Hi Billy,

On Jan 6, 2010, at 11:32 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> Ernie:
> So far my worst fears from the Admin have not been realized.
> Still holding my breath, but at least for now it has been possible
> to re-focus on other matters, including some proposals made by BHO
> which I think well of, like C-Span and transparency.
>  
> This turn of events is unexpected, for all of my criticisms
> this was one area where I thought the best of Obama.
> Looks like I can't continue to do so.
>  
> And not just me, of course.

Yeah, I tend to agree. He hasn't done as badly on social issues, or as well on 
transparency, as we thought.  At least he's breaking campaign promises 
even-handedly. :-(

-- Ernie P.

>  
> Billy
>  
> ======================================================
>  
> In a message dated 1/6/2010 11:26:43 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, 
> [email protected] writes:
> Yeah, the Interwebs are already grieving the loss of transparency, the one 
> clear win we were really hoping for from Obama. :-(
> 
> http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/jan/05/charlie-crist/gov-charlie-crist-says-obama-breaks-transparency-p/
> 
> http://race42008.com/2010/01/06/suddenly-transparency-is-bad/
> 
> To be fair, I do think we'll get some useful access to *historical* data:
> 
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/08/open-government-directive_n_384018.html
> 
> But, that's not nearly as important as getting to watch the sausage get 
> made...
> 
> -- Ernie P.
> 
> On Jan 6, 2010, at 11:15 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> 
>> There is a 3 minute video with this article which you would be well advised
>> to view. It is Obama speaking in crystal clear terms about his intention
>> to televise the health care negotiations on C-Span. That is, the negotiations
>> which are now directly ahead of us. There is no ambiguity, Obama made
>> an absolutely clear promise to televise the negotiations on C-Span.
>> He gave his reasons,  and they are persuasive.
>>  
>> This is no longer Obama's position, essentially his promise is null and void.
>>  
>> Now what ?
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> January 5th, 2010
>>  
>>  
>> Obama's C-Span Problem
>> Posted by Tom Bevan
>> Brian Lamb has put President Obama on the spot. Lamb is the CEO of C-Span, 
>> and today he wrote a letter to the leaders of Congress asking them to allow 
>> cameras in the room for the final negotiations on the health care bill. Lamb 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> President Obama, Senate and House leaders, many of your rank-and-file 
>> members, and the nation's editorial pages have all talked about the value of 
>> transparent discussions on reforming the nation's health care system. Now 
>> that the process moves to the critical stage of reconciliation between 
>> Chambers, we respectfully request that you allow the public full access, 
>> through television, to legislation that will affect the lives of every 
>> single American.
>> 
>> Indeed, this was one of Obama's signature promises on the campaign trail:
>> 
>> [ Here is where the video clip is inserted in the article ]
>> 
>> It's hard to get more explicit than that.
>> 
>> But that was then. Today, when asked for the 3rd time whether President 
>> Obama believes that the "standard" he set during the campaign for 
>> transparency on health care negotiations is being met by the current process 
>> (which now appears to include bypassing the formal conference process), 
>> White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs gave a flaccid but telling response.
>> 
>> "I do not believe the American people have lacked for information on what's 
>> in these bills - the political and policy arguments around different 
>> people's positions - I think that's been well documented," Gibbs said.
>> 
>> With all due respect, the reporter did not ask Gibbs for his appraisal of 
>> what he thinks the public does and does not know about the health care 
>> bills. Rather, the question is very simple: will President Obama honor his 
>> campaign pledge and demand that the final health care negotiations are 
>> televised on C-Span? Judging from Gibbs' response, the answer is an obvious 
>> "no."
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Centroids mailing list: [email protected]
>> http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com
>> Archives at 
>> http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/
> 
> =
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Centroids mailing list: [email protected]
> http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com
> Archives at 
> http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Centroids mailing list: [email protected]
> http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com
> Archives at 
> http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/

_______________________________________________
Centroids mailing list: [email protected]
http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com
Archives at http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/

Reply via email to