Slashdot Mirror
Obama Administration Promises "Thorough Review" of USTR Policies
After all of the uproar surrounding some of the Obama administration's recent decisions, trade officials have promised a thorough review of the USTR policies regarding transparency. In an effort to ensure that the review includes all possible angles, the USTR is urging groups to make other proposals as well. "KEI is very impressed with the USTR decision to undertake a review of USTR transparency efforts. They are taking this much further than simply reviewing policies on the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), or recent controversies over the secrecy surrounding the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) negotiations. The review offers the possibility of more transformative changes, including pro-active measures to enhance transparency, covering all aspects of USTR operations, including multilateral, plurilateral, regional, bilateral and unilateral trade policies and negotiations. We are also grateful that USTR is offering to have a continuing dialogue on this issues. KEI will offer additional suggestions on transparency to USTR, and we encourage others to do so also."
From ustr.gov:
The Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) is an agency of over 200 people, a highly committed group of professionals who have decades of specialized experience in trade issues and regions of the world. They negotiate directly with foreign governments to create trade agreements, resolve disputes and participate in global trade policy organizations. They also meet with governments, business groups, legislators and public interest groups to gather input on trade issues and explain the president's trade policy positions. The agency was founded in 1962 and has offices in Washington, Geneva and Brussels.
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
KEI: Knowledge Ecology International
USTR: Office of the United States Trade Representative
Yeah, like that thorough fucking review of the money you just gave out to AIG and BOA and all the rest?
The review needs to come from the people. Time for a change is right... not time for the same old DC claptrap and underhanded back room deals.
Unfortunately, there really wasn't much difference between "every single fucking thing" and "really egregious shit".
I'd say that this is worthy slashdot material. USTR probably spends a lot of time on only-vaguely-peripherally-related-to-slashdot steel and potatoes stuff; but they are also, as with ACTA, one of the likely candidates to be writing the (horribly dystopian) IP-related international agreements that are going to strongly affect a lot of topics of interest to slashdot.
I haven't really heard much "uproar" over anything the Obama administration has done (have they actually done anything yet, really?) In fact he still seems to have a pretty high favorability rating. I admit, however, I don't listen to Rush Limbaugh, so my experiences might be somewhat biased towards reality.
Your name is quite ironic. Step back a sec and let's take a look at this:
Your question on Bush - well, that might be somewhat subjective, but you can easily judge that for yourself by looking around /., yeah?
I also see a really serious disconnect between the content of TFA and your doom-laden proclaimation of "typical posting ... he's the same old boss." Yes, the dept. blurb is provocative. But it's, you know, not always the most serious part of the posting.
When "the other side," whomever you perceive them to be, close ranks; do not question the boss; blindly support; and generally don't watchdog their own: isn't that some of the crap we've all been screaming about for, um, ever? Yes, it's good to keep an eye on those who you feel are opposed to you. Y'know what, it's even more important to reality-check the ones who you put your hope in. And i think FOIA requests, frex, are well within the established interest zone of this site's denizens, innit? Or are you suggesting we just sit back and Trust Everything's Gonna Be Okay..? That's the path that leads to "America - love it or leave it!" T-shirts.
I worry when anyone takes criticism of a public figure too personally. And i feel, thus far, your worry is unwarranted:
Squirrely things have been noted in contrast to promises of transparency; pressure was applied; steps are being taken; watchdogs are being invited to participate.
Isn't that how it's supposed to happen?
That which does not kill us makes us... st
Quickly! If you squint, you can make a sailboat out of all those abbreviations. And is this review as thorough as recovery.gov is transparent?
"The best way to accelerate a Macintosh is at 9.8m/sec^2" -Marcus Dolengo
...to define all those TLAs and FLAs PDQ, or anyone reading this article summary are SOL. LOL.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares?"
"For all intents and purposes..."
Use it dammit! If you are gonna insist on not spelling out TLA's for us, at least spell them out using the proper HTML!
That said, it is only polite to spell out your damn acronyms. This audience knows WTF "WTF" stands for and I dont have to spell out HTML either, but KEI? Is that like "Key Enterprise Induction", "Keynan Earned Income", or "Krusty's Entertainment Industry"? Who knows!
Hey, I read your journal- you're certainly consistent.
Journal by Reality Master 201 on 09:59 PM October 6th, 2006: I seldom bother checking the messages that I get on Slashdot, since they're usually nothing particularly interesting. For shits and giggles, though, I did just a couple minutes ago. Apparently, two people have made me their "foe," just today: morie (227571) and Somegeek (624100) don't seem to like me for some reason. So I went looking back through my comments, and I can't find (given an admittedly cursory and quick glance of about 4 seconds) anywhere that I've interacted with them. Maybe they read something I wrote and decided they don't like me. I took a look at the comments they've made, and they're the typical banal crap you find on Slashdot, nothing remarkable. Me, I decided I wanted to be friends, cause I'm just a nice person way deep down. Also, because making you my foe, particularly because you made me your foe, just seems so... high school. I'd say it's tough being the grown up in all this, but it's not.
