8 years of the same stuff was not going to cut it for them, so the people showed they wanted “Change”.
Just my thoughts on the subject, mostly opinions.
Obama Foreign Affairs Update:
Religious tribal groups targeted and bombed by U.S. on Pakistani border. Obama rejects Pakistani’s plea to end the bombing sprees. Smart move? What do you guys think?
EDIT:
Something to note. Obama didn’t issue these strikes, he just allowed them to continue, as in we were bombing these targets for a while now. Pakistani Officials hoped that Obama would cease the bombings once he was into office, yet he has refused.
Bitey said:
If the economy does pull out of the rut it is in, then we will know that it is because of the policies and plans that Obama put into placeSee that’s not really fair though because a number of experts were already predicting a large comeback this year even under the existing Bush economic policies. What’s going on in the housing and stock markets ise going to happen so long as we have a relatively free market system. The only thing politicians can do is make the decline worse as anything they do to “pad” the market back to an artificial high only makes the next decline worse.
New_rayz that shows that once again reality and campaign idealism rarely go together. There really are bad people over there and if nothing else it’s comforting that Obama isn’t getting in the way of existing military operations. I’d really be nice if he’d plan some new offensive on neighboring terrorist hotbed nations or a surge to turn Afghanistan around but at this point I’ll take whatever I can get.
It is troubling that he closed Gitmo. I’m sure they did some pretty rough things to the prisoners down there but some of them will be back after we turn them lose. I only hope we can kill them before they kill more of us.
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama on Friday struck down the Bush administration’s ban on giving federal money to international groups that perform abortions or provide abortion information — an inflammatory policy that has bounced in and out of law for the past quarter-century.
MasterP said:
It is troubling that he closed Gitmo. I’m sure they did some pretty rough things to the prisoners down there but some of them will be back after we turn them lose. I only hope we can kill them before they kill more of us.Most detainees will probably be transferred to prisons in the United States, where they will be killed by fellow inmates.
YouWinGameOver said:
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama on Friday struck down the Bush administration’s ban on giving federal money to international groups that perform abortions or provide abortion information — an inflammatory policy that has bounced in and out of law for the past quarter-century.Reagan created the ban and every democrat in office since then has lifted the ban while every republican in office has reinstated it.
When you consider how much we are hated around the world it really doesn’t make sense to give money away as freely as we do, especially now that our budget has fallen in a hole deeper than Zion.
MasterP, you are right, after I posted that I thought about how some presidents policies take forever to take place, like 3-4 years somtiems so yeah, it may be that one of Bushes plans comes through the woodwork and brings us out of the rut, we don’t really know, but I dont really care what happens as long as it does and it helps the people who need it.
Im tripping I am mostly drunk and I am saying alot so yeha…nightr
MasterP said:
Reagan created the ban and every democrat in office since then has lifted the ban while every republican in office has reinstated it.When you consider how much we are hated around the world it really doesn’t make sense to give money away as freely as we do, especially now that our budget has fallen in a hole deeper than Zion.
Completely agree. I thought Reagan was a horrible president btw.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.