Is Obama done?

[Belegon]

The think is, Belegon, if the State Department were truely trying to protect their information, why were they using unknown temps? To quote Dr. Phil, "That's just wrong."

Unfortunatly, this is a mess that permiates the entire government. It's like a really old row boat - Full of Leaks.

Well,the policy is sound and the hiring wasn't then. And that REALLY sounds like the government... doing one thing right and making all their efforts useless by screwing up something related...

To be honest, I haven't paid much attention to the passport thing because I read the headline and went, "Duh! A part time teller knows better than that..."

 

[sr71plt]

Confidentiality in an environment like the state department or a financial office is no joke.

I've worked in banking for many years and I have handled accounts for people whose names many of you would recognize and in one case almost all of you would recognize. Those people are not only entitled to their privacy, it is guaranteed as a matter of policy and law, just like mine and yours are.

You don't go into ANY account or personal background unless you have a reason to do so. And it is just as much a firing offense at your local bank as it is at the Federal level. Period.

Still it was just natural curiosity, I'm sure, that led those contractors to check those files. It would be interesting to see what other names popped up as accessed without permission (OJ; Marilyn Monroe, Charles Manson, Michael Jordan, Michael Jackson, Jimmy Hoffa, etc.). It's a good thing that they have mechanisms to catch the peekers--even though it is just human nature to browse--because passport application information would be very useful in this day and age for identity theft. (Although you would have to be a real lunkhead to try to steal Obama's identity.)

I saw worse at the CIA in the mid 60s. Their spy files were set up in an elaborate fashion so that they were numbered, not named. The actual files (hard-copy files, of course, in those days) were filed by number. And there was a manual index where you could search by name and get a number. With their staff employees, the CIA made sure that those who worked in the index didn't have access to the file rooms and those who worked in the file rooms didn't have access to the index.

Then the dummies brought in college kid summer-only kids (including me) to start setting the index up for computerization. We were given access to both the index and the file room. Staffers weren't, but the contracted college kids were. You can bet there was a whole lot of browsing going on.

 

[cloudy]

I am Laughing My Ass Off. Obama gave q great speech - written by Bill Clinton's X-Speech Writer. Of course it was good. But did he mean it? Time will tell.

small correction: Obama wrote the speech himself.

 

[manyeyedhydra]

But wouldn't it would make it easier for the regular people to start slaughtering people?

Don't give me a gun.

Ever...

 

[sr71plt]

The think is, Belegon, if the State Department were truely trying to protect their information, why were they using unknown temps? To quote Dr. Phil, "That's just wrong."

Unfortunatly, this is a mess that permiates the entire government. It's like a really old row boat - Full of Leaks.

Did you read somewhere that they were "unknown temps" or are you jumping to false conclusions? Government contractors generally are vetted and given clearances at the same level as the staffers working whatever is being worked there. (When I retired, I immediately became an on-call contractor so that I could continue doing what I had been doing as needed.)

This is a "no win" situation. People scream at the cost and slowness/lack of response of government, and when agencies farm out what work they can to cheaper/larger work force contractors, People scream about that too. Take your pick; which do you want? Cheaper/faster response time or false security (because there's a hundred and three ways information like this can be/will be compromised anyway). The passport office hired the contractors on a crash basis, because they'd slipped six months behind in processing passport requests and the citizens were screaming. There's only so much you can squeeze out of the orange--you have to decide which compromises are the most acceptable.

I don't know how this came to light--you imply that the Obama folks publicized it. If so, this is just another example of how wet behind the ears he is concerning government functioning. It's been blown way out of proportion. Saying you are running because you aren't a Washington insider sounds real nice, but it doesn't lead to getting much actual work done if you win. Evidence Jimmy Carter.

 

[rgraham666]

I imagine this is one area we'll simply have to agree to disagree on. And I don't think we should simply be handing out guns to every Tom, Dick and Harry Dick who walks up asking for one. I will add, however, that my belief in gun ownership is not simply about protecting yourself from thugs, robbers, thieves and Jehovah's witnesses but also protecting yourself from your own government. And that may sound paranoid, especially considering the ammo box and my open declaration for open rebellion against the U.S. government, but I'll point to the Patriot Act as proof enough of why people should be allowed to own guns.

