Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Obama Administration Promises "Thorough Review" of USTR Policies

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 5 years ago | from the transparency-just-another-buzzword-so-far dept.

Government 78

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."

cancel ×

78 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

United States Trade Representative (5, Informative)

Phroggy (441) | more than 5 years ago | (#27274777)

From ustr.gov [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.

Re:United States Trade Representative (1)

AlexBirch (1137019) | more than 5 years ago | (#27275677)

Thanks, I kept thinking USSR.

Re:United States Trade Representative (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27276267)

Isn't it traditional for editors to use the full name once before using the uncommon acronym?

Re:United States Trade Representative (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27276499)

You make the mistake of thinking that the editors here are competent.

Re:United States Trade Representative (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27277221)

Isn't it traditional for editors to use the full name once before using the uncommon acronym?

Not if that editor enjoys being pretentious and deluded with the notion that using obscure, unexplained acronyms makes one intelligent and the reader shamefully ignorant.

Re:United States Trade Representative (1)

Phroggy (441) | more than 5 years ago | (#27277311)

Isn't it traditional for editors to use the full name once before using the uncommon acronym?

Not if that editor enjoys being pretentious and deluded with the notion that using obscure, unexplained acronyms makes one intelligent and the reader shamefully ignorant.

I think you presume too much about our esteemed editors. I find it unlikely that ScuttleMonkey made a conscious choice to use obscure and unexplained acronyms to shame us - it's far more likely that he just wasn't paying attention, and didn't think about it.

As you can see from my UID, I'm not new here.

Re:United States Trade Representative (1)

Pantero Blanco (792776) | more than 5 years ago | (#27278035)

Not if that editor enjoys being pretentious and deluded with the notion that using obscure, unexplained acronyms makes one intelligent and the reader shamefully ignorant.

Amusingly, they spelled out FOIA, which I bet almost every Slashdotter knows.

So, they actually used the full name for a common acronym, but not for the obscure ones.

For what it's worth, I knew USTR (I guess it isn't that obscure, but it's hardly common), but KEI had me stumped.

Re:United States Trade Representative (1)

Elektroschock (659467) | more than 5 years ago | (#27281001)

I know both.

KEI = Knowledge Ecology International

Re:United States Trade Representative (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27277071)

The agency was founded in 1962 and has offices in Washington, Geneva and Brussels.

In other words, it is another Cold War legacy that was originally created for spies, like the Peace Corps.

Re:United States Trade Representative tsarkon (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27296039)

Barack Hussein Barry-Soetoro-Afro-Leninist Obama II. , hell bent on bankrupting the USA once and for all.

