Political Forums  

Go Back   Political Forums > Current events
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

We appreciate your help

in keeping this site going.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-15-2010, 12:27 PM
piece-itpete's Avatar
piece-itpete piece-itpete is offline
Possibly admin. Maybe ;)
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Land of the burning river
Posts: 21,098
Obama won't show Fannie/Freddies' political contribution records....

Why?

http://biggovernment.com/tfitton/201...+Government%29

Pete
__________________
“How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.”
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-15-2010, 01:40 PM
merrylander's Avatar
merrylander merrylander is offline
Resident octogenarian
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 20,860
So now he is the court too? Will wonders ever cease.
__________________
Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people.
Eleanor Roosevelt
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-15-2010, 01:53 PM
piece-itpete's Avatar
piece-itpete piece-itpete is offline
Possibly admin. Maybe ;)
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Land of the burning river
Posts: 21,098
Judicial Watch took the Admin to court to force him to comply with the Freedom of information act. He had refused.

Strange this open, honest, 'transparent' Admin needs to hide so much.

Pete
__________________
“How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.”
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-15-2010, 02:32 PM
merrylander's Avatar
merrylander merrylander is offline
Resident octogenarian
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 20,860
Quote:
Originally Posted by piece-itpete View Post
Judicial Watch took the Admin to court to force him to comply with the Freedom of information act. He had refused.

Strange this open, honest, 'transparent' Admin needs to hide so much.

Pete
Guess he learned a lot from Prince Dickie.
__________________
Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people.
Eleanor Roosevelt
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-15-2010, 10:10 PM
d-ray657's Avatar
d-ray657 d-ray657 is offline
Loyal Opposition
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Johnson County, Kansas
Posts: 14,401
To keep this in perspective, remember that these were records that were not subject to disclosure at the time they were created. In other words, the Tea partiers could not have forced either of the companies to produce such records at the time they were created. FOIA was intended to provide access to documents about governmental actions. These are documents about the actions of a private company. Interesting to see the tea partiers clamoring for the government to force disclosure of records of a business entity.

Regards,

D-Ray
__________________
Then I'll get on my knees and pray,
We won't get fooled again; Don't get fooled again
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-15-2010, 11:36 PM
BlueStreak's Avatar
BlueStreak BlueStreak is offline
Area Man
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Swamp
Posts: 27,407
Aren't Freddie/Fannie a couple of those "quasi-governmental" organizations, kinda like the Federal Reserve?

Why should I care anyways?

Dave
__________________
"When the lie is so big and the fog so thick, the Republican trick can play out again....."-------Frank Zappa
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-16-2010, 07:33 AM
noonereal noonereal is offline
Abby Normal
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 11,245
Quote:
Originally Posted by piece-itpete View Post
Judicial Watch took the Admin to court to force him to comply with the Freedom of information act. He had refused.
Gee, a president who refusing to comply.

Why does this sound familiar?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-16-2010, 04:19 PM
d-ray657's Avatar
d-ray657 d-ray657 is offline
Loyal Opposition
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Johnson County, Kansas
Posts: 14,401
Quote:
Originally Posted by piece-itpete View Post
Judicial Watch took the Admin to court to force him to comply with the Freedom of information act. He had refused.

Pete
It appears that the court ruled in favor of the Administration that the documents were not subject to disclosure under the FOIA. Accordingly, the Administration was in compliance and Judicial Watch went to court to get something it wasn't entitled to. Therefore, your statement is inaccurate.

Regards,

D-Ray
__________________
Then I'll get on my knees and pray,
We won't get fooled again; Don't get fooled again
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-17-2010, 07:28 AM
merrylander's Avatar
merrylander merrylander is offline
Resident octogenarian
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 20,860
and we all know the nutcase behind judicial watch.
__________________
Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people.
Eleanor Roosevelt
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10-18-2010, 09:38 AM
piece-itpete's Avatar
piece-itpete piece-itpete is offline
Possibly admin. Maybe ;)
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Land of the burning river
Posts: 21,098
So the answer is either, no change, or Obama's most transparent government ever actually is regardless of what he actually does?

Pete
__________________
“How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.”
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:19 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.