[jthomas1600]

Originally Posted by JerryLove

Well. The claim that it's an "town hall meeting" might be false, if I assume your definition of the term; but that has nothing to do with transparency.

Is the government disclosing their internal workings and actions? If so they are transparent. If not they are not.

But I think it's pretty well accepted that town hall meetings are one way to facilitate transparency. Typically (or theoretically) when you hold a town hall meeting you are saying we are here to answer any and all questions you might have -- we have no secrets, nothing is off limits.

[Napoleon17]

Originally Posted by JerryLove

Well. The claim that it's an "town hall meeting" might be false, if I assume your definition of the term; but that has nothing to do with transparency.

Is the government disclosing their internal workings and actions? If so they are transparent. If not they are not.

One way the government can disclose their internal workings and actions (and the thought behind those workings and actions) is by answering questions from the citizens that they represent. Preselecting questions and selecting who can be at the town hall certainly doesn't appear to be an earnest attempt at disclosing the internal workings and actions, nor their thoughts behind those workings and actions.

In other words, they will only disclose what they deem acceptable to disclose, not necessarily what the people they represent what to know (of course, there are some things that the people may want to know but that the government must keep classified - we're not talking about matters of national security here, though). That's not transparency, that's creating an image, trying to control that image, trying to manipulate perception of that image, trying to get re-elected, etc.

It doesn't matter that every other administration has done the same thing, what matters is that this administration has promised to be the most transparent administration in American history (if I'm not mistaken, Obama did make that promise), and at least in this instance it does not seem that he is trying his best to be open and transparent. He still may end up being the most transparent president in history, but this situation does reflect poorly on this administration in light of the expectations that he created.

[normajean777]

I agree. If Obama had promised to be the same, and do things behind people's backs, and answer his own questions, that'd be fine, we would be expecting it to happen. But if he promised transparency, and change, but is delivering more of the same, then he is lying and we have gained nothing.

[JerryLove]

Originally Posted by jthomas1600

But I think it's pretty well accepted that town hall meetings are one way to facilitate transparency. Typically (or theoretically) when you hold a town hall meeting you are saying we are here to answer any and all questions you might have -- we have no secrets, nothing is off limits.

No. Disclosure is the way to transparency. Otherwise anything I can keep so secret you don't ask about it I can be "transparent" without telling you.

Nor is it true that any president has truly unvetted town-hall meetings (if so you'd get "why are you such a jerk" questions.

Though Obama has been obviously hit more than once with questions he'd rather not have (such as those on marijuana), which tells me that there's not (in all cases) the level of control you ascribe. He's also done many news interviews with both domestic and foreign reporters without vetted questions.

[JerryLove]

Originally Posted by McLuvinjesus

One way the government can disclose their internal workings and actions (and the thought behind those workings and actions) is by answering questions from the citizens that they represent. Preselecting questions and selecting who can be at the town hall certainly doesn't appear to be an earnest attempt at disclosing the internal workings and actions, nor their thoughts behind those workings and actions.

That's one way. It's not the only way.

In other words, they will only disclose what they deem acceptable to disclose, not necessarily what the people they represent what to know (of course, there are some things that the people may want to know but that the government must keep classified - we're not talking about matters of national security here, though). That's not transparency, that's creating an image, trying to control that image, trying to manipulate perception of that image, trying to get re-elected, etc.

I think you are reinventing "transparency". Disclosing where stimulus money was going is transparency. Making public the white-house visitors log (which he is sadly not doing) is transparency.

Secretly bringing together record executives to draft copyright legislation and not tell anyone was not transparency.

It doesn't matter that every other administration has done the same thing, what matters is that this administration has promised to be the most transparent administration in American history (if I'm not mistaken, Obama did make that promise), and at least in this instance it does not seem that he is trying his best to be open and transparent. He still may end up being the most transparent president in history, but this situation does reflect poorly on this administration in light of the expectations that he created.

But your complaints don't match. "Most transparent" does not require "completely transparent", even if I accepted that controlling public Q-n-A was not transparent.

Is there some question you cannot ask the federal government?
Is there some question the press cannot ask anyone?

Why must Obama himself be available for anything anyone comes up with? There're whole departments to deal with those. That's not really related to transparency.

In fact, telling you that the questions were vetted (as opposed to vetting them and keeping it secret) is transparency.

Look. I want the administration to be more transparent than it is. I remember making these complaints about Bush. Where were you all then?

[Napoleon17]

Originally Posted by JerryLove

That's one way. It's not the only way.

True, obviously. However, it is one of the only ways for President Obama to get asked tough questions from the average joe (the plumber). Questions directly from the public are sometimes not stated very diplomatically. He is limiting the possibility of someone asking him a tough question that he might not be prepared for.

Originally Posted by JerryLove

I think you are reinventing "transparency". Disclosing where stimulus money was going is transparency.Making public the white-house visitors log (which he is sadly not doing) is transparency. Secretly bringing together record executives to draft copyright legislation and not tell anyone was not transparency.

I agree... those events characterized transparency well.

But your complaints don't match. "Most transparent" does not require "completely transparent", even if I accepted that controlling public Q-n-A was not transparent.

I said as much in my post.

at least in this instance it does not seem that he is trying his best to be open and transparent. He still may end up being the most transparent president in history, but this situation does reflect poorly on this administration in light of the expectations that he created.