- Chairman Barack Hussein "The Teleprompter" Obama is deeply connected to corruption, Rahm Emanuel (Radical authoritarian Statist-Zionist whose father was part of the Murderous Civilian Killing Israeli Terrorist Organization known as IRGUN), Connected to Rod Blagojevich (Rahm inherited Rod's federal-congress seat), Connected to Ayers, a man who promotes the concept that civilian collateral damage is ok in a war against freedom, Preacher Jeremiah Wright, who is himself a black-elitist who wants all the people who largely "pay the freight" to suffer, 31 million on food stamps, more blacks are in prison and on food-stamps per capita than anyone else. The problem with Wright is simply this: the facts are "racist."
- Obama: Racist, AIPAC-Zionist, Corrupted and a Traitor and a Liar who can't even produce a valid birth certificate (which is not a certificate of live birth)
- Raytheon lobbyist in Pentagon
- Goldman Sachs insider second in command at Treasury.
- Cabinet has had several nominees and appointees with multiple tax fraud issues.
- The head of the IRS and the head of the Treasury, Geithner, is a Tax Cheat
- Lied about no lobbyists
- Lied about having a new degree of accountability and a SUNSHINE period of new laws, he has signed bills with little or no review at whitehouse.gov as promised.
- Appointed a second amendment violating Rich-pardoning treasonist Eric Holder as AG, the top cop of the USA, a man who helped a fugitive evade justice.
- Has not put a dime in for a single new nuclear power plant but wants to help bridges and roads to promote more driving.
- Obama, Blagojevich and Rahm Emanuel have a LOT to hide. They literally lived next to each other, Rahm had (until being Chairman Obama's Chief of staff) Blagojevich's old federal congressional seat. Blagojevich helped Chairman "The Teleprompter" Obama cheat his way to the Illinois senate by getting other candidates thrown off the ballot in Illinois. Why do you think Blagojevich was so mad? Obama DID owe him, big time. Rahm and Obama are using Blagojevich and trying to cut his head off to keep him away.
- Tony Rezko, Iraqi Arms Dealer Nahdmi Auchi, and of course Aiham Alsammarae. Chairman "The Teleprompter" Hussein Obama is so corrupted its a joke.
- Fools and "useful idiots" twist the pie charts by leaving welfare, workfare, interest on debt, social security, Medicare and Medicaid out and focusing only on non-whole "discretionary" pie charts.
2007 high level pie chart, Federal Budget, USA [wikimedia.org]
2009 Pie chart, detailed, Federal Budget, USA [wikimedia.org]
- Chairman Obama is drastically increasing spending and creating more entitlements that will make the US less competitive (especially against China, India, East Europe/Russia). This will be a huge disaster and change you can believe in will strap you and your grandkids with more debt. No taxation without representation? Obama is spending money for the next two-three generations and they can't even vote yet, or even have been born.
- An alternative to the dollar and a forex and a reserve currency came up at the last G20 meeting. The world will not take faith in Obama's liar-socialist spending and welfare state, why should the taxpayers (plebian citizen-slaves of a police state).
- The spending going on now vastly eclipses all previous spending. In fact, the massive trillion plus debts is a thing of the 80's onwards. Congress signs the checks, remember that Year after year, as egregious as the pentagon spending is, that the social spending is completely a waste of money and it is unfunded over the long term. Eisenhower built the interstates, the US could build a new power infrastructure with this money but instead is being pissed into creating more of an entitlement system that is STILL unfunded, and without massive poll-taxes and far more aggressive progressive taxes, could NEVER be funded.
- The budgeting being done today were recently reported by a non-partisan auditing commission will lead to about 10 TRILLION in new debt over the next 10 years. Obama is going to double the national debt while doing nothing to address the unfunded debt obligations of Social Security.
- Clinton appointed David Walker of the GAO, he quit, the unfunded debt obligations have rendered the USA insolvent according to accounting standards.
Taxpayers on the hook for $59 trillion [usatoday.com]
US Public Debt Unfunded Debt Obligations [wikipedia.org]
- Most of the world population gets NOTHING from their governments, or a very bare minimum or services that benefit only the upper echelons of society. However, the liar Chairman Obama says we need his universal "state-hospital" rationed health care to be competitive. Bull. China and India give nothing, and they are the biggest threat to the American worker. By forcing healthcare and higher taxes, Americans will be less competitive.
- If you think 60% tax rates end to end (income, accounts receivable tax, building permit tax, CDL tax, cigarette tax, corporate income tax, dog license tax, federal income tax, unemployment tax, gasoline tax, hunting license tax, fishing license tax, waterfowl stamp tax, inheritance tax, inventory tax, liquor tax, luxury tax, Medicare tax, city, school and county property tax (up 33 percent last 4 years), real estate tax, social security tax, road usage tax, toll road tax, state and city sales tax, recreational vehicle tax, excise tax, state franchise tax, state unemployment tax, telephone federal excise tax, telephone federal state and local surcharge tax, telephone minimum usage surcharge tax, telephone state and local tax, utility tax, vehicle license registration tax, capital gains tax, lease severance tax, oil and gas assessment tax, misc internet sales tax and many more taxes that I can't recall at the moment) will make the US competitive, along with compulsory programs to provide everyone with health care is going to make the US competitive in the age of India and China, you are a joke.
- As the US nationalizes (read: rations healthcare) to the least common denominator of affordability without regard to efficacy, people with money will simply look into medical tourism so those with money can go to medical parks in India and get real health care. Those who have lived in Canada or in the UK can tell you "free" healthcare is NOT a panacea. If you think this, you are again, a useful idiot. The NHS in the UK has given bad blood and Hepatitis and AIDS blood to people, and Jade Goody who just died was misdiagnosed twice resulting in her death (She was all cleared twice of cervical cancer which she just died of). The NHS in the UK is not able to be sued or held accountable. Neither will Chairman Obama's rationed health care service for America.
- Sorry to bust the socialist bubble-lie, but support of these types of policies will simply lower the standard of living in the USA, particularly for the middle class. At least at the end of the Eisenhower projects the USA got roads to show for the spending, and with this new spending, the USA could have built power plants that get the USA out of the middle east, but the age of government for the sake of government is upon us, and the useful idiots line up and believe empty promises.