And yes, Kev, it was, indeed, a nice jack. I also don't think it's unrealistic at all for someone to get that level of training. Understand how kinematics works concerning guns will give people a better idea of the kind of damage a bullet can do and how things CAN go terribly wrong when you use one recklessly.

Picking up my threadjack.

This made me think of a line from Sicko from an American expatriate living in Paris. "In the U.S. the people fear the government. In France the government fear the people." That quote quite resonated with me.

And seriously, if a government goes dictatorial a few handguns and assault rifles aren't going to help much. The dictatorship will have full access to the modern panoply of arms. The best an individual can do is make the cost of killing them high. Which, seriously, most people, even those with guns, aren't willing to do.

In the modern world the only thing that can protect you from an authoritarian government is politics.

/threadjack

 

[Liar]

And seriously, if a government goes dictatorial a few handguns and assault rifles aren't going to help much. The dictatorship will have full access to the modern panoply of arms. The best an individual can do is make the cost of killing them high. Which, seriously, most people, even those with guns, aren't willing to do.

And as I pointed out in another thread (and got no replys), the only way to do it would be to go underground. Unconventional warfare, un-uniformed combatants, insurgency, bombings, possibly kamikaze operations. You know, the stuff that the US already consider enough to declare people non-members of the human race and shuffle them away from any legal rights.

 

[RagsNRiches]

Roxanne Appleby wrote in post #54 in this thread:

"Oh for goodness sakes: For decades we had a mainstream media - including three networks and CNN - that in their presentation of the news were unambiguously tilted in favor of the liberal, Democratic side of the U.S. political spectrum. In particular, by selecting which stories to cover, and which not to cover. The only ones who did and do deny this are those whose own preferences are so firmly in the same direction that they perceive themselves and others who share their views to be "neutral." "
_____________________________________________________________________
She's hit on the most important problem we Americans have with our politics... the media. As an ex-journalist, I'm very aware of the ease with which a slant can be put to a story, and all writers of any venue should realize the primal importance of the purity of the information we consume.

For the last 50 years, the American media have pimped the presses and cameras to sway the public. They have come to care nothing for information. Their only concern is " How can I get the most mileage for such-and-such a cause out of this bit of news.

Then Dan Rather gets clumsy and gets caught with bald-faced lies in his mouth and the ignorant public thinks Rather is the exception to the rule of "honest" journalism. What a joke! Rather was the prime example of the rule.

And Fox News hit the scene about 12 years ago, and has been successful. They have badly damaged the credentials and incomes of the liberal media mainstream. The mainstream media (MSM) had so many people brainwashed that many of their listeners actually think that Fox News is the only biased operation out there. (That's just paraphrasing Roxanne above). That just shows you how well the MSM performed when they had a monopoly of opinion in the industry. The only thing such listeners and viewers know about bias is how to spell it. They certainly don't know it when they see it day after day, year after year.

Most viewers and news readers have been partaking of cestpools of information for so long they think it's the best water on earth. The tragedy is that any political system needs reinforcement to survive. Another 50 years with the likes of Dan Rather and his thousands of sympathizers in the media will bring our nation to extinction.

 

[rgraham666]

I've been calling Fox News 'The Ministry of Truth' ever since they made Mark Foley a Democrat.

And let's face like political correctness the people bitching about a slanted media are only bitching about the fact that it isn't slanted their way.

Humans.

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

Did you read somewhere that they were "unknown temps" or are you jumping to false conclusions? Government contractors generally are vetted and given clearances at the same level as the staffers working whatever is being worked there. (When I retired, I immediately became an on-call contractor so that I could continue doing what I had been doing as needed.)

Makes no difference wheather they were run through the FBI Intel grinder for BI's or not. They were NOT government employees. That means they were not under the control of the government, the government had no ability to disiplan them and the government had no right to chose which bodies sat in these positions beyond choosing one Contractor over another. That's fucked up. And a waste of taxpayer dollars.

Now with Obama demanding congress prove Hillary did it, he's going to spend a few billions more.

 

[Darkniciad]

small correction: Obama wrote the speech himself.

I find that hard to believe. At the very least, a team of ninnys most certainly picked it over and over for hours on end, adjusting points to account for the way the news cycle was flowing.

It probably went right on until speech time, with final scratch-out substitutions furiously going on behind the scenes while everyone waited for him to take the stage ( the speech was late by a bit from the schedule )

That being said, I have no doubt that his voice is the dominant feature of the speech. It's consistent with his style, even before the presidential primaries where he didn't have a huge team of national handlers. I've heard a few from back in his career, being from next door in Indiana.

