Obama Keeps His Blackberry (And Gets a Sectera) 365
InternetVoting writes "After all the controversy surrounding Obama's Blackberry, word has come that he will get to keep it. Few details are available and neither the National Security Agency nor the White House are talking. The current rumor is that the Blackberry will be used exclusively for personal use and a Sectera Edge will be used for official communications."
So, all this talk about Bush emails and... (Score:5, Insightful)
It turns out, that, after trashing Bush and Cheney for eight years for not making all of their communications public, the first thing the new Democratic President does is get for himself a means of making private communications based on his word that it will be for personal use only.
Frankly, I don't dispute the right of any President to have secret communications. He needs to be judged by his work product and not be constantly subject to the Congress. It was wrong for Republicans to harrass Clinton during his Presidency and it was wrong for Bush to be harrassed as well. IT's not because, ideally, the President is above the law, but it is because, he (or she!), is not subjugated to the Congress. They are equal branches of government.
Not good (Score:3, Insightful)
And now we are told that Obama 'promises' to only use his blackberry for personal communications. I am sure he has every good intention to comply, but, as with Palin, we see that routine use of personal assets while in a government job can lead to a confusion and misuse between the personal asset and government property. One can imagine Palin logged onto her yahoo account simply writing a government note because it was more efficient that logging into the proper account, or thinking that since she was staying in her own home on government business, that the taxpayers should help her pay her mortgage.
Which is to say that we cannot trust that our officials are always doing the right thing, no matter how moral or trustworthy we think they are. If Obama uses the blackberry, then it still has to fall under the FOIA. If that means we get hundreds of pages of 'thinking of you dear', that is fine. At least we will know that he is not plotting to defraud the American consumers by colluding with oil company executives.
Re:So, all this talk about Bush emails and... (Score:5, Insightful)
No one is complaining about Bush's private communications with his family and friends, which is presumably what Obama will continue to use his Blackberry for. That information can and should remain private. The "Bush-trashing" is coming from the refusal of the Bush administration to release communications between, say, administration and intelligence officials, which can and should be a matter of public record, and probably contain a great deal of enlightening information on the administration's many illegal activities (torture, wiretapping, etc.)
Re:So, all this talk about Bush emails and... (Score:4, Insightful)
The big problem with email and any recorded communication really is that is can be used to craft almost any story you want to tell. Your enemies will always want access to all of your communications. This way they can edit them and release to the public in a way to paint a picture of you using your own words.
Many people have been slandered this way for many years. So much that you would think that the general public could tell the difference between propaganda and reality. The problem remains that people believe what they want to hear and discount anything they don't want to hear. Give them an irrelevant email out of context and they will eat it up.
I would recommended against any public figure using email.
Re:Should be interesting... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:So, all this talk about Bush emails and... (Score:5, Insightful)
My point is that, as soon as you allow the President to have a means of making "private" communications, then don't you think he or she would use that to keep his or her own deliberations secret? Your guys are chasing after Bush on a presumption of guilt of something, and you demand a right to all of his communications because they exist and prove your point. If Obama were to fall under the same accusations, there's no way that those communications could ever even exist, and therefor, it makes it impossible to even bother trying to go after him. He's got a relatively blank check now, that Bush never had. That's my point.
My other point is, I think its good that the President have something of a blank check because the last 16 years of Clinton/Bush subpoenas and evidence gathering did little more than to undermine the power of the Presidency relative to the Congress, and right now, the Congress is completely out of control. The job of the Congress is to manage legislation and the federal purse and its failed at both. Meanwhile, it blames its own failures on the Presidency and thus , its not only wrecking itself, it wants to drag another branch of government down with it.
The bottom line is, Dick Cheney is right. The Presidency needs to be more powerful relative to the Congress, and that is why Obama should get to keep his Blackberry, and -gasp-, even a cell phone, if he could get a secure one.
Re:So, all this talk about Bush emails and... (Score:2, Insightful)
I just wanted to clarify a small thing. The Congress is responsible for the passage of laws, the Executive (President) is responsible for enacting those laws. While in theory, the two are equal, the power of law is based in Congress, which has the most direct connection to the people, and is most directly accountable.
The President is not subject to Congress, however he can also not really act without their support. Were he truly to be a separate entity and not beholden to the laws passed to him by Congress, he would be an elected King, which your message appeared to support. Direct accountability to the people, whom both the Congress and President serve is more important than secret communications. These people are our employees, and I know I get cranky when my staff spend too much time on the clock dealing with non-work issues.
Re:So, all this talk about Bush emails and... (Score:5, Insightful)
Ok. Where do you draw the line? The President can't use a non-official phone? The President cannot ever be alone with somebody? The President cannot write a birthday card to his Auntie Mabel without a copy going into the permanant record?
