Before anybody lights into me for that (somewhat) rhetorical question - yes, I know that they already lie to us but this is a bit different. They want to institutionalize the practice.

It's pretty bad for the administration when a reliably left wing newspaper comes out with an editorial exposing and condemning what Obama's administration wants to do.

Quote:Obama's Secrets
The Obama administration should rethink its outrageous proposal that would allow the government to lie to citizens about whether documents exist.

October 31, 2011

One of the most disappointing attributes of the Obama administration has been its proclivity for secrecy. The president who committed himself to "an unprecedented level of openness in government" has followed the example of his predecessor by invoking the "state secrets" privilege to derail litigation about government misdeeds in the war on terror. He has refused to release the administration's secret interpretation of the Patriot Act, which two senators have described as alarming. He has blocked the dissemination of photographs documenting the abuse of prisoners by U.S. service members. And now his Justice Department has proposed to allow government agencies to lie about the existence of documents being sought under the Freedom of Information Act, or FOIA.

You read that correctly. They want to use a doctrine allowing them to deny that certain documents exist when faced with FOIA requests.

Quote:At present, if the government doesn't want to admit the existence of a document it believes to be exempt from FOIA, it may advise the person making the request that it can neither confirm nor deny the document's existence. Under the proposed regulation, an agency that withholds a document "will respond to the request as if the excluded records did not exist."

This policy is outrageous. It provides a license for the government to lie to its own people and makes a mockery of FOIA. It also would mislead citizens who might file an appeal if they knew there was a possibility that the document they sought was in the possession of a government agency. Such an appeal would allow a court to determine whether the requested document was covered by an exemption in FOIA.

U.S. Security: Freedom of Information Act: Obama's secrets

They already do...this is just a way for them to get Holder out of Jail.

No, they should not be able to withhold information, saying that documents do not exist. Since the gov. is there for the people, the people have a right to see exactly what its gov. is doing. Vail this in secrecy and the gov. is the only one watching what it is doing. When you look at the "gun walking" operation, it is obvious that it cannot keep up or want to keep up with operational techniques, for whatever reasons. Why would you want to give this power to these nitwits?

Does it really matter whether they lie about it or still prohibit you from getting it as they are doing now by saying the document may or may not exist? Right or wrong, you still aren't getting it under the new or old rule.

And the LA times editorial pages are certainly not a friend to Obama by any means. Just look at the stories on the left side of your link.

Personally, we should be allowed to see everything, but at some point we have to rely on our government to know what has to be withheld to protect certain things. Yeah, it sucks at times but it has to be this way.

(11-01-2011 10:48 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Does it really matter whether they lie about it or still prohibit you from getting it as they are doing now by saying the document may or may not exist? Right or wrong, you still aren't getting it under the new or old rule.

And the LA times editorial pages are certainly not a friend to Obama by any means. Just look at the stories on the left side of your link.

Personally, we should be allowed to see everything, but at some point we have to rely on our government to know what has to be withheld to protect certain things. Yeah, it sucks at times but it has to be this way.

So we should rely on our government to police themselves? Why can't they rely on me to police myself? You're stupid.

(11-01-2011 10:48 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Does it really matter whether they lie about it or still prohibit you from getting it as they are doing now by saying the document may or may not exist? Right or wrong, you still aren't getting it under the new or old rule.
And the LA times editorial pages are certainly not a friend to Obama by any means. Just look at the stories on the left side of your link.
Personally, we should be allowed to see everything, but at some point we have to rely on our government to know what has to be withheld to protect certain things. Yeah, it sucks at times but it has to be this way.

I disagree, but I respect your right to a different opinion. As long, that is, as you hold that different opinion honestly.

That means that you took the same position when people were pressuring the Bush administration for more info about Iraq or Gitmo. But I'm sure you were doing that, because you are a principled individual.

(11-01-2011 10:51 AM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  

(11-01-2011 10:48 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Does it really matter whether they lie about it or still prohibit you from getting it as they are doing now by saying the document may or may not exist? Right or wrong, you still aren't getting it under the new or old rule.

And the LA times editorial pages are certainly not a friend to Obama by any means. Just look at the stories on the left side of your link.

Personally, we should be allowed to see everything, but at some point we have to rely on our government to know what has to be withheld to protect certain things. Yeah, it sucks at times but it has to be this way.

So we should rely on our government to police themselves? Why can't they rely on me to police myself? You're stupid.

I'm sorry, for matters of "national security" we have little choice.

And I have little problem with what Bush withheld, it's the stuff I think he made up I take issue with.

(11-01-2011 12:52 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-01-2011 10:51 AM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  

(11-01-2011 10:48 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Does it really matter whether they lie about it or still prohibit you from getting it as they are doing now by saying the document may or may not exist? Right or wrong, you still aren't getting it under the new or old rule.

And the LA times editorial pages are certainly not a friend to Obama by any means. Just look at the stories on the left side of your link.

Personally, we should be allowed to see everything, but at some point we have to rely on our government to know what has to be withheld to protect certain things. Yeah, it sucks at times but it has to be this way.

So we should rely on our government to police themselves? Why can't they rely on me to police myself? You're stupid.

I'm sorry, for matters of "national security" we have little choice.

And I have little problem with what Bush withheld, it's the stuff I think he made up I take issue with.

So you THINK he made it up...ok. Anyway, don't they already do this? Why is this a big deal?

(11-01-2011 12:52 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  And I have little problem with what Bush withheld, it's the stuff I think he made up I take issue with.

And what was the stuff "he made up"?

(11-01-2011 10:40 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-01-2011 12:52 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  And I have little problem with what Bush withheld, it's the stuff I think he made up I take issue with.

And what was the stuff "he made up"?

Sorry, I ain't got that much time...lol, so:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?tit...deceptions