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

This entire campaign is out of hand. As of this morning, even Elenor Clift seems to have abandoned Obama.

Obama countered with another scream about Bill Clinton being a racist because of remarks he made about a presidential race between Hillary and John McCain. Meanwhile, he's campainging for the Pennsylvania primary in Oregon (?)

John McCain seems to have gone into hiding trying to figure out who we are at war with, Iraq or Iran and who the hell hasn't heard about al Quida being everywhere, including a secret meeting room in the third stall in the men's room at the Mark Hopkins in San Francisco. Hate to tell him but that's not al Quida. Thats a Republican Senator from Idaho

 

[sr71plt]

Makes no difference wheather they were run through the FBI Intel grinder for BI's or not. They were NOT government employees. That means they were not under the control of the government, the government had no ability to disiplan them and the government had no right to chose which bodies sat in these positions beyond choosing one Contractor over another. That's fucked up. And a waste of taxpayer dollars.

Now with Obama demanding congress prove Hillary did it, he's going to spend a few billions more.

I don't know about "disiplan"--in fact have no idea what that means, but again you are talking with no knowledge whatsoever, Jenny. The government vets each and every one of that type of contractor individually (In fact I wouldn't be surprised to find out most of them were government retirees). The contracting agent just presents who they would like to be cleared and then does the paperwork on their pay and scheduling. Do you have a little machine in your back room manufacturing those "facts" you spout out, Jenny?

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

I don't know about "disiplan"--in fact have no idea what that means, but again you are talking with no knowledge whatsoever, Jenny. The government vets each and every one of that type of contractor individually (In fact I wouldn't be surprised to find out most of them were government retirees). The contracting agent just presents who they would like to be cleared and then does the paperwork on their pay and scheduling. Do you have a little machine in your back room manufacturing those "facts" you spout out, Jenny?

Yes we know, SR. You were a war hero of the last 3 great wars. A senior filight officer in the Air Force, a CIA agent, a great novelist, editor, columnist and I don't know what else. How old did you say you were? That seems like at least 5 life long careers.

Having done exactly what I was talking about, I worked for the Federal Government for five months in a sensitive position before the FBI got around to checking me out. Get your facts straight or just go away - preferably the latter.

 

[sr71plt]

Yes we know, SR. You were a war hero of the last 3 great wars. A senior filight officer in the Air Force, a CIA agent, a great novelist, editor, columnist and I don't know what else. How old did you say you were? That seems like at least 5 life long careers.

Having done exactly what I was talking about, I worked for the Federal Government for five months in a sensitive position before the FBI got around to checking me out. Get your facts straight or just go away - preferably the latter.

Sorry, Jenny, you obviously know from spit on government contracting.

Nope, never was in the Air Force, and have posted that several times here. More "facts" from your backroom press, dear?

And sorry if my life seems to have been too large for you; perhaps that's evidence yours has been too small (certainly hasn't included a dictionary).

P.S. Anyone can pretty much determine how old I am if they want to by just one of my postings on this thread. Mid 60s, in college. You can do math better than you can spell, can't you?

 

[cloudy]

I find that hard to believe. At the very least, a team of ninnys most certainly picked it over and over for hours on end, adjusting points to account for the way the news cycle was flowing.

It probably went right on until speech time, with final scratch-out substitutions furiously going on behind the scenes while everyone waited for him to take the stage ( the speech was late by a bit from the schedule )

That being said, I have no doubt that his voice is the dominant feature of the speech. It's consistent with his style, even before the presidential primaries where he didn't have a huge team of national handlers. I've heard a few from back in his career, being from next door in Indiana.

Why is it so hard to believe? I'm sure you don't believe he's incapable of writing such a speech...so why not? He's certainly intelligent enough to write his own speeches.

From MSN: "Mr. Obama continued to write the speech on Monday evening, which he believes could be one of the most important of his presidential candidacy, aides said.

"Obama advisers said he wrote the deeply personal speech himself."

He wrote it, whether you "find it hard to believe" or not. All you had to do was a little research yourself to find out.

 

[sr71plt]

Although most certainly Obama's aides poured over the speech and made suggestions and helped tone it up--and maybe even provided a first draft to build on--the speech did read like it was mostly Obama in his own words and his own structuring of what he wanted to say.

