Amy Goodman...get thee under the bus...

[truebrit71]

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/barack_obama_the_least_transparent_president_in_history_20140326

[Kelvin Mace]

2. Well, she'll have lots of company

so she won't be lonely.

[Steve Martines]

44. +1

[ProSense]

3. Not everyone is

knowledgeable about history.

The process of providing access to records is key to transparency. Past administrations were horrible in terms of this. In fact, the administration put many policies in place to change that culture.

CREW AND OBAMA ADMINISTRATION SETTLE LAWSUIT OVER MISSING BUSH WHITE HOUSE EMAILS:
http://www.citizensforethics.org/index.php/press/entry/crew-and-obama-settle-lawsuit-over-missing-bush-white-house-emails/

CREW AND OBAMA ADMINISTRATION REACH HISTORIC LEGAL SETTLEMENT – WHITE HOUSE TO POST VISITOR RECORDS ONLINE
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8626066

Transparency, Declassification, and the Obama Presidency

By Lee White

<...>

Steven Aftergood (Director of the Project on Government Secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists and the publisher of the blog Secrecy News)

In retrospect, the Administration erred in making its early public statements promising unprecedented transparency. The President raised expectations so high that the ensuing disappointment was inevitable. The smarter move would have been to demonstrate openness in actions, not in words, and to exceed public expectations.

<...>

Thomas Blanton (Director of the National Security Archive at George Washington University in Washington, D.C.)

There are obviously some differences of opinion on this subject. My own is that too often we conflate "the Obama administration" with actions of specific agencies or specific bureaucrats, when in fact the policy decision at the top has been pretty good, just stymied by ongoing bureaucratic obfuscation in the middle and the bottom. Or even worse, continuity by federal career employees of Bush policies that the White House has not succeeded in changing.

<...>

Anne Weismann (Chief Counsel for Citizen's for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington-CREW)

In my assessment, the administration's record on transparency is mixed. Without question, President Obama put strong, pro-transparency policies in place that really set the benchmark for a more open government. The problem has been in implementing those policies at the agency level. Agencies have been encouraged to make proactive disclosures, but they have shown little regard for the quality of and public interest in the information they are posting. And the administration has not provided them much guidance on this front.

<...>

Patrice McDermott (Executive Director of OpenTheGovernment.Org)

I think it is a very mixed bag. There are strong indications that the initiatives and efforts of the Obama Administration have begun to institutionalize changes in the attitudes of components of the Executive Branch, mostly in the area of domestic right-to-know. While the effectiveness of FOIA as a disclosure and accountability tool for the public continues to lag behind the promises the President and the Attorney General made, much more attention is being directed by agencies to improving the process, and agencies are putting more information out proactively (without requiring or waiting for a FOIA request)—and not just the usual stuff they want you to know. The greatest frustration on the domestic policy front has been the ongoing changes in policy personnel in the White House, creating problems of follow-through and consistency.

<...>

- more -

http://www.historians.org/Perspectives/issues/2012/1209/Transparency-Declassification-and-Obama-Presidency.cfm

Obama provided evidence of Bush's torture program to the Senate, and Obama is covering up torture?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024662090

[truebrit71]

4. As you display on a regular basis...

[xchrom]

5. +1

[ProSense]

6. Translation: Facts are getting in the way. n/t

[truebrit71]

10. Something that has never stopped you before...

...no reason Amy Goodman's facts should stop you now...

[SomethingFishy]

11. What facts? You provided a couple of anecdotes and a few quotes

that claim this administration is a "Mixed-Bag" on transparency. The fact is, we as a nation are doing more spying than at any time in our history. More spying means more secrets. Period. Thats not up for debate. It is what it is.

I'm not saying this is Obama's fault or Obama's doing, it just is what it is, it's the times we live in. We have become a nation that lives in fear, and a nations that lives in fear wants to know what everyone is up to. Technology has made that possible.

We are so afraid that we can spend billions to "appease" our fear but in order to pay for it we keep taking from the least of us... The sick, the poor, the elderly, children...