I just think that in this case, he is not trying to be very transparent, and people are calling him out on it, based on the expectations he created. If he didn't want people calling him out every time he is perceived to not be transparent, he shouldn't have promised to be the most transparent President in history. Yes, he didn't specifically say "I will not be completely transparent, but I will be the most transparent". After all, what does "The most transparent President in history" even mean? Did he hire scholars and professors of American history to rate each presidency on a scale of 1-10 as far as how transparent they were? And then all he has to do is be 0.1 pts ahead of the highest scorer? I can see it now:

"Hey Professor Dillweed, so who was the most transparent Administration?"
"Well President Obama, it was actually Lyndon Johnson. He signed the freedom of information act"
"What was his score?"
"Uh, lets' see got an 8.6 on the transparency chart."
"Oh goody, all I have to get is an 8.7 and I'm golden. Hey, intern, start vetting those questions for that lame town hall thing. I gotta get me some votes, you know?"


No. When you say that you're going to be the most transparent President in history, it is taken to mean that you're going to try really hard to be transparent. At least, that's how I interpret his promise.

Originally Posted by JerryLove

Is there some question you cannot ask the federal government?
Is there some question the press cannot ask anyone?

Is there some question that Obama doesn't want to answer in front of millions of people because it might make him look bad? Is he scared to run into another Joe the Plumber?

Of course you can ask the federal government questions. I have asked my congressional representative a question about the regulations of the FAFSA, because the stupid regulations were affecting me negatively (I was married, but for FAFSA purposes my father's income was still counted towards what the government thought I could use to pay for school... which I couldn't. Therefore I couldn't get a Pell grant even though 98% of poor young married couples got tons of Pell grants). Did my congressman have the time to respond to a simple e-mail, from one of his constituents, from his website that was specifically set up for the public to send in questions? No, of course not. Which, by the way, among other things, is why I didn't vote for him next time. However, I think some positive changes have been made to the whole FAFSA process since then.

Originally Posted by JerryLove

Why must Obama himself be available for anything anyone comes up with? There're whole departments to deal with those. That's not really related to transparency.

If he doesn't know the answer to something, or if he doesn't feel like answering a question, he can simply say so. We're not suggesting he has to directly and completely answer each and every question that the average Joe comes up with... he is a politician after all.

In fact, telling you that the questions were vetted (as opposed to vetting them and keeping it secret) is transparency.

I guess Gibbs didn't get the memo... he kept trying to make it sound like it wasn't vetted. "Usually we just hand out tickets" "You can go online and ask a question" etc. etc. He, for one, definitely wasn't trying to be ultra-transparent. He just wanted the conversation to be over.

Look. I want the administration to be more transparent than it is. I remember making these complaints about Bush. Where were you all then?

That doesn't matter. We're not talking about Bush. We're talking about Obama. But now that we're on the subject... I hated Bush. I actually prefer Obama. So do many other members of this site. I don't know why Helen Thomas didn't bash Bush over transparency. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that the press corps was lucky if they got an answer that was made using proper English. Maybe it had something to do with the fact that Bush never made transparency a buzzword. But whatever the case, in this instance, Obama looks bad, in my opinion.

[JerryLove]

Originally Posted by McLuvinjesus

True, obviously. However, it is one of the only ways for President Obama to get asked tough questions from the average joe (the plumber). Questions directly from the public are sometimes not stated very diplomatically. He is limiting the possibility of someone asking him a tough question that he might not be prepared for.

Interesting example. "Joe the plumber" was dishonest and asking a rhetorical question. But he did take it and did answer it.

There are 300,000,000 Americans. What would you suggest is a good use of the president's time?

There are plenty of unvetted interviews with Obama, and plenty of other administration representatives to ask questions of.

In fact, and I'm about to use this question several times. Was Helen Thomas vetted? It seems he did get asked the hard questions in public.

I just think that in this case, he is not trying to be very transparent, and people are calling him out on it, based on the expectations he created. If he didn't want people calling him out every time he is perceived to not be transparent, he shouldn't have promised to be the most transparent President in history.

I recall it as "administration", not "president".

Is there some question that Obama doesn't want to answer in front of millions of people because it might make him look bad? Is he scared to run into another Joe the Plumber?

He's been hit with more than one of them. He's responded. I suspect "scared" is rhetorical. It's obviously an attempt to control message; which is neither transparent nor secretive: it's simply... well... controlling message.

Of course you can ask the federal government questions.

And you can make those questions and responses public; and if you have a good platform, you can get attention and apply pressure.

If he doesn't know the answer to something, or if he doesn't feel like answering a question, he can simply say so. We're not suggesting he has to directly and completely answer each and every question that the average Joe comes up with... he is a politician after all.

You keep acting as those all questions in all interviews are vetted. I don't see a difference between what he's doing and moderators killing off-topic questions.

In fact every such thing everywhere where there is a moderator does something similar. The presidential debates, questions were chosen bt the debate hosts, not everyone got to ask.

But again, this is unrelated to transparency.

That doesn't matter. We're not talking about Bush. We're talking about Obama.

The moment you say "most" we are talking about every one of them.

But now that we're on the subject... I hated Bush. I actually prefer Obama. So do many other members of this site. I don't know why Helen Thomas didn't bash Bush over transparency.

Fair enough. All I asked there was consistency.

So what about Helen Thomas? It seems he did get asked the hard questions in public.

[Jfool]

... depends on what the definition of "is" is.

[AlphaSigma]

I didn't know that Gibbs was such a good dancer.