So, we should elect Romney? You know - the man that refuses to provide voters with a detailed plan because they wouldn't vote for him if they heard it...

Which doesn't mean jack when Romney promises to have an even less open Presidency.

FTA: "It's ironic that the demands in the presidential campaign for Mitt Romney's tax returns are unrelenting, but when it comes time to release the schedules for senior appointees there's the same denial of access," said Paul Light, a New York University professor who studies the federal bureaucracy.

Sorry, that's not ironic at all. Ironic would be if the president's father had pioneered the act of releasing the travel schedules of senior appointees back in the day, and the president still demands Romney's tax returns.

Bontesla: So, we should elect Romney? You know - the man that refuses to provide voters with a detailed plan because they wouldn't vote for him if they heard it...

Yeah, let's vote for the guy who promises no transparency whatsoever and will deliver on that promise!

Nineteen of 20 cabinet-level agencies disobeyed the law requiring the disclosure of public information: The cost of travel by top officials. In all, just eight of the 57 federal agencies met Bloomberg's request for those documents within the 20-day window required by the Act.

So... measuring transparency via how many and how quickly they respond to compiling thousands of travel expense reports...

That's not transparency. That's nitpicking over demanding the agencies to compile and create reports.

GAT_00: Which doesn't mean jack when Romney promises to have an even less open Presidency.

this. if you haven't noticed this guy hasn't been too forthcoming with details to his proposal. here's a hint: let congress run the country.

Shenanigans!: Bontesla: So, we should elect Romney? You know - the man that refuses to provide voters with a detailed plan because they wouldn't vote for him if they heard it...

Yeah, let's vote for the guy who promises no transparency whatsoever and will deliver on that promise!

I want someone even less transparent than Cheney, so opaque that the only information that escapes are high-energy x-rays emitted from beyond the singularity's event horizon. Because socialism.

/am on Nyquil

Obama *is* trying to make government more open and accountable but it's a tough row to hoe in the deeply bureaucratic DC particularly in light of the increased number of requests. This is definitely something that needs working on but as someone who clearly remembers the BushCo years of unprecedented secrecy there's no farking way you can make a equivalency argument here as Bloomers News is trying to do here without looking like an idiot.

quatchi: BushCo years of unprecedented secrecy

Remember when the Bush administration released over a million documents during the his presidency? Good times, good times. 

/Got a lot of flack for that thread...

This thread:

Not surprised liberal dems still believe this guy is the saviour-King-Obama.

He lied all through his campaign in 08.


Time for someone new.

See, this is one of the things I feel the Obama Administration really shot themselves in the foot on. I'm not saying that every single piece of information needs to be released (and FOIA recognizes that), but surely there have got to be ways to make this process more efficient. I'm not saying increase the 20-day deadline or some stupid crap, but perhaps dedicating more resources/people to clearing up the FOIA backlog, especially in the DHS which the article seems to note is getting the brunt of it. Getting records digitized is a good idea, but can it be done any faster than by 2019? What's a realistic timeline for that sort of digitization? And that's not even including the back-door dealings.

Look, I'm not sating it's an easy system to change, nor is there a guarantee that Romney will actually take steps Obama has not, but the President that seriously tackles the issue of transparency could probably win a lot of points in their favor. Obama really hasn't from the looks of it, and shiat like that just feeds the "hype and blame" crowd.

spcMike: WizardofToast: Nothing can really change me over to Romney unless Obama does in fact round up people into camps like those FW:FW:FW emails tell me.

To be honest, even if Obama does in fact start rounding up people into camps, I'd probably still vote for him over Romney.

I wonder how many ppl would switch their vote over to Obama if he started rounding up baby boomers and sending them to camps like those.

Shaggy_C: Good times, good times.

Do you miss him yet?

Mexican Jew Lizard: Getting records digitized is a good idea, but can it be done any faster than by 2019? What's a realistic timeline for that sort of digitization? And that's not even including the back-door dealings.

Wikileaks didn't seem to have the problem with huge backlogs and slow bureaucracy. Hell, you could bring in Julian Assange as an uppaid consultant rather than throwing him in jail - kill two birds with one stone.

quatchi: Obama *is* trying to make government more open and accountable but it's a tough row to hoe in the deeply bureaucratic DC particularly in light of the increased number of requests.

Did you type that with a serious face?

Because looking at his very 1st executive order when he took office (at a time where you would think the financial meltdown we had going on wouild be priotity #1)... he signed 13489... to make sure all of his personal records were sealed from the public.