The pentagon (and Bechtel, Kroll, Bluewater, Halliburton, etc) could get less than half of what they get today, but that will fix nothing fundamental in terms of government spending. It is simply not enough to make a difference when compared to the Medicare, Medicaid, welfare, workfare and social security entitlements.
See: YouTube - US Government Immorality Will Lead to Bankruptcy [youtube.com]
- If Obama thinks its ok to lie to 300 million people about being able to "take care of them" without even being honest about what that care would look like, then being an idiot and believing in Obama is for you.
- The US Government already have over 50% of the budget on Medicare, Medicaid, welfare, workfare and social security. Socialists: Good job on that one, its working great. Solution to the current near-collapse-due-to-over-spending: add more unfunded entitlements!
- You Socialist-liars can break my spirit and my financial back to force me to "need" a federal government that is turning this country into a police state and turn it into a quasi-socialist lie, but I will, I must put up a fight. I have kids to educate and feed, and the stuff you sell (which is failing to various degrees everywhere else as implemented) is simply forcing a culture of failure on a once great, libertarian free country.
- I will not be complacent with your "change," and there will be a point where civil war will become an option. See how hard you can push before you get it. How much more than half can the truly productive workers in this country afford to pay. Keep pushing to find out how to start a civil war.
- The socialist-lie of a plan will not work, its not fundable, it WILL destroy the currency to fund it, and its really as simple as this: if this insanity is funded by borrowing from the US's economic and military adversaries then Obama and his socialist cabal is NOT fit to administrate society. Rome fell. Kings who mis-manged their treasuries all fell. Every example of unhinged spending leads to the same result: systemic collapse.
- Obama and his sycophantic lunatics would want to have a civil war to get Chairman Obama's way and force the socialist-lie system on my already tax paying law abiding ass. And as far as "no new taxes" for those under 250k, its a lie, the tax is called inflation, which is set to begin just about now that the Chinese wont want the USA's worthless treasuries to fund the socialist-lie fantasy (one that COMMUNIST China doesn't even try and sell to its people!)
- Chairman Obama's numbers don't add up. There is a $59 trillion dollar hole (UFDO) in social security alone. AIG $150 billion here, TARP $350 billion there. $800 billion for a highly dubious stimulus package. Another one on the way. $59 trillion hole in the balance sheet IGNORED. China saying they aren't going to buy treasuries, Clinton clamoring to find buyers now. $3.6 trillion dollar budget, potential military action on Mexico, Iran still a "terrorist state" at the behest of the AIPAC, spending up, dollar about to fall, inflation over time since Breton Woods extremely easy to document, yet, the socialist-liars question when the numbers (the Federal Government numbers) simply don't add up to the point where if the US-GOV was a company it would be insolvent.
  -How dare the taxpayers question what Chairman Obama's drastic spending increases are going to do to the purchasing power of our savings because Chairman Obama wants to recklessly spend and try to maintain and American empire AND guarantee a standard of living, and Chairman Obama doesn't even want to build a single nuclear power plant to do it? Chairman Obama must be a complete and total lunatic moron.
- Obama is either a negligent idiot or an unhinged maniac with delusional fantasies. Meanwhile, Chainman Obama's tax dodging Treasury Secretary has 17 unfilled positions, the Treasury Dept. isn't even functioning at this point.
- "General welfare" in the constitution was, according to the man who wrote it, Madison, meant to be extremely limited in scope. The federal government per the constitution doesn't even have the enumerated POWER to deal with economic messes. A lot of these "POWERS" were created while there is a crisis to dupe the public into accepting an un-constitutional authoritarian regime as the government and to usurp authority over the people.
- The USA is a constitutional republic. A democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting to eat a sheep. Also a constitutional republic isn't about using a barely-majority or a plurality to stuff your (un-fundable disastrous) crap down the disenfranchised other-half's throat.
- With Obama's authoritarian corrupted criminal (aiding and abetting a criminal in flight of prosecution, Rich case) Eric Holder in charge, we won't have our inalienable and enumerated rights to firearms much longer. For a constitutional law expert, Obama must have never read the federalist papers or he would simply hand himself as a traitor.
- The arbitrary expansion of "general welfare" is not only unconstitutional, it may very well lead to a serious conflict on the issue.
- Here is a debate on general welfare and how stuff like this came to pass, but was clearly no intended by the authors of the document of root law.
In Federalist No. 41, James Madison asked rhetorically: "For what purpose could the enumeration of particular powers be inserted, if these and all others were meant to be included in the preceding general power?" (In reference to the general welfare clause)
So strongly did the founders believe that "general welfare" wouldn't be expanded as written:
In Federalist No. 84, Alexander Hamilton indirectly confirmed Madison's point. (That the "general welfare" clause was "clearly" nota free pass for government)
Hamilton argued that a bill of rights, which many were clamoring for, would be not only unnecessary, but dangerous. Since the federal government was given only a few specific powers, there was no need to add prohibitions: it was implicitly prohibited by the listed powers. If a proposed law a relief act, for instance wasn't covered by any of these powers, it was unconstitutional.
"why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do? Why, for instance, should it be said, that the liberty of the press shall not be restrained when no power is given by which restrictions may be imposed?"
Hamilton goes on to argue that making Amendments (e.g., enumerating Free speech, press and assembly) and enumerating the 'right' would have the following effect:
(A bill of rights) "would furnish, to men disposed to usurp, a plausible pretence for claiming that power that is, a power to regulate the press, short of actually shutting it down. "
"With respect to the words 'general welfare,' I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers (enumerated in the Constitution) connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." --James Madison [The US Supreme Court has found the meaning of "general welfare" in the Constitution to be much more elastic than did Mr. Madison. But as the "author of the Constitution," what does he know?]
James Madison, when asked if the "general welfare" clause was a grant of power, replied in 1792, in a letter to Henry Lee,

