Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Whitehouse visitor log now unavailable to public

  1. Jan 6, 2007 #1
    Here we go again. Another layer has been added to the Bush administrations unprecedented record of secrecy.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6325579,00.html
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jan 6, 2007 #2

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Yeah, I saw this the other day. How long can they hope to hide behind their abuses of power? Hopefully the subpoenas coming soon will take care of this.
     
  4. Jan 13, 2007 #3
    It's not an abuse of power, it's a necessary and proactive measure against the terrorists. It's a national security issue, and if we can't trust the president with issues of national security, the terrorists win!
     
  5. Jan 14, 2007 #4
    What makes them think that they have any right to hide information from the people they serve?

    As far as I'm concerned, this should be an impeachable offense.
     
  6. Jan 14, 2007 #5

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Why is that? Do the terrorists check the logs before attacking?

    Democracy is not based on trust. Also, most journalists are not terrorists.
     
  7. Jan 14, 2007 #6

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Ivan, you've done it again.
     
  8. Jan 15, 2007 #7

    siddharth

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    Indeed! Bush is clearly 'defending the safety' of the country with this measure :rolleyes:. Secrecy and security are vital during times of crisis :uhh:! What if al-qaeda got a hold of the visitor log :eek:? People should learn to trust the government! Those criticizing this 'brave' initiative, are unamerican bush-bashers :devil:

    See? I've gone overboard, but the point is that the use of smilies can clear things up, especially for those not familiar with the style of your posts o:)
     
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2007
  9. Jan 15, 2007 #8
    :rolleyes: Honestly, I never know when u are being sarcastic or not...

    lol
     
  10. Jan 16, 2007 #9
    .... lol rach.. for the record I think your intent is blatantly obvious :rofl: some of these folks are being a bit ridiculous
     
  11. Jun 15, 2009 #10
    Now that our "almost a god" President Obama has declared his visitor logs are private, do your opinions still stand?:devil:
     
  12. Jun 15, 2009 #11

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Interesting! I hadn't heard about this. Got a reference?
     
  13. Jun 16, 2009 #12

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Here's the story:
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31373407/ns/politics-white_house/

    Disappointing!
     
  14. Jun 16, 2009 #13

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Why would anyone change their opinion? Obviously we can trust a Democrat.

    This will probably shake out over time. Bush was into his 8th year and there were a hundred reasons to be distrustful. Note that at the time there was a known scandal. Obama is into his 6th month. So far I have no reason to believe that Obama is trying to hide anything.
     
  15. Jun 16, 2009 #14

    CRGreathouse

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Ivan, I can't tell. Are you being serious here?
     
  16. Jun 16, 2009 #15

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    The second sentence was a joke. Otherwise what I said is true: As yet I have no concerns.
     
  17. Jun 16, 2009 #16
    So, it's not the act but the party? I find it very odd especially since Obama is the one that ran on transparency.
     
  18. Jun 16, 2009 #17

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Funny that I gave my real reason but you only cited the joke.

    One report about one issue hardly constitutes a betrayal of confidence. So far Obama has been accused of being everything from a black militant to a foreign terrorist, and every assertion was bogus.
     
    Last edited: Jun 16, 2009
  19. Jun 16, 2009 #18

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Note that I gave Bush the benefit of the doubt right up until we found no WMDs. I kept telling myself that surely they would never invade a country unless they have far better evidence than they have shown. No one would be that stupid!
     
  20. Jun 16, 2009 #19
    Do you not see this as a mistake to learn from? While I respect our President, I'd rather avoid having to trust politicians as much as possible.
     
  21. Jun 16, 2009 #20
    Unfortunatly your follow up post was posted while I was reading and replying so I didn't see your comment that it was a joke. I appologize.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Whitehouse visitor log now unavailable to public
  1. Public Pensions (Replies: 73)

Loading...