Obama's not perfect, vote Romney.

Relevant information:

http://www.freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/FOTP%202011%20Tables% 2 0and%20Graphs_0.pdf

http://cpi.transparency.org/cpi2011/results/

You know that when the right wing trolls come on shift they'll be all over this, gloating that it's another of Obama's broken promises. And a significant number of Obama supporters will concede that they are disappointed in the lack of transparency, too.

The trolls won't listen, however, and will claim that the Obamabots defend the President no matter what he does, even though there will be any number of posts proving otherwise.

The problem is that it is impossible for them to accept that people may be disappointed in some of things Obama has done while still believing that he is an infinitely better president than Romney would be. This kind of nuanced thinking is impossible in the Republican universe, which is binary - you're either with them 100% or you're the enemy.

Without Fail: Unfortunately, Romney is the same old shiat.

Name just one thing that he promises to do differently than Bush.

Repay Sheldon Adelson's campaign contributions by invading Iran. Bush never did that...

vegasj: quatchi: Obama *is* trying to make government more open and accountable but it's a tough row to hoe in the deeply bureaucratic DC particularly in light of the increased number of requests.

Did you type that with a serious face?

Because looking at his very 1st executive order when he took office (at a time where you would think the financial meltdown we had going on wouild be priotity #1)... he signed 13489... to make sure all of his personal records were sealed from the public.

LINK FAIL.
You dumbass, your own link even calls you a liar and a conspiracy theorist, noting that the EO in question actually increased transparency.

Mitt Romneys Tax Return: You know that when the right wing trolls come on shift they'll be all over this, gloating that it's another of Obama's broken promises. And a significant number of Obama supporters will concede that they are disappointed in the lack of transparency, too.

The trolls won't listen, however, and will claim that the Obamabots defend the President no matter what he does, even though there will be any number of posts proving otherwise.

The problem is that it is impossible for them to accept that people may be disappointed in some of things Obama has done while still believing that he is an infinitely better president than Romney would be. This kind of nuanced thinking is impossible in the Republican universe, which is binary - you're either with them 100% or you're the enemy.

Exactly. Look, it's all about priorities. Has been since the beginning of time. Adults know there wil never be a perfect option to vote for. Even you Third Partiers have to admit that your guy/gal has skeletons in his/her closet. So you just pick the one who best aligns with your highest priorities. Just so happens that transparency, while important, doesn't rank as high as pragmatism, maturity, health care reform, etc. etc. for me. So I still feel good about my vote.

To learn more, read WorldCitizen's perfectly articulated post.

Teufelaffe: vegasj: quatchi: Obama *is* trying to make government more open and accountable but it's a tough row to hoe in the deeply bureaucratic DC particularly in light of the increased number of requests.

Did you type that with a serious face?

Because looking at his very 1st executive order when he took office (at a time where you would think the financial meltdown we had going on wouild be priotity #1)... he signed 13489... to make sure all of his personal records were sealed from the public.

ROFLAMO...did you actually read the article you linked to? Here, let me give you a taste:

Obama's first executive order merely rescinded an earlier executive order severely limiting public access to presidential records after they left office.

What, you expect a Troll to actually FACT CHECK the links they provide to back up their derp? Fact checking has a well known liberal bias!

vegasj: Because looking at his very 1st executive order when he took office (at a time where you would think the financial meltdown we had going on wouild be priotity #1)... he signed 13489... to make sure all of his personal records were sealed from the public.

Obama's personal records have what to do with government transparency?

After the muslim kenyan birth certificate bullshiat during the 08 election, I'd be surprised if Obama did it just so he knew what it was the birthers would be complaining about, rather than giving more information to spin, fuel for the false narrative that's still going 4 years later.

Teufelaffe: vegasj: quatchi: Obama *is* trying to make government more open and accountable but it's a tough row to hoe in the deeply bureaucratic DC particularly in light of the increased number of requests.

Did you type that with a serious face?

Because looking at his very 1st executive order when he took office (at a time where you would think the financial meltdown we had going on wouild be priotity #1)... he signed 13489... to make sure all of his personal records were sealed from the public.

ROFLAMO...did you actually read the article you linked to? Here, let me give you a taste:

Obama's first executive order merely rescinded an earlier executive order severely limiting public access to presidential records after they left office.

You need to stop throwing your liberal-leaning facts in his face! We all know the real world is liberally biased and its all part of the conspiracy!