If not only the means but the objects are unlimited, the parchment [the Constitution] should be thrown into the fire at once.

"...We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it...it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government , and to provide new Guards for their future security. ...--The Declaration of Independence
- Wrong, monetizing failures causes more. Japan showed us this for decades. But hey, Chairman Obama thinks you can fix a problem DECADES in the making with a quick fixer-upper, he is screwed in the head.
- The complaints are with the Federal government (in general) since Breton Woods. The Federal Government and Obama's minions STILL didn't listen to David Walker, a Clinton appointee and former head of the GAO. This isn't about political parties anymore morons!
- Show me a single federal budget that was less than the previous. If this $3.6T budget goes, its never coming back barring systemic collapse.
- The United States Federal Government, The United States Federal Reserve, and the banks which were enabled to continue down reckless paths by a quasi government agency known as the Federal Reserve whose actions are not subject to congress and whose members are unelected. This situation is untenable and unconstitutional.
- Every inflationary road taken in history ends in collapse. Keynesian policies are widely regarded as no longer workable.
- Inflation is a tax: What ignorant tax and spenders don't take into account here is the relative percentages of people's wealth (both net and gross) and the costs of owning and maintaining houses, cars, standards of living.
- Inflation via deficit spending is going to make it such that you will be paying a lot more by percentage of your income to maintain a given standard of living. Obama's arguments are so poorly thought out and seek to blame "Republicans" for the mess, its really simply laughable - the needs cleanup now, not worsening.
- You can't spend your way out of a hole if the creditors (e.g. China) start telling the USA they won't buy. It is that simple. Now America starts to have to collateralize the debt with assets. The USA will be selling off chunks of American assets to back the new debt. One day, it may even be necessary to sell Alaska back to Russia because no one will take greenbacks to prop up a failing version of a modern Rome.
- Ah, here we go with the Matthew Lesko arguments. [lesko.com]
Interest rates were on the rise before the government stepped in with free money for everyone (the fine print of course indicate massive strings attached).
Other economies, for example, India, have the central rates set to far more reasonable/realistic rates (at the moment ~ 8+%), which is still tends to be too low, but shows that if you need someone else capital you need to pay a premium for it, and given that capital is in short supply, it would stand to reason that a premium must be charged for it.
The problem is the unrealistic growth rates of mature economies don't allow for profiting via growth projections (rather than simply earning money). So the government steps in, turns on the free money spigot, gets the interest rates for savings down in the 1-2% range while diluting the value of the whole currency in order to prop up dying companies that ran the business like a Madhoff Ponzi scheme.
- The Republicans aren't solely responsible for the crisis as Obama's minions would have you believe, congress is (no particular congress), the Executive of the US government (no particular one) and the US Federal Reserve System are all at fault.
- Fundamentally, the government is trying to fix the prices of various things to "make it all work." This pulling on the invisible hand is a fools venture. It was predicted long ago the housing collapse (and those, such as myself, in the know, wished while realizing the housing collapse coming that we were wrong for everyone's sake - but the truth is the truth) . It may be that the Austrian (von Mises) economists will ultimately be proven right.
- We are a nation of partially educated whiney grabby idiots, and we got the government that represents this. The Chinese, India and other up and coming nations will show no mercy for this arrogant abuse of our status as the world's forex reserves.
- War and asset sales will continue to be the only option for this scheme until it is corrected at the core. And to say that the government has already averted a depression by doing what they did (most of the monies injected wont be "felt" for some time), is just arrogance and stupidity. Price fixing prolonged the Great Depression. Price-fixing (or attempting to) houses will do the same, but probably worse.
- Obama's minions simply don't care if the US is bankrupted and rendered insolvent, they just want a say in how its done, presumably to "feel safe." Rather selfish.

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." AND "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin (Possibly Richard Jackson)

- Everyone better realize that inflation will pay a major role in funding un-fundable fantasies, wiping the savers and the middle class out. The problem is, that other countries are growing tired of making our Federal Reserve notes worth something by buying our debt as treasuries. Obama's minions talk about spending, but in order to "get what YOU want" you will sell debt to potential economic and military adversaries? Real bright. What's really sad is that despite David Walker being an authority on these issues, people refuse to even watch him and listen to what he is saying.
- On the success of Canada and its form of Socialism: A huge country like Canada with massive amounts of uranium and tar sands and natural resources and a huge land mass with a scant 30 million people is an order of magnitude less of a problem to manage than a country with 10x its population, a serious leaky southern border, backfiring aggressive foreign policy, particularly with Iran, and the US is competing with countries like India and China whose middle classes are larger than the US's entire population. The top 5 students in every Indian and Chinese primary school out numbers all the kids in primary school in the US. Canada is a idyllic island, the USA is front and center in an all out economic and political clash of ideologies.
- Cap and trade (and pollution control for solving global problems) will never work unless the top 10 countries in the world (in terms of both GDP and manufacturing capacity and population) are on board. Period end. If the world doesn't quickly move to nuclear now and fusion shortly, it is OVER possibly not if every home on the planet gets a wind vane, but that seems unlikely to happen (since its possible now).
- Keynes calls it "the paradox of thrift" and suggested that policies forcing people not to save is a "good idea." The guy wanted people spending all the time, or if he didn't, he never conveyed that to his protégés well enough for them to not do what they are doing. Right now the plebeians in the US are actually stashing cash, and everyone from Obama to the media is trying to get people to spend spend spend. The best thing for the long term is for people to prepare for the coming hell, not set out with no reserves.
- I have seen Keynes invoked to justify nearly every bad move in the past decade, and its warming up to be a potential currency collapse, the collapse of the US Treasury and Federal Reserve notes, and a collapse of the NYSE. And then they invoke Keynes to suggest the best way out of the mess is to spend out of an already near-critically debt massed black hole.
- A house is run like a town is run like a country or business is run like a state is run like a government. If there are things the government is doing that would either force your home into bankruptcy or into jail via fraud charges, then the government and banks shouldn't be operating in that fashion. A certain degree of stretchy liquidity is in order, but in terms of percent of GDP, there is no way of justifying what they US has now.
- Iceland failed at 850 percent debt to GDP. The US is at 350 and rising. It is not a good thing at all.
- What is happening to the dollar as a forex standard. [youtube.com]
- March 19, 2009 C-SPAN - "Let's Quit Destroying Our Dollar!" [youtube.com]
- HR 1207 (A bill to make the Fed more accountable and to answer questions regarding the dollar policy) [loc.gov]

