News and Politics | November 13, 2008 | 47 comments

Obama could revoke Bush's presidential secrecy directive

source: http://rawstory.com/news/2008/More_than_sixty_groups_call_for_1112.html

Image
bansheewail
Open the books. Let's see what was really going on.
  1. groups:
    News and Politics
  2. tags:
    News and Politics,  Obama,  Barack Obama,  US,  2 more
  3.     
    |

47 comments // Obama could revoke Bush's presidential secrecy directive

  • bedeboop
  • barbara3d
  • bluestranger
    • 0
      bluestranger  

    • It is supposedly still our government. Not the presiden'ts or congress' or the supreme court's government but ours. It only follows that we should know what is supposedly being done in our names.

    • 4 years ago
  • HolyCity2012
  • barbara3d
  • Commentor
    • 0
      Commentor  

    • The President G W Bush (not its not Jr. his father was G H W Bush and hence not Sr.) could still use the directive to act in case of an "Emergency" the emergancy might very well be some sort of war condition in Iraq or anything else GW Bush decides is a threat to the USA -- possibly including voting illregularities due to the electronic-voting machines.

      Remember Obama is not elected president yet.
      He won't be until the Electorial College meets and elects him. Until then electorial votes can still be changed in some cases since they are not all bound to vote the way the districts in the states have voted.

    • 4 years ago
  • amazume
    • 0
      amazume  
    • Commentor:

      Is that wishful thinking on your part? Obama is our president elect, and that in itself is a promising fact, especially compared to our current commander in chief. Transparency is something I believe Obama will be very comfortable with, and who knows, maybe if we give Dennis Kucinich a listen, it will help send Bush/Cheney and fellow cronies to the Hague, The Netherlands, facing charges as the war criminals they are, besides impeachment. Whatever it is they did, and did not, is known all over the world anyway.

    • 4 years ago
  • Commentor
    • 0
      Commentor  
    • Commentor:

      Another problem cited by critics is the possibility of "faithless electors" who defect from the candidate to whom they are pledged. Most recently, in 1976, a Republican elector in the state of Washington cast his vote for Ronald Reagan instead of Gerald Ford, the Republican presidential candidate. Earlier, in 1972, a Republican elector in Virginia deserted Nixon to vote for the Libertarian party candidate. And in 1968, Nixon lost another Virginia elector, who bolted to George Wallace.
      --------------------
      some states have passed laws that say an elector should vote as pleged but they still aren't necessarlly required to do it
      ------------------------------------------------
      The origionall intent seems to be similar to a parlement system where the ministers elect a prime minister --- since it seemed that individual states would loose power in popular votes and because they didn't want the legislators to choose the president (seperation of powers) they chose the electoral college system.
      ------------
      Additionally later the house of representatives limited in size to 435 that should have never really happened and when it did the number of electors in the electoral college should have been adjusted to the original formula used for representatives Instead of the re-apportioning

    • 4 years ago
  • NeoDotCom
    • 0
      NeoDotCom  

    • Wow. Dude has 10 weeks until he takes office.

      I'm gonna let you in on a secret.

      He can't do everything. He sold us all a dream. He'll be better than bush 41 and 43. Better than Clinton, Regan and Carter. But for him to meet his expectations he must be better than Roosevelt, Teddy and Frankling, Lincoln and Kennedy.

      Two of those guys were assassinated.

      Be realistic. That's all I'm saying. He could be our best president in 30 years and for some people that still wouldn't be enough.

    • 4 years ago
  • HolyCity2012
  • Saladin
    • 0
      Saladin  

    • This is an absolutely essential function of our government that needs to be restored for basic accountability purposes.

    • 4 years ago
  • samthesixth
  • ruberube
    • 0
      ruberube  

    • Its imperative that this transformation go through...
      take back our democracy from the fascist neocons.

      Make them stand up to for their actions!

      Oh please god, let Obama take back our nation!
      Oh please god, let the scientists save our planet!

    • 4 years ago
  • huntre
  • onechance
  • samthesixth
  • bansheewail
  • neckfire
    • 0
      neckfire  
    • samthesixth:

      To cement his role as a benevolent leader? There is more than one type of power and if the country trusts Obama to do good I'm pretty sure he will be able to move mountains.

    • 4 years ago
  • Saladin
    • 0
      Saladin  
    • samthesixth:

      This is an utterly useless comment.

      "Ooooo, don't believe it, he might be lying!"

      Yeah, and he might get into office and become Cthulu.

      You can assert anything with baseless suspicion and prejudice.

    • 4 years ago
  • GatorMonkey
    • 0
      GatorMonkey  
    • samthesixth:

      The fact that Bush is already pissed off at him for being open about what went on between the two of them when Obama met Bush at the White House was a big sign to me that he planned on being open with the public about what is going on.

      HMMMMM

    • 4 years ago
  • samthesixth
  • samthesixth
  • HolyCity2012
  • justright
  • justright
  • current89
  • J_Jammer
  • krush_productions
  • Argon18
    • 0
      Argon18  

    • That is where you are wrong since it states right on his web page

      "Change the Culture of Secrecy: Obama will reverse President Bush's policy of secrecy. He will institute a National Declassification Center to make declassification secure but routine, efficient, and cost-effective."

    • 4 years ago
  • JanforGore
  • GatorMonkey
    • 0
      GatorMonkey  
    • Argon18:

      Regardless of which article... the current post stated a fact that you claimed was false.

      ""More than sixty groups call for revocation of presidential secrecy directive"

      Kind of a misleading title on this, no? Obama never stated he "could" or would do this. "

      So... all Argon did was point out that Obama DID in fact say he planned on doing this. Who cares where it was specifically said.

    • 4 years ago
  • cyman01
  • Argon18
    • 0
      Argon18  
    • Argon18:

      Then THIS article was about 60 groups jumping on the bandwagon and agreeing with the plan Obama has advocated for months during the campaign.

      It does not make it any more right just because it did not mention something that was well documented already.

      Since Obama has the support of these 60 groups it would make a lot more sense to follow through with that plan than just forget it because any power he tried to use with it would be offset with a loss of power from the withdrawal of support from those groups.

    • 4 years ago
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  

    • "More than sixty groups call for revocation of presidential secrecy directive"

      Kind of a misleading title on this, no? Obama never stated he "could" or would do this. This article is about the sixty groups calling on him to do the right thing. It sure will be a test to see if he does it as it will hold his administration to the same standards. He is coming into office with the most power ever held by a president of this country. Let's see how far he really goes to give it all up once he has it.

    • 4 years ago
  • ii386
    • 0
      ii386  
    • JanforGore:

      and NO ONE should give Obama any credit for ANYTHING yet. He hasn't done anything yet.

      He needs to earn credit and trust.

      If anything, I am going to be far more critical of Obama than I was for the lost-cause of Bush. You couldn't expect anything good from Bush, but it seems Obama might be on a good preparatory path to change.

    • 4 years ago
  • hwhfgier
  • hwhfgier
  • samthesixth
  • IMMININT
    • 0
      IMMININT  

    • Having the truth brought out to the American public would definitely have it's benefits for my sanity.

      I could see this resulting in an assasination attempt though.

    • 4 years ago
  • Argon18
  • daledrops
  • drewsuf721
  • pokesmot
  • cyman01
  • bansheewail
more from News and Politics:
from the community

top videos