 

[cloudy]

Although most certainly Obama's aides poured over the speech and made suggestions and helped tone it up--and maybe even provided a first draft to build on--the speech did read like it was mostly Obama in his own words and his own structuring of what he wanted to say.

I agree. It was very personal....so personal that I don't see a professional speech writer penning it.

 

[Boxlicker101]

I agree. It was very personal....so personal that I don't see a professional speech writer penning it.

I don't know if he wrote his own spech or not, but consider this: Everybody agrees he is a great speaker. I don't think anybody will disagree with that. Now consider this: Great actors, on stage, TV or films, almost never write their own lines. Professional writers do that. All the actor does is to deliver them, and do it so well that they seem to be their own lines. Given these facts, how can we know he wrote his own speech? Undoubtedly, he made a major contribution to it, such as things about his grandmother, but how do we actually knowwhether he wrote it or not.

For that matter, why does it make a difference?

 

[cloudy]

I don't know if he wrote his own spech or not, but consider this: Everybody agrees he is a great speaker. I don't think anybody will disagree with that. Now consider this: Great actors, on stage, TV or films, almost never write their own lines. Professional writers do that. All the actor does is to deliver them, and do it so well that they seem to be their own lines. Given these facts, how can we know he wrote his own speech? Undoubtedly, he made a major contribution to it, such as things about his grandmother, but how do we actually knowwhether he wrote it or not.

For that matter, why does it make a difference?

Did you even read my post?

*sigh* Yes, he wrote it himself.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Did you even read my post?

*sigh* Yes, he wrote it himself.

You can trust Box with your clit, however.

 

[cloudy]

You can trust Box with your clit, however.

*headdesk*

 

[Darkniciad]

*shrug* I said as much, that his voice was dominant. There's no way his wranglers weren't putting their fingers in the pie from the get-go, though.

He's on the campaign trail, and he doesn't have time to keep up with the news cycle, that's what the wranglers are for. The speech sprouted from a need to address the concerns surrounding Rev. Wright's sermons getting wider coverage and scrutiny than they have for the last several months that the news has actually been out there. He would have to depend upon his wranglers to keep him up to date on the ebbs and flows. The personal elements were surely built off a framework that his wranglers provided to take care of business.

He didn't write this on napkins between campaign stops. His campaign knew every word he was going to say before he said it, and they most certainly had a hand in it.

As to the campaign saying he wrote it himself, what do you expect them to say?

Once again, I'm not saying that they aren't his words/thoughts/feelings. I'm saying that to expect a person on the Presidential campaign trail to write a speech in a vaccum without his wranglers invovled from the beginning just isn't realistic.

 

[cloudy]

*shrug* I said as much, that his voice was dominant. There's no way his wranglers weren't putting their fingers in the pie from the get-go, though.

He's on the campaign trail, and he doesn't have time to keep up with the news cycle, that's what the wranglers are for. The speech sprouted from a need to address the concerns surrounding Rev. Wright's sermons getting wider coverage and scrutiny than they have for the last several months that the news has actually been out there. He would have to depend upon his wranglers to keep him up to date on the ebbs and flows. The personal elements were surely built off a framework that his wranglers provided to take care of business.

He didn't write this on napkins between campaign stops. His campaign knew every word he was going to say before he said it, and they most certainly had a hand in it.

As to the campaign saying he wrote it himself, what do you expect them to say?

Once again, I'm not saying that they aren't his words/thoughts/feelings. I'm saying that to expect a person on the Presidential campaign trail to write a speech in a vaccum without his wranglers invovled from the beginning just isn't realistic.

Whatever. Your mind is already closed to any possibility save what fits your mindset. I'm certainly not going to waste my time arguing with you.

I prefer doing research, fact-finding, if you will, instead of just deciding what I will and will not believe.

 

[Darkniciad]

Whatever. Your mind is already closed to any possibility save what fits your mindset.

*Shrug* I hope he's not spending all his time writing speeches. He's running for President, and that's the least of the job qualifications in my mind. I would hope he's spending most of his time getting a feel for the voters concerns, the issues, and building a solid plan for moving the country in a positive direction should he win the election.

Not that all those things don't have a million hands on them as well. You don't really elect a President, you elect a team of people surrounding him or her that offer advice and information.

You'll have to pardon me if I don't accept warm-n-fuzzy statements released by political campaigns as facts.