Title: Obama sidetracked by fiscal mess, but presses on [yahoo.com]
"Being heard above the din may prove difficult. Lawmakers are wrangling over taxing people who got big bonuses and worrying the president's budget could generate $9.3 trillion in red ink over the next decade."
- Kremlin to pitch new global currency [infowars.com]
Russia proposes creation of global super-reserve currency

Holy crap, even the Russians and Chinese get it. Strange days are here.

" !" -

Initialisms (4, Informative)

RockMFR (1022315) | more than 5 years ago | (#27274791)

KEI: Knowledge Ecology International
USTR: Office of the United States Trade Representative

Re:Initialisms (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27275071)

I was gonna write:

Fucking swell since KEI was impressed. HeeeeWWWU! And who the fuck is this KEI?!

But since you explained it, I will write this instead:

Fucking swell since Kowledge Ecology International was impressed. HeeeeWWWU! And who the fuck is this Kowledge Ecology International?!

Re:Initialisms (1)

fm6 (162816) | more than 5 years ago | (#27275387)

Initialism: a Wikipediaism for "acronym".

Actually, to be precise, an initialism is an acronym which is pronounced by sounding out the letters. And I guess it must be common in some quarters, but I never heard it used until Wikipedia came along. Really not that useful a word. Wikipedians love their obscure terminology.

Re:Initialisms (1)

rrohbeck (944847) | more than 5 years ago | (#27276273)

And acronym is an Americanism for abbreviation :)

In most other languages, acronym is only used for initialisms that are pronounced as a word like laser or radar.

Re:Initialisms (1)

Ashriel (1457949) | more than 5 years ago | (#27276573)

We do love our acronyms. Our military has its own special language comprised entirely of them.

Re:Initialisms (1)

skroops (1237422) | more than 5 years ago | (#27276625)

And in most other languages acronym and abbreviation are not words.

Re:Initialisms (1)

ijakings (982830) | more than 5 years ago | (#27276961)

I don't know why you've never heard of it before, it's a perfectly cromulent word.

Right, change my ass (0, Troll)

Reality Master 201 (578873) | more than 5 years ago | (#27274811)

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?

Re:Right, change my ass (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27274925)

I don't recall any other administration attempting these types of things and yet this one, while doing more than the rest, is getting lambasted for not being perfect at changing the whole game.

Re:Right, change my ass (2, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 5 years ago | (#27274963)

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.

Re:Right, change my ass (2, Insightful)

spacefiddle (620205) | more than 5 years ago | (#27274999)

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?

Re:Right, change my ass (-1, Troll)

Reality Master 201 (578873) | more than 5 years ago | (#27275249)

Your name is quite ironic.

Entirely on the basis of that remark, I can confidently declare you the dick-suckin'-est dumbshit that ever has walked the face of the earth. I hope you get cancer and your entire family dies in horrible, painful accidents or as the result of rare tropical diseases that cause them to linger for decades in astounding pain. Really, I wish upon you the following - may your entire bloodline die out and have its DNA destroyed to the very last nucleotide so that there's not even the faintest hint of a possibility that your kind might once again arise and pollute our species. Also, go fuck yourself.

You deserve nothing but pain and death.

Re:Right, change my ass (1)

MillionthMonkey (240664) | more than 5 years ago | (#27275499)

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.

Re:Right, change my ass (-1, Flamebait)

Reality Master 201 (578873) | more than 5 years ago | (#27275553)

I never said i was a nice person way deep down.

I hope you and everyone in your family gets a serious form of cancer and dies painfully within 6-9 months.

Re:Right, change my ass (-1, Flamebait)

Reality Master 201 (578873) | more than 5 years ago | (#27275569)

To add to my other remark:

I especially wish cancer and sterility on any children you might have; failing that, maybe a nice brutal murder. If you don't have children, then I'd be OK with a really serious accident mutilating you genitals followed by cancer and death.

No, seriously - suicide is too good for you.

Re:Right, change my ass (1)

MillionthMonkey (240664) | more than 5 years ago | (#27275785)

No, seriously - suicide is too good for you.

I'll take your word for it.

