Skip to main content

View Diary: Markos: What Say You? "Off The Record" Meeting With Obama. (169 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Heh (9+ / 0-)

    Two points:  I for one was not yelling about Cheney's secret meetings. There are secret meetings in government ALL THE TIme! The transparency BS is just that. BS. What nmeeds to be done in public is actual governing and I would trade access to transcripts of meetings for frank discussion of issues from journalists.

    But even this example is riduclous - you are really comparing a meeting with journalists with a meeting with lenergy lobbyists desigining legislation? Surely you jest.

    •  Judgment is key. E.g., fiscal cliff negotiations. (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      2questions, grrr, JesseCW, joe shikspack

      We must distinguish between:

      1. Things people in government or journalism have a right to keep from the public.

      2. Things people in government or journalism would be wiser to make public.

      F'rinstance, while I understand why the negotiations on the fiscal cliff are kept private, and that the negotiators have a right to keep them private, I think that's stupid. The Dems are passing up a huge opportunity here. I'd love to see the Dems post a summary of every offer and counter-offer on the web, and hold press conferences to highlight the major points. This would:

      A. Ensure the Dems are doing things they can defend.

      B. Expose the GOP's bullshit as bullshit. (And perhaps hasten the day when the GOP becomes more reality-based.)

      C. Get the Dems major points for openness.

      OTOH there are other matters that lawmakers & journalists either have a right to keep private or would be wise to keep private.

      I doubt anything more than mutual ego-stroking goes on in private politco-journo meetings, though I'd like to hear from Kos something about what value he sees in them, even if he says nothing about the specifics of this one.

      "The true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals." - Barack Obama

      by HeyMikey on Sat Dec 08, 2012 at 10:16:55 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Well, I was (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JesseCW

      Hell, I'm pissed off that the freaking constitutional convention was held in such secrecy, which is part of why it's so freaking conservative and continues to hold us back till this day. To it we owe the anti-democratic senate and electoral college, the scourge of gerrymandering (since districting was left to the states), and of course slavery. And yes, I know that without this secrecy we likely would never have had a constitution and the sourthern states would have just walked off, but the older I get the more convinced I am that that would have been a good thing for all. Slavery would have died out anyway but we wouldn't have had a Civil War.

      But I digress. Yes, I think that secrecy is bad for democracy. Surely you don't support the way that the states secrets privilege (let alone the even more silly executive privilege) has been exploited to avoid judicial review by both parties?

      And no, I don't jest. If he was trying to influence coverage and cut implicit deals for implied quid pro quo, it's bad for democracy and a stain on the media (if said media complies with it, and clearly it has in the past).

      "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

      by kovie on Sat Dec 08, 2012 at 10:32:05 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Of course he's trying to influence coverage. Why (0+ / 0-)

        else would one want to meet with journalists?

        So what?  

        Wouldn't you?  There's a war of ideas going on.  Wanna lose?

        •  Hmm, I kind of thought that the way to do it (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          JesseCW, apimomfan2, joanneleon

          was with smart and strong policy and politics, and having your own effective messaging operation independant of a hopefully independant media. Kind of pathetic IMO to try to recruit the latter to do your propagandizing. Hopefully, most of them were smart and principled enough to see through the ruse.

          Instead of continually trying to reach a safe and easy "middle ground" with the other side (that curiously is always better for them than the country) and selling it as "pragmatism", how about actually fighting for what's best for the country and using THAT as PR? Voters don't like a principled fighter? News to me.

          As usual, he's opting for easy finesse over actual political combat.

          "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

          by kovie on Sat Dec 08, 2012 at 12:32:41 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  With energy lobbyists planning a war. Just a wee (0+ / 0-)

      bit different.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site