So glad you could grace us with your presence; Slashdot needs more grownups who are nice people way deep down.
Is itself an acronym. However, I'll take the example set by the Slashdot editors and not spell it out for you. After all, we here at Slashdot know everything already. If we needed to spell it out to you, you really should be working in a field more suitable for you--like picking lint out of driers at a laundromat.
Now obviously you and I both know what Whiskey Tango Foxtrot stands for. Really I'm just belaboring the obvious while I kill time as the store boys order an extra-wide Top Hat. As you know, it is very hard to find fitted hats that actually fit our large diameter heads. Clearly there much money to be made selling extra-wide hats to highly intelligent individuals but if it would mean bending our principles and reducing ourselves to mere salesmen, forget it.
No, seriously - suicide is too good for you.
I'll take your word for it.
.
That's already being done.
Currently hooked on AMP
I'm sorry, but you didn't spell out what O.W.N. means. Does that stand for "Obama's Winning Number" or "Omaha Women's Network"?
You are as bad as the editors here. Please define your terms before using them.
(dare I leave off anything suggesting this isn't snark?)
Pick something you support.
If you are a liberal, label all arguments against your cause as biased crap from a conservative media. Make sure to point out their greed and lack of being right. Make sure to point out how from this day forward you will boycott them.
If you are a conservative, label all arguments against your idea as biased crap from a liberal media. Be sure to point out their general illogic and lack of being right. Make sure to point out how from this day forward you will boycott them.
If you are a Ron Paul supporter, you also must point out the media is actually scared of you. Point out that they are a monopoly and if ${GOVERNMENT} busted them up, Ron Paul would win*. Make sure to point out how from this day forward you will boycott them. Also, make sure to flood their phones, blackberries and other electronic devices with profanity laced letters. That will teach them.
In other words, all media that is against ${YOUR CAUSE} is ${BIASED}.
* and do this with out any hint of irony, what with asking for the government to intervene with a private entity...
[quote]Blah blah. Fill in typical slashdot posting about how he's the same as the old boss, etc.
What the fuck is with this site? Was there this much focus on every single fucking thing the Bush administration did? Or did the coverage then just focus on the really egregious shit?[/quote]
I'm reposting something someone else wrote on this subject to answer you (with his permission):
George W. Bush had something going for him his last term. Those who hated him had written him off. There was no need to pay attention to what he was doing because everything he was going to do was going to be steeped in failure. By the time this recent Presidential Election got started, he only had the hearts and minds of 1/5th of the country. And one has to assume that many of those are probably party loyalists who feel it is their sworn duty to support ANY Republican President. It seemed like somewhere along the way, a majority of Americans, though they loathed W's performance as a President, decided, "Meh, we'll just wait him out", and then tuned out in favor of Dancing with the Stars.
So now we have this new guy coming in. And in some sense, he still is a relative unknown, when you compare him to the typical life-span in DC politics. It's clear that there are many who desperately want him to succeed. I suspect even some of the fifth who still like W, would love to see Obama succeed, thought they'd be loathe to admit it in public. There is a collective weight on our shoulders in the form of this failing economy. We desperately want someone to come along and lift it. We want someont to come along and succeed in lifting it.
But the key will be remembering that this is our burden to share with him. The biggest role we have is to support his efforts. That is, to support them by paying attention. We cannot allow this "Hope for Change" to become insulation. We cannot put so much trust in Obama that we stop paying attention. Holding his feet to the fire when he walks astray will be our best contribution. And we know the fifth will do that anyway. The rest of us need to represent the rational and reasoned response.
At least, that's how I see it. - Reverend What's-His-Name?
Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite (TM)
Here too: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/
Viewed with a cynical eye, factcheck uses careful spin on mentioning some facts, while no actually disclosing ALL facts for the reader to peruse. I specifically noted excerpts given from enactments during the Bush administration used to deride claims that the national health record system is not new in steering treatment.
Firstly, the 2004 legislation does not provide teeth, as it is written. The current legislative excerpt is notably absent for comparison. The FACT is that the recommendations of a money-wielding government bureau have a lot of weight in influencing a doctor's choice in treatment, when that treatment will be on record. A record that will be statistically parsed, and available to insurance companies for identifying doctors that put saving lives above saving lives "cost effectively". While there is certainly abuse in the current system, by drug marketing, I don't feel that having a "guiding authority" is a good thing. The opinions of these people that supposedly "know what works" will be used as argument against treatment or payout from insurance companies. If we ever move to a socialized model, the treatment will simply be denied.
Do a fact check on fact check, please.
No weight is applied to which promises are truly relevant. Coupled with an overall liberal slant.... again do your own fact check.
Do you not realize that it was the current administration's own offices that put the bonus payouts IN the bill as it was passed? You didn't catch that the writers were told by the treasury dept that it needed to go in?
Obama: It's easier to beg forgiveness and feign concern than to ask permission or right a wrong.