Re:Right, change my ass (0, Flamebait)

Reality Master 201 (578873) | more than 5 years ago | (#27275887)

Don't be coy - I'd love to have you prove me wrong.

Re:Right, change my ass (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27275275)

... are you suggesting we just sit back and Trust Everything's Gonna Be Okay..?

Absolutely! You've got to let the Hope and Change(tm) have a chance to work so that the Magic Rainbow Unicorns(tm) will appear and usher in a new age of peace and prosperity for all. If you don't Trust you'll make Baby Obama cry. You don't want to make Baby Obama cry do you?

Re:Right, change my ass (2, Interesting)

Repossessed (1117929) | more than 5 years ago | (#27277399)

[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?

Re:Right, change my ass (0, Troll)

HiThere (15173) | more than 5 years ago | (#27280289)

There was a great deal of criticism of Bush...but we never had any expectations that he'd pay any attention. With Obama there's hope that he'll notice. So some of the criticism is louder.

Also some people don't like other people accepting that there might be some chance of change. Such people don't tend to be very nuanced in their thought processes, so their comments tend to be loud and abrasive.

I'll admit to being a bit of a cynic myself, but at least Obama isn't conducting an outright war on the citizenry. There might be a chance of something happening. I don't expect the government to roll back any of it's previous incursions on our rights, but it might slow down the advance, or even roll things back in a few places where people are made really unhappy.

OTOH, where Bush would have either stone-walled or fought aggressively, Obama says that he's conduct a review of policies. Now this review may take so long that it's just a sneakier form of denial...but it might not. So this is one place where we get a chance to find out what kind of change was made. Is he going to push ahead with the secret treaties, and only decide that the secrecy was unnecessary when it's too late to make reasoned comments on the treaties? We'll find out. And THEN it will be reasonable to condemn him for a traitor or praise him as an honorable man.

Remember, there's a lot of inertia in politics, and a few people at the top can only push things so hard. I may think that it would be desirable to have the A.G. go searching for a few blatant cases of misfeasance or malfeasance among the high level bureaucrats...but I'm not certain that I'm right. (And it's even possible that I'm wrong about them being there to be found.)

Re:Right, change my ass (2, Insightful)

pandaman9000 (520981) | more than 5 years ago | (#27283159)

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.

We need a thorough review regarding transparency (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27274845)

Of the write-up.

Post Effective (3, Insightful)

retech (1228598) | more than 5 years ago | (#27274935)

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.

Re:Post Effective (1)

Lawrence_Bird (67278) | more than 5 years ago | (#27278317)

The 'review' will take 'a few months'. Didn't Obama already spell out his policy on FOIA requests? USTR should now have the message and immediately unclassify the documents in question. This is just typical DC defer and delay tactics.

All the uproar? (4, Insightful)

Stiletto (12066) | more than 5 years ago | (#27274989)

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.

Re:All the uproar? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27275229)

If you want to start getting your experiences "biased towards reality," you might want to:
A) Read the summary.
B) RTFA.

Re:All the uproar? (1)

Pantero Blanco (792776) | more than 5 years ago | (#27275755)

Anyone who tells you that their global or national perspective is "biased towards reality" is overestimating their own ability.

No one can be certain that their global or national perspectives are biased towards reality, because the information one builds those perspectives upon is delivered by people and factions with their own agendas and goals. The best anyone can do is weigh odds, based on a largely arbitrary scale.

If you aren't omniscient and capable of parallel processing on a massive scale, you can't be "biased towards reality".

Re:All the uproar? (1)

fm6 (162816) | more than 5 years ago | (#27275471)

Yes, POTUSBO is still very popular — probably more so than when he won the election. Doesn't mean there can't be uproar. Lots of his decisions are unpopular in certain quarters.

Not all of it is from dittoheads. Christian conservatives are shocked to learn that "I'll listen to you" does not mean "You'll always be happy with my decisions." And all the folks who've been defending Gitmo, business-uber-alles policies, etc for 8 years aren't going to just shut up because they're out of power.

And last but not least, there's the Republican politicians who have to find every excuse to argue that he's the Spawn of Satan simply because, well, that's their job.

Re:All the uproar? (1)

sumdumass (711423) | more than 5 years ago | (#27277337)

Actually, I find the republican leadership arguing that he isn't the second coming of Christ more then the spawn of Satan. I guess the opposite of one might be the other if your convinced enough.

Re:All the uproar? (1)

fm6 (162816) | more than 5 years ago | (#27281283)

Anti SCoC: "The Obama administration has clearly dropped the ball by allowing AIG to pay bonuses. However we will support a bill to tax them back."

Pro SoS: "The Obama administration's proposal to tax the AIG bonuses is just a cynical ploy to deflect attention from the question of when they learned about these bonuses."

Re:All the uproar? (1)

sumdumass (711423) | more than 5 years ago | (#27283647)

Pointing out flaws and direct negligence isn't an accusation of more then that. Pointing out that when confronted with those actions, he attempts to hide from them isn't either.

Re:All the uproar? (1)

fm6 (162816) | more than 5 years ago | (#27284897)

Pointing out that when confronted with those actions, he attempts to hide from them isn't either.

