Page 18 of 24 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 ... LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 236

Thread: Obama finds room for lobbyists

  1. #171
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,740

    Re: Obama finds room for lobbyists

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    Let look in my crystal ball............


    Nah I am asking cause 1st it was "Wait until he takes office", now that he has you are all telling me to wait to "See who he picks", to now "wait a little longer"... .

    I'd like the official date of permission to critisize obama.
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

  2. #172
    Sage
    Gibberish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Last Seen
    12-23-12 @ 09:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    6,339

    Re: Obama finds room for lobbyists

    It seems Obama put an exception in his ethics rules, as would be expected from any rule in the government.
    "If you are a lobbyist entering my administration, you will not be able to work on matters you lobbied on, or in the agencies you lobbied during the previous two years," Obama said. "When you leave government, you will not be able to lobby my administration for as long as I am president."

    Later, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Obama's ethics rules included a provision for waivers if they are approved by the White House Counsel. He said Lynn "is superbly qualified" for the deputy defense secretary job.
    And it seems our Defense Secretary believes this man is the best for the job and requested the exception.
    Defense Secretary Robert Gates told reporters he asked for an exception to be made for Lynn because he is the best candidate for the job.
    Lynn Gets Waiver From Obama Lobbyist Rules - Defense News
    "Gold gets dug out of the ground in Africa, or someplace. Then we melt it down, dig another hole, bury it again and pay people to stand around guarding it. It has no utility. Anyone watching from Mars would be scratching their head."
    - Warren Buffett

  3. #173
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,740

    Re: Obama finds room for lobbyists

    Quote Originally Posted by Gibberish View Post
    It seems Obama put an exception in his ethics rules, as would be expected from any rule in the government.


    And it seems our Defense Secretary believes this man is the best for the job and requested the exception.


    Lynn Gets Waiver From Obama Lobbyist Rules - Defense News
    So it was not:


    I donít take a dime of their money, and when I am President, they wonít find a job in my White House.


    To, "except the ones I like"......
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

  4. #174
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: Obama finds room for lobbyists

    Quote Originally Posted by Reverend_Hellh0und View Post
    Nah I am asking cause 1st it was "Wait until he takes office", now that he has you are all telling me to wait to "See who he picks", to now "wait a little longer"... .

    I'd like the official date of permission to critisize obama.
    I live by the idea that rules are meant to be broken. I want to see what happens before I damn people. I even said this in regards to Bush's spying programs.

  5. #175
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,740

    Re: Obama finds room for lobbyists

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    I live by the idea that rules are meant to be broken. I want to see what happens before I damn people. I even said this in regards to Bush's spying programs.
    ok.......
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

  6. #176
    Professor

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Seen
    02-13-09 @ 05:15 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,942

    Re: Obama finds room for lobbyists

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    I live by the idea that rules are meant to be broken. I want to see what happens before I damn people. I even said this in regards to Bush's spying programs.
    But we have seen what has happened.

    Obama declared that no lobbyist would find a job in his White House.

    Obama has hired lobbyists for jobs in his White House.

    What are you waiting for?

  7. #177
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,740

    Re: Obama finds room for lobbyists

    Quote Originally Posted by JMak View Post
    But we have seen what has happened.

    Obama declared that no lobbyist would find a job in his White House.

    Obama has hired lobbyists for jobs in his White House.

    What are you waiting for?




    One year from now, we have the chance to tell all those corporate lobbyists that the days of them setting the agenda in Washington are over. I have done more to take on lobbyists than any other candidate in this race - and Iíve won. I donít take a dime of their money, and when I am President, they wonít find a job in my White House. -President Barak Hussein Obama



    .............
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

  8. #178
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

    Re: Obama finds room for lobbyists

    I've got nothing against Democrats that will say something along the lines of:

    "Yes, I don't like this. Yes, it does seem like politics as usual and he was being dishonest. However, its still early on and while this does make leery I would like at least a year to see what promises he keeps, what promsies he doesn't, and what steps he takes to fulfill his promises."

    Its understandable. Its completely understandable not to want to judge the guy you voted for based on a single incident. No one expects the guy they voted for to be perfect and I understand the feeling of wanting to judge him over a reasonable course of time, like 1 or 2 years, before really making a judgement on rather he was completely lieing or being dishonest about his platform as a whole or if there was just certain issues where he had to compromise his principles due to the reality of situations.

    Say I'm told that a movie is supposed to be a great comedy, filled with moments where I'm bursting at the seams laughing, and then I go to see it and just get a few chuckles in the first 5 minutes and one moment that was just HORRIBLY unfunny. For some people, that may be enough to make them think that the reviews and the commericals for the movie were a lie and get up and walk out. Others may think that sometimes things aren't going to deliver IMMEDIETELY, but you gotta give it a bit of time to see it pan out. If its a two hour movie and 30 minutes or an hour into it it STILL hasn't really been that funny, and at some points downright unfunny, then yeah, those initial people may then think they've got enough to go on to make a decision.

