Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I wasn't aware Bush ran on a platform of "transparency". He didn't make grandiose claims about hope, change, transparency and honesty, claiming to be a new type of president that would do things differently than the past administrations, did he?
To be fair..Obama submitted the name in April and Congress just sat on it.
Congress had their chance and blew it.
As far as the other two appointed..that I'm not sure.
I wasn't aware Bush ran on a platform of "transparency". He didn't make grandiose claims about hope, change, transparency and honesty, claiming to be a new type of president that would do things differently than the past administrations, did he?
What do you consider transparency?
Open financial books?
Two way conversations with the public?
Getting approval before blowing ones nose or taking a crap?
I've seen it described a dozen different ways, from both the public and from government. In most states (from Michigan to Texas), it is just about fiscal accountability (showing where the money goes - not the process in selecting where it goes) and making legislative information available online (what was decided, not how the decision was made).
There were only 3 conditions to Obama's claims of transparency:
Disclose information rapidly, encourage public participation and
Collaborate across all levels of Government, and with nonprofit organizations, businesses, and individuals in the private sector.
He never said he'd hold a American idol style competition for who he wants to work with him, carrying out his policies.
No different then any other president.
What's the big deal? Recess appointments are common practices used by both repub and dem presidents. In two terms, Bush made 171 recess appointments - one was a judge filibustered by the dems.
The big deal here is that this recess appointee will be overseeing a budget larger than that of the Department of Defense and he has not been vetted by Congress. That makes it a HUGE deal. This is not just any recess appointee.
Why is this considered a back room deal? A back room deal is when we don't know the detail of why a decision has been made. President Obama made it very clear the repubs are holding up approving the nominee for political reasons. An example of a back room deal was Cheney's secret meetings with the oil and gas companies.
BTW - Saint Ronnie is the king of recess appointments with 273.
Only fools believe that the reason this appointment couldn't be accepted by the Senate. When you have that many people in your majority and all it takes here is a majority, it seems to me that he couldn't get enough Dems to go along with this appointment.
Hey that was a great job of trying to deflect the conversation to Cheney and Reagan. I don't think it worked, though.
Last edited by roysoldboy; 07-07-2010 at 10:21 PM..
I wasn't aware Bush ran on a platform of "transparency". He didn't make grandiose claims about hope, change, transparency and honesty, claiming to be a new type of president that would do things differently than the past administrations, did he?
The point is that recess appointments are constitutional, and they are temporary, just to fill the vacancy.
It is allowed by Article II, section 2, clause 3 of the Constitution. Recess appointments are...wait for it...temporary.
ABM has made, if memory serves 18 recess appointments. It is NOT unusual.
But this is the Messiah who said he was going to change all that. Going to be open and honest and do away with all the typical Washington back door tricks. You Koolaid drinkers just will never get how corrupt this man is, will you?
Getting approval before blowing ones nose or taking a crap?
I've seen it described a dozen different ways, from both the public and from government. In most states (from Michigan to Texas), it is just about fiscal accountability (showing where the money goes - not the process in selecting where it goes) and making legislative information available online (what was decided, not how the decision was made).
There were only 3 conditions to Obama's claims of transparency:
Disclose information rapidly, encourage public participation and
Collaborate across all levels of Government, and with nonprofit organizations, businesses, and individuals in the private sector.
He never said he'd hold a American idol style competition for who he wants to work with him, carrying out his policies.
No different then any other president.
You fit right in with him. No one ever said he'd hold any kind of "competiton" or anything like that. Nice try to deflect from his promises to be the most open administration and totally change Washington. Has he fulfilled any of the promises you list? NO! What happened to his promise of posting everything in the internet so the American people could see just what he and his administration were doing? Lie, after lie, after lie after broken promise yet you still support him. Nov. 2012 can't come soon enough to get rid of this abomination.
Last edited by jeepejeep; 07-08-2010 at 06:01 AM..
Truly astounding and unprecedented. What happened to the rule of law and NOT circumventing congressional oversight, something obama spewed about regularly?
That's what makes the administration's decision unprecedented in my nearly 30 years of closely following politics: I can't recall a preemptive decision to make a recess appointment ab sent a controversy, ugly political battle or contentious confirmation hearing.
Second, this is as glaring an admission as there is that Obama and his people know they've lost the public on health care.
The slimy democrats wanted to avoid any questions regarding obamacare. Do they really think they will be able to avoid the subject this fall?
Getting approval before blowing ones nose or taking a crap?
I've seen it described a dozen different ways, from both the public and from government. In most states (from Michigan to Texas), it is just about fiscal accountability (showing where the money goes - not the process in selecting where it goes) and making legislative information available online (what was decided, not how the decision was made).
There were only 3 conditions to Obama's claims of transparency:
Disclose information rapidly, encourage public participation and
Collaborate across all levels of Government, and with nonprofit organizations, businesses, and individuals in the private sector.
He never said he'd hold a American idol style competition for who he wants to work with him, carrying out his policies.
No different then any other president.
How about stuff that he promised? Like televised debates on health care, no lobbyists, no special favors for cronies....stuff like that?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