They're not "pointing out" anything. They're making allegations, devoid of evidence and deliberately vague.

Re:All the uproar? (1)

guydmann (1313789) | more than 5 years ago | (#27275529)

I think the article refers to this [boingboing.net] story about not releasing details of a copyright treaty in the works.

Re:All the uproar? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27275665)

What would you call the commotion surrounding the bailouts, if not an "uproar"? Or does Bush take credit for those unless they seem to work?

Or are you so influenced by the liberal media that you didn't even realize there was an uproar over the bailouts?

Re:All the uproar? (1)

castorvx (1424163) | more than 5 years ago | (#27275927)

This is off-topic, but seriously, what the fuck is the liberal media and where can I find it?

Re:All the uproar? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27276079)

Your point is well taken! The vast majority of the media is actually conservative, and, according to polls, most American journalists identify as conservative, am I right? Right?

Easy as hell (4, Insightful)

coryking (104614) | more than 5 years ago | (#27276137)

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...

Re:Easy as hell (4, Interesting)

Ashriel (1457949) | more than 5 years ago | (#27276841)

Media is biased in so many ways, not strictly on "liberal" (a term I use loosely) or "conservative" (another meaningless label). For instance, when is the last time you've seen a reporter say:

"Listen you dumb shits, stop buying things you can't afford, get out of debt. No, you don't need that new flatscreen HDTV. Shop less, consume less, and save more."

Of course you never hear that, even with the profanity edited out. Because sponsors would have a fit and the network would lose revenue. There's no way the producers would allow that. Just like you'll never hear:

"We're headed for another Great Depression. Could be worse than the last one."

For the same reasons.

Well, ok, there's at least one guy [youtube.com] saying these things on the air, but nobody likes him much; they tend to cut him short.

You'll also never hear anything that's anti-government in a bi-partisan way: about how 85% (or more) of the legislation that gets passed these days is inherently unconstitutional; about the insane 4th amendment violations [aclu.org] across the nation; about how the "War on Drugs" is causing more problems than it (supposedly) solves; about what we did to make terrorists hate us in the first place.

And you'll certainly never hear anything about crazy IP laws going into effect or the RIAA cases (unless they win in court), because the media isn't about to serve up anti-media stories.

All commercial media has a pro-establishment, status quo bias, because that's who's in charge. The majority of our politicians, Republican or Democrat (I prefer the term "Republocrat"), are pretty much the same - they're all right-wing fascists when you take into account the full political spectrum that's available. Any "liberal" or "conservative" bias you may attach to it is meaningless compared to the bias that actually exists.

Re:Easy as hell (1)

HiThere (15173) | more than 5 years ago | (#27280541)

You left out the primary media bias. The primary bias is: Is this entertaining enough?

That overrules truth, honesty, and even occasionally the preference of sponsors.

P.S.: About those things you say I'll never encounter: I've encountered most of them at least once. They're just very infrequent. Outright censorship is only applied to unimportant things, like a "wardrobe malfunction". For important things they don't use censorship, but rather shaping. They reduce the frequency and move them to unimportant areas. (E.g.: "Sorry, we can't report about the president violating the constitution, it's time for an ad for the upcoming pennant race. We'll show that one after 'Bedtime with Bonzo'.")

Re:All the uproar? (2, Insightful)

deets101 (1290744) | more than 5 years ago | (#27280215)

what the fuck is the liberal media and where can I find it?

MSNBC or CBS News is the best place to start.
Want an example, last night on the Rachael Maddow show, what were they going over... AIG, TOTUS (Teleprompter of the United States) making fun of mentally challenged kids, Tim "TurboTax" Geithner lying about "what he knew and when he knew it", Chris Dodd lying about adding the provision that let AIG give the bonuses.... NO, how deregulation from 8-10 years ago created this mess (read in "8 years of failed Bush policies")*. It is as if nothing else even happened.
*Actually happened before Bush was elected, but they weren't going to let the facts get in the way of this one.

I seem to also remember the Wasington Post coming out and saying that the media during the campiagn was far more favorable to Obama. Here is one example http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081101/COLUMNIST14/811010373/-1/COLUMNIST [toledoblade.com]

Re:All the uproar? (1)

pandaman9000 (520981) | more than 5 years ago | (#27283181)

You were reading it right before you posted? Under that chair over there. Elvis is everywhere, and so is the liberal media!

Re:All the uproar? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27276135)

What would you call the commotion surrounding the bailouts, if not an "uproar"? Or does Bush take credit for those unless they seem to work?

In other words, politics as usual.

Re:All the uproar? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27276225)

I haven't heard much "uproar" over anything the Obama administration has done either and I'm not even a liberal bitch.

Re:All the uproar? (1)

blind biker (1066130) | more than 5 years ago | (#27276895)

It's probably about the Obama apointee Timothy Geithner, secretary of US treasury, who "forced" (if you will believe Dodd, another Obama appointee) to amend the law forbidding bailed-out companies to distribute bonuses to top executives. Now, nobody is accusing Obama of anything, directly - eccept Obama himself, when he says "The buck stops with me".