Is this all the fault of the Democrats? No. Not even close. But are they working hard enough to stop the madness? No. Not even close.

[ProSense]

21. They are facts, and

You provided a couple of anecdotes and a few quotes

that claim this administration is a "Mixed-Bag" on transparency. The fact is, we as a nation are doing more spying than at any time in our history. More spying means more secrets. Period. Thats not up for debate. It is what it is.

I'm not saying this is Obama's fault or Obama's doing, it just is what it is, it's the times we live in. We have become a nation that lives in fear, and a nations that lives in fear wants to know what everyone is up to. Technology has made that possible.

We are so afraid that we can spend billions to "appease" our fear but in order to pay for it we keep taking from the least of us... The sick, the poor, the elderly, children...

Is this all the fault of the Democrats? No. Not even close. But are they working hard enough to stop the madness? No. Not even close.

...nothing you posted negates them. "Mixed-Bag" relevative to the promise made. You talk about spying, and then say, "I'm not saying this is Obama's fault or Obama's doing."

Spying has nothing to do with the level of transparency of a President's administration. The OP claim is delusional.

[ProSense]

32. ACLU: President Announces Reforms to Rein in NSA Spying on Americans

President Announces Reforms to Rein in NSA Spying on Americans

NEW YORK – President Obama today announced a plan to end the NSA’s mass collection of phone records. According to the proposal to change surveillance under the Patriot Act’s Section 215, the government would request records from phone companies using court orders based on individual suspicion.

Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, had this reaction:

“The president’s plan is a major step in the right direction and a victory for privacy. But this must be the beginning of surveillance reform, not the end. It is gratifying to know that the president has heard the growing bipartisan opposition to the NSA’S mass collection of phone records, and will heed the advice of his own review panel. However, today's announcement leaves in place other surveillance programs with equally troubling implications for civil liberties. Comprehensive reform should begin with passage of the USA FREEDOM Act, a bill that safeguards privacy while also ensuring that the government has the tools it needs to investigate real threats. We must restore the proper balance between security and our constitutional rights.”

https://www.aclu.org/national-security/president-announces-reforms-rein-nsa-spying-americans

[truebrit71]

41. Which, as your link says, doesn't go anywhere near far enough...

...

[Fawke Em]

45. ...and something that would have never happened had

the poster's arch-enemy Edward Snowden not brought it out into the light.

We need a "pulling on waders to walk through the BS" smiley.

[bobduca]

14. Translation : flopsweat

[ProSense]

19. Translation: Nothing but nonsense to add. n/t

[truebrit71]

20. Translation: Nothing but canned cut and paste responses

..and endless blue links to offer...

[ProSense]

23. You posted a link in the OP

and it's to a silly claim. LOL!

[truebrit71]

26. Um, I posted a link to a news article that clearly states it's point...

Are you suggesting that something in that linked article is false, or are you, as some might suggest, just full of shit?

(Please note, I'm not suggesting that you are full of shit, merely that others might say that you are full of shit, or that people that are full of shit typically post in a manner similar to the one that you use even though you are not full of shit).

[ProSense]

29. And I posted several links debunking a ridiculous claim. n/t

[truebrit71]

33. None of those links debunked a thing...

...other than your cut & paste skills...

[bobduca]

37. Plenty of sense there..

funny with a name like Pro Sense you'd think you'd be able to stop playing dumb all the time.

[LuvNewcastle]

12. Thank you!

[840high]

36. +2

[sabrina 1]

46. The irony is stunning is it not?

It gets more and more difficult for those desperately trying to defend the indefensible which may account for the increase in background noise.

You do have to give some credit for the huge effort though.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

13. NOT BAD!!! Only 8 minutes from the time the OP was posted until your detailed response!

Thank you for your diligence!

[truebrit71]

15. ROFL!!

Wait...are you being serious?

[ProSense]

18. Yeah, I was slow on retreiving previous posts. n/t

[bvar22]

49. .

[ProSense]

50. The Bush administration was more transparent.

Like I said, the claim is delusional, and no amount of eyerolling changes that.

