First Executive Orders:

Pay freeze on all senior staff

Stricter lobbyist rules for staffers

Freedom of Information to be more open

 

Via Politico:

At his 1:15 ceremony Obama announced salary freezes for all White House employees making over $100,000 a year.

"Some of the people in this room will be affected by the pay freeze, and I want you to know I appreciate your willingness to agree to it," Obama said. “It’s what’s required of you at this moment. It’s a mark of your commitment to public service”

POTUS also outlined ethics restrictions on lobbying and gifts, requiring White House staff to attend ethics briefings and sign agreements restricting their ability to lobby after leaving office." Obama called these restrictions "stricter limits than under any other administration in history."

 

More as I see them posted.

Edited January 21, 200917 yr by Athomeboy_2000

Easy low hanging fruit for Obama that I hope he goes for - designate all current Wilderness Study Areas that met their qualifications as full Wilderness Areas. Big win with environmentalists, and those areas are already semi-restricted anyway so you aren't taking land out of use.

 

Video:

• There will be a two-year waiting period for any former lobbyists to work on issues for which they had previously done lobbying work.

There's already a similar rule for contractors, you can't be in a position that could possibly influence the award of contracts to an organization if you just left that organization. There's also pretty strict rules about giving personal gifts, etc. for example you can't give someone a birthday gift if you're a contractor and they're a government employee.

I feel like this should have been such no-brainer stuff.

Recap:

Pay freeze for senior staffers making over $100,000

Former (and current?) lobbyists may not work for issues you lobbied about or work for agencies your lobbied

When you leave government, you may not lobby the white house for the remainder of Obama's presidency

Lobbyists may not give gifts to ANY White House staffers

Ethics briefing for all staffers

The Freedom of Information Act will be more... well... free or open.

Easy low hanging fruit for Obama that I hope he goes for - designate all current Wilderness Study Areas that met their qualifications as full Wilderness Areas. Big win with environmentalists, and those areas are already semi-restricted anyway so you aren't taking land out of use.

Further on this, Obama could reverse Bush's early-time XO's that flattened the many environmental protections that Clinton had put in place. ESA stuff, Grand Staircase-Escalante, etc.

 

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/2...an-negotiations

 

He's following through on that one quickly. I think it's funny that Bush wanted to spread democracy in the Middle East but the largest democracy in the region is Iran and well... uhh... yeah.

I wonder if Iran was listening when Obama said America will extend its hand to anyone if they were willing to unclench their fist? It was directed pretty much right at them.

Iran is absolutely harmless, there is nothing to be worried about there.

Um. No?

Democracies dont attack other democracies... just does not happen. I'm not worried about Iran any time soon.

Iran attacking the US in a state-on-state conflict is not what we're worried about though.

Iran attacking the US in a state-on-state conflict is not what we're worried about though.

 

I suspect that he isn't worried about them attacking Israel in a state-on-state conflict either, but judging by Iran's unrelenting support of Hamas and Hezbollah it probably is something that a lot of people are a little worried about.

 

Calling Iran a democracy is a bit of a stretch as well. Somehow I doubt the Ayatollah was put into power through free and transparent elections.

I suspect that he isn't worried about them attacking Israel in a state-on-state conflict either, but judging by Iran's unrelenting support of Hamas and Hezbollah it probably is something that a lot of people are a little worried about.

 

Calling Iran a democracy is a bit of a stretch as well. Somehow I doubt the Ayatollah was put into power through free and transparent elections.

Iran's not a dictatorship, technically it's a democracy, but it's definitely not a democracy in the liberal Western sense. But even so, IIRC, the Ayatollah doesn't even have absolute control of the country. Strong, but not absolute.

Iran's not a dictatorship, technically it's a democracy, but it's definitely not a democracy in the liberal Western sense. But even so, IIRC, the Ayatollah doesn't even have absolute control of the country. Strong, but not absolute.

He controls who gets to run for office, so it is stretch to call it a democracy IMO. He just disqualifies anyone who doesn't trumpet what he wants to hear.

Democracies dont attack other democracies... just does not happen. I'm not worried about Iran any time soon.

How can you talk about Reagan's quote being ignorant (in another thread), and state that Iran isn't a threat with a straight face?

 

That sigline is ignorant because neither Ronald Reagan nor kap know what a liberal is.

That sigline is ignorant because neither Ronald Reagan nor kap know what a liberal is.

 

Priceless dude. Keep it up.

 

That sigline is ignorant because neither Ronald Reagan nor kap know what a liberal is.

so then, I suppose you don't know what a conservative is?

 

It goes both ways, you see. But its better that this one goes neither way. Let's drop the talk of other posters' ignorance, even if indirect, k?

 

 

Priceless dude. Keep it up.

Adam Smith pretty much invented liberalism, by all means Ronald Reagan was a liberal (the irony...). Liberals trust the the market, they want to LIBERALIZE the market and lower government's involvement.

 

Merriam Websters dictionary, see definition 2b: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/liberalism

 

see for yourself...

Edited January 22, 200917 yr by DukeNukeEm

Loosely translated kap's sig quote is:

 

"The problem with our free market friends is not that they are ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so."

 

That doesn't sound like Ronald Reagan to me.

This can go in circles actually.

ugh, what a boring argument peanut. Are you really going to argue classical liberalism for the modern day usage?

He controls who gets to run for office, so it is stretch to call it a democracy IMO. He just disqualifies anyone who doesn't trumpet what he wants to hear.

 

This.

 

The Ayatollah controls the military, the media, appoints all relevant members of the judicial branch, and chooses who gets to be on the council that decides who can run for office. He is a dictator in everything but name. Ahmadinejad is simply a puppet of the Supreme Leader. Bear in mind all this is controlled by a complete religious fanatic. If that doesn't scream democracy I don't know what does.......