But yeah, Geithner is part of the Obama administration. Now go ahead and shout "la la la I can't hear you". Fact is, this shit did happen, and people are livid.

More details from Associated Press [google.com]

Re:All the uproar? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27277099)

I admit, however, I don't listen to Rush Limbaugh, so my experiences might be somewhat biased towards reality.

If you don't listen to him, then you only know what others want you to think and feel about him... Mainly "feel".

Mmm abbreviations... (1)

Vertana (1094987) | more than 5 years ago | (#27275105)

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?

Same old same (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27275107)

New skin color, same shitting on the American people.

Make sure.. (2, Funny)

Alyred (667815) | more than 5 years ago | (#27275159)

...to define all those TLAs and FLAs PDQ, or anyone reading this article summary are SOL. LOL.

Re:Make sure.. (1)

drew (2081) | more than 5 years ago | (#27280849)

I believe the abbreviation ETLA is preferred over FLA.

Fixed (0)

istartedi (132515) | more than 5 years ago | (#27275181)

KEI [keionline.org] is very impressed with the USTR [ustr.gov] 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."

Re:Fixed (1)

Alyred (667815) | more than 5 years ago | (#27275261)

For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares?"

"For all intents and purposes..."

Re:Fixed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27275649)

His use of "intensive purposes" and misuse of "begs the question" are deliberate. He's trying to be witty.

The ABBR tag! (4, Insightful)

coryking (104614) | more than 5 years ago | (#27275285)

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!

Re:The ABBR tag! (1)

fm6 (162816) | more than 5 years ago | (#27275501)

Testing, <abbr>testing</abbr>. Nope doesn't work. Slash strips them out.

I know that WTF stand for Whisky Tango Foxtrot, but I don't know what it means.

Whisky Tango Foxtrot (1)

coryking (104614) | more than 5 years ago | (#27275619)

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.

Re:Whisky Tango Foxtrot (1)

fm6 (162816) | more than 5 years ago | (#27275993)

Of course I know what "Whisky Tango Foxtrot" means. Somebody even wrote a book about it [amazon.com] .

I'd flame you for not getting my joke, except I have to admit the joke was pretty lame.

Re:Whisky Tango Foxtrot (1)

coryking (104614) | more than 5 years ago | (#27276081)

Obviously you know what Wisky Tango Foxtrot means or I wouldn't have brought it up.

"Humor", by the way, is for unprincipled fools who need acronyms spelled out for them--acronyms like "Whisky Tango Foxtrot". Jokes, too, are for the uneducated, unenlightened hordes just outside the gates of Slashdot Central.

Where am I going with this? Obviously, *obviously*, anybody with a clue knows already. Obviously, Slashdot editors should never spell out abbreviations of any kind at any time. We here are so smart we already know every acronym in any industry at any point in history. Only an idiot would not know what RKDOD means or even the simple SDOKC* stands for and Slashdot and the elite posters here do not take kindly to idiots.

* The SDOKC crowd, by the way is dead wrong in their interpretations of DFLF. I always laugh at their foolish ways.

In other words, my point is it is fucking snobby as hell to not fucking spell out abbreviations and acronyms your audience probably does not know. The editors of Slashdot need to get off their high horse. Excuse my french.

Re:The ABBR tag! (1)

AlexBirch (1137019) | more than 5 years ago | (#27275713)

Thanks for clarifying that! I read:
"Keep Eating It (KEI) is very impressed with the United States Transvestite Representative (USTR) decision to undertake a review of USTR transparency efforts."

Re:The ABBR tag! (1)

sumdumass (711423) | more than 5 years ago | (#27277351)

Great, that's all we need, a transvestite dressed us in drag with clear plastic clothing while we are trying to eat diner.

How about if.. (0, Offtopic)

moxley (895517) | more than 5 years ago | (#27275767)

How about if Obama does a thorough review of all of his OWN policies, to see if they match up with all of the shit he promised he'd do when he was campaigning and the constitution...

Re:How about if.. (1)

wealthychef (584778) | more than 5 years ago | (#27276067)

How about if Obama does a thorough review of all of his OWN policies, to see if they match up with all of the shit he promised he'd do when he was campaigning and the constitution...

.
That's already being done. [factcheck.org]

Re:How about if.. (1)

Conanymous Award (597667) | more than 5 years ago | (#27277473)

Re:How about if.. (1)

pandaman9000 (520981) | more than 5 years ago | (#27283127)

No weight is applied to which promises are truly relevant. Coupled with an overall liberal slant.... again do your own fact check.

Re:How about if.. (1)

pandaman9000 (520981) | more than 5 years ago | (#27283097)

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.

OWN (2, Funny)

coryking (104614) | more than 5 years ago | (#27276099)

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?)

How about this acronym? WTF (0)

theshowmecanuck (703852) | more than 5 years ago | (#27276071)

KEI USTR FOIA ACTA... WTF

Only stopped at this article long enough to post this... can't be bothered with indecipherable shite.

WTF USTR (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27276347)

Seriously. Why is it that I am supposed to know what USTR stands for ?

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?