After all, 'best birthday wishes' might be code for 'buy Haliburton; we's invadin' another o'l country!' and 'best wishes on your birthday' might be code for 'sell Microsoft; we're sending Gates to Guantanamo tomorrow!'
Re:So, all this talk about Bush emails and... (Score:2, Insightful)
I think we will see a lot of this kind of back tracking in the next four years.
Just look at the ethics situation now.
A tax cheat will be running the Treasury Department and a guy who played a questionable role in getting another tax cheat and fugitive pardoned will be the Attorney General. Don't even talk about Hillary.
Switch the party labels around and Slashdot would be in flames.
Re:So, all this talk about Bush emails and... (Score:4, Insightful)
Don't worry, the press will treat this as fairly as they did when it was revealed that Governor Palin of Alaska had an email account for work use, and a separate email account for home use.
Re:Should be interesting... (Score:5, Insightful)
Whatever. "I am the head of the Executive Branch. I will use my crackberry, and you will find a way to make me untraceable just the same as you found a way for me to walk down a D.C. street without getting shot. Is that clear?" "Yes Mr. President."
The end.
Probably the solution is as simple as, "Don't use your Blackberry's wireless connection." But I don't know; that's what security experts are for. Everyday I see Congressmen using cellphones; if those can be secure enough to carry day-to-day government business, why not other wireless devices?
Re:Should be interesting... (Score:3, Insightful)
But what Obama wants, presumably, is the common good, and his plans are but means to that end. Rush is simply being idiotically idiological, in the most stupid way.
By the way: I find it amazing the way the US has brute forced the word "liberalism" into meaning exactly the opposite of what it used to mean...
Re:Should be interesting... (Score:3, Insightful)
Okay, the hardware specs look good, but the software description scotched the deal for me. "Familiar Microsoft® Windows® Platform".
Of course, that's only the front-end. Chances are it's running virtualized using a secure separation kernel. This system is likely so thoroughly contained and hardened that it can't even access external networks- and if it can, it's doing so through a kernel like GHS INTEGRITY or LynxSecure or something.
Ideally, with a secure embedded system like this, Windows, Linux, Mac, whatever- they're only good as front-ends. The thought of any of those three running bare on a system with that much sensitive information is quite frankly frightening.
Re:So, all this talk about Bush emails and... (Score:5, Insightful)
the last 16 years of Clinton/Bush subpoenas and evidence gathering did little more than to undermine the power of the Presidency relative to the Congress, and right now, the Congress is completely out of control.
Forget about the Blackberry/phone stuff, what parallel universe did you just jet in from?
The bottom line is, Dick Cheney is right. The Presidency needs to be more powerful relative to the Congress,
Yeah, screw that whole balance of power thing the founders set up. It's inconvenient.
Re:So, all this talk about Bush emails and... (Score:4, Insightful)
the last 16 years of Clinton/Bush subpoenas and evidence gathering did little more than to undermine the power of the Presidency relative to the Congress
I think if anything, the last 16 years has done the opposite- the power of congress (the *only directly elected representatives* we have in Washington) has been greatly diminished compared to the the presidency.
The congress used to have exclusive rights to the declaration of war, yet neither of the last two wars (nor any since WWII) were 'declared' by the congress and indeed would have proceeded without their approval.
The congress used to have the 'power of the purse' yet when they declined to prop up the car companies the president did it anyway.
The congress used to have not just the power to oversee, but the *responsibility* for oversight. Yet when they asked to see documents concerning various potential violations of the law, including items regarding the outing of Valerie Plame, CIA interrogation techniques, warrantless wiretapping etc. the President refused to acknowledge their subpoenas.
I for one want my directly elected representatives to be given their power back. I have some respect for Obama, and I hope that he will have the balls to put the power back where it belongs.
Or in /. terms: Obama- please be Galadriel, not Saruman. Thanks.
Re:So, all this talk about Bush emails and... (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm this close to just outright modding this statement and all others like it flamebait.
The Bush administration was mired in controversy and saying that Obama is just like him because they both have personal communications devices is just sickeningly stupid.
Re: Congress's failure (Score:2, Insightful)
Unfortunately there are only 2 ways I can think of to investigate improprieties of a Presidential Administration, through a special prosecutor appointed by that or a later Administration, or by Congress. And only Congress has the power within the US to hold that Administration accountable.
Ultimately this is where Congress failed the American people most miserably. They failed to investigate the egregiously illegal and immoral acts of the Bush Administration, largely because the Democrats were afraid of the same quagmire that befell the Reublicans after the Clinton impeachment hearings.
Re:Should be interesting... (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:So, all this talk about Bush emails and... (Score:1, Insightful)
So the guy is a tax cheat and an ineffective bureaucrat that has already failed at his job... yet he's still the man for the job? That's not exactly the type of change most people want to believe in nor an honest, open and ethical administration.