[LondonReign2]

59. 8 minutes to churn out

the blue squid ink. Very professionally done

[pkdu]

7. " in history" .....really?

I expect more from Amy Goodman, the AP quote was

“The government’s efforts to be more open about its activities last year were their worst since President Barack Obama took office.”

Very different than the headline.

Oh , and nice collection of comments going , after the article.

[ProSense]

25. You're not suppose to challenge claims.

LOL!

[truebrit71]

27. Nope, blind obedience to obscure blind blue links is preferred..

[sabrina 1]

52. That may be, but we Dems are not known to take orders to remain silent no matter who

it offends.

[bvar22]

55. Amy Goodman probably did NOT write the Headline.

A headline's purpose is to quickly and briefly draw attention to the story. It is generally written by a copy editor, but may also be written by the writer, the page layout designer, or other editors.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headline

Here is what Amy Goodman wrote in her 1st paragraph,
which as all journalists know is a statement of content.

“My Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in Government.” So wrote President Barack Obama, back on Jan. 29, 2009, just days into his presidency. “Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government.”

Now, six years into the Obama administration, his promise of “a new era of open Government” seems just another grand promise, cynically broken.

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/barack_obama_the_least_transparent_president_in_history_20140326

[QC]

8. Amy Goodman never really loved him!!!

[deutsey]

9. Anyone who has followed Amy Goodman for some time will know

that she has always been a critic of both Democrats and Republicans.

It's fair to say she's far to the left of either mainstream party and has been "under the bus" for quite some time, by her own choice.

[GiveMeMorePIE]

16. Amy Goodman is entitled to her misinformed opinion.

She is a genuine person that just happens to be wrong more times than not.

[bullwinkle428]

17. Please tell me you don't view her as a "female William Kristol".

Please?

[GiveMeMorePIE]

22. No. Kristol is scum.

I disagree with both of them, but actually respect Goodman.

She stands for what she thinks is right, even if much of it is based in naivete.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

31. Please show examples of Amy Goodman's naïveté. Thank you. nt

[TroglodyteScholar]

42. IMO her whole career is an exercise in naivete.

She's to be respected, but anyone who functions on any political "extreme" is either going on ideology, naivete, or some combination of both. If you don't see that, no explanation from a DUer will make it clear to you.

[fascisthunter]

43. Why? Because she's Left Wing?

Or because she calls out corruption as she sees it?

[NorthCarolina]

48. My guess is the prior...

because she's left wing.

[fascisthunter]

53. There's Definitely a Right vs Left Paradigm on this Site

[sabrina 1]

54. So good journalists are 'functioning as extremists' now? Who would you recommend as a journalist

we should trust?

I ask because so far over the past few months, EVERYONE who reports actual news, has been dismissed as not credible for one reason or another. But we have been asking and so far, have not received, a list of 'sources' we CAN trust.

[L0oniX]

24. Enjoy your stay.

[GiveMeMorePIE]

28. Thanks bro!

Cool gif.

I was trying to knock it off my monitor.

[Steve Martines]

56. No room for Amy

Nate's already there.

[PowerToThePeople]

47. .

[Bluenorthwest]

30. Pie is yummy, here's a link to how to make a prezel pie crust!!!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=about&forum=1002

[NuclearDem]

35. Bang bang!

[bobduca]

38. Hey he wants more pie

[In_The_Wind]

57. Yes, indeed!

[fascisthunter]

40. Somebody lost a laundry basket

[sabrina 1]

51. Welcome to DU. Since this is a discussion forum, could you explain your comment 'she is wrong

more often than she is right'. DUers tend to ignore drive by comments with nothing but someone's 'opinion'. We would appreciate some context to that statement.

[Phlem]

34. It's getting fucking crowded under here.

-p

[1000words]

58. Have you seen this year's model?

[2banon]

39. Why single out Goodman?

It's not as if editors or reporters from NYT, WaPo, Reuters et al, hasn't reported or opined exactly the same thing.

And Goodman has never, ever shilled for any President of either party.