    Same thing here. He's been in for 2 weeks, and while to me this is a bad sign, I even am can't say for certain what it pertains to the future because its two weeks out of 208 that he's going to be in office at least. Less than 1%. And during that time, I'm sure he's done things that HAS kept campaign promises.

    The problem is, for most of the Democrats that are saying something akin to that they're adding in an attack at republicans daring to actually point out this issue. Whether it is them harping on him too early, or not giving him enough time, or other such excuses...none of those negate what he did and that it IS something to consider.

    The amazing thing is this therad would've likely ended 3 pages ago if the majority of the democrats went "Yep, I don't really like his move on this. It goes against part of what he campaigned for. However, its only been 2 weeks, and I've liked more things than disliked that he's done so far, so I'm going to hold off on Judgement".

    A few rabid republicans may still have gone "OMG! You didn't say you hate him and that he's a horrible human being, I'm going to bite your leg off now!" but for the most part it would've died out.

    Instead we got responses that "he didn't keep his promise 100%" whatever that means, or that its okay that he broke the promise because these guys may be good so its not REALLY the kind of people he was talking about when he made the promise, and other such "rationalizations". The sad thing is, a lot of these rationalizations give credance to some of the attacks from the more rabid people on the right during the campaign about the Messiah-complex (really, could say the Reagan-Complex as republicans do the same thing with him) during the campaign.

  9. #179
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: Obama finds room for lobbyists

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    I've got nothing against Democrats that will say something along the lines of:

    "Yes, I don't like this. Yes, it does seem like politics as usual and he was being dishonest. However, its still early on and while this does make leery I would like at least a year to see what promises he keeps, what promsies he doesn't, and what steps he takes to fulfill his promises."

    Its understandable. Its completely understandable not to want to judge the guy you voted for based on a single incident. No one expects the guy they voted for to be perfect and I understand the feeling of wanting to judge him over a reasonable course of time, like 1 or 2 years, before really making a judgement on rather he was completely lieing or being dishonest about his platform as a whole or if there was just certain issues where he had to compromise his principles due to the reality of situations.

    The problem is, for most of the Democrats that are saying something akin to that they're adding in an attack at republicans daring to actually point out this issue. Whether it is them harping on him too early, or not giving him enough time, or other such excuses...none of those negate what he did and that it IS something to consider.

    The amazing thing is this therad would've likely ended 3 pages ago if the majority of the democrats went "Yep, I don't really like his move on this. It goes against part of what he campaigned for. However, its only been 2 weeks, and I've liked more things than disliked that he's done so far, so I'm going to hold off on Judgement".

    A few rabid republicans may still have gone "OMG! You didn't say you hate him and that he's a horrible human being, I'm going to bite your leg off now!" but for the most part it would've died out.

    Instead we got responses that "he didn't keep his promise 100%" whatever that means, or that its okay that he broke the promise because these guys may be good so its not REALLY the kind of people he was talking about when he made the promise, and other such "rationalizations". The sad thing is, a lot of these rationalizations give credance to some of the attacks from the more rabid people on the right during the campaign about the Messiah-complex (really, could say the Reagan-Complex as republicans do the same thing with him) during the campaign.

    The situation is something I will keep an eye on.

  10. #180
    Sage
    Khayembii Communique's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7,897

    Re: Obama finds room for lobbyists

    It seems Obama put an exception in his ethics rules, as would be expected from any rule in the government.
    Actually, this is only partially true, and not relevant to Lynn's case.

    Quote Originally Posted by Executive Order
    Section 1. Ethics Pledge. Every appointee in every executive agency appointed on or after January 20, 2009, shall sign, and upon signing shall be contractually committed to, the following pledge upon becoming an appointee:
    Emphasis mine in all of these quotes.

    (a) "Executive agency" shall include each "executive agency" as defined by section 105 of title 5, United States Code, and shall include the Executive Office of the President; provided, however, that for purposes of this order "executive agency" shall include the United States Postal Service and Postal Regulatory Commission, but shall exclude the Government Accountability Office.

    (b) "Appointee" nshall include every full time, non career Presidential or Vice-Presidential appointee, non career appointee in the Senior Executive Service (or other SES type system), and appointee to a position that has been excepted from the competitive service by reason of being of a confidential or policymaking character (Schedule C and other positions excepted under comparable criteria) in an executive agency. It does not include any person appointed as a member of the Senior Foreign Service or solely as a uniformed service commissioned officer.
    So there are exceptions to this rule, but they are in no way related to Lynn's case, as the Department Secretary of Defense is not part of the Government Accountability Office or the Senior Foreign Service and is not a uniformed service commissioned officer.

    This is why Obama's administration, instead of just having him approved outright, must first seek a waiver for Lynn, based on Section 3 of the Executive Order:

    (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.

    (b) 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.
    So what they are going to have to do in seeking this waiver is proving that the appointment of Lynn is "in the public interest" (i.e. "includ[ing] but not limited to exigent circumstances relating to national security or to the economy").

    The sticking point with people like Reverend is not that the appointment of Lynn goes against the Executive Order, but that the Executive Order goes against what Obama claimed he was going to implement.

    Executive Order

Page 18 of 24 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •