Obama administration application "invasive"

#1
SavageOrangeJug

SavageOrangeJug

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2007
Messages
3,569
Likes
6
#1
WASHINGTON — Want a top job in the Obama administration? Only pack rats need apply, preferably those not packing controversy.

A seven-page questionnaire being sent by the office of President-elect Barack Obama to those seeking cabinet and other high-ranking posts may be the most extensive — some say invasive — application ever.

The questionnaire includes 63 requests for personal and professional records, some covering applicants’ spouses and grown children as well, that are forcing job-seekers to rummage from basements to attics, in shoe boxes, diaries and computer archives to document both their achievements and missteps.

Only the smallest details are excluded; traffic tickets carrying fines of less than $50 need not be reported, the application says. Applicants are asked whether they or anyone in their family owns a gun. They must include any e-mail that might embarrass the president-elect, along with any blog posts and links to their Facebook pages.
Click to expand...
The question in bold really jumped out at me.

The rest of the article: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/13/us/politics/13apply.html?no_interstitial
 
#2
#2
It would be great if there were no responses and Brack had to go out on the street to get a cabinet.
 
#4
#4
OK, if you have a Facebook page, that should be an instant disqualification for any position.
 
#6
#6
“Every transition is cumulative,” said Michael Berman, a lawyer and lobbyist who worked in the transitions of both Mr. Clinton and President Jimmy Carter. After reviewing the Obama application, Mr. Berman added, “I am very happy I am not seeking a job in the federal government.”
Click to expand...
:question:

I can't say as I blame him.
 
#8
#8
The portion in bold about guns bothers me. Often questions like this are asked so the administration does not look like hypocrites when they take a position on an issue. Does anyone think this may be a sign of things to come? Like maybe trying to crack down on gun ownership?
 
#9
#9
So there is concern that an applicant to a presidential administration position is providing a complete and thorough application? An application to work at McDonalds is three pages long.

I guess taking a different approach and finding the best people is a different course than previous administrations just appointing their buddies.

Personally, it's good to see this. Weeds out the rift raft and such.
 
#10
#10
UT IE 95 said:
So there is concern that an applicant to a presidential administration position is providing a complete and thorough application? An application to work at McDonalds is three pages long.

I guess taking a different approach and finding the best people is a different course than previous administrations just appointing their buddies.

Personally, it's good to see this. Weeds out the rift raft and such.
Click to expand...

Why would it be important that Obama know if potentials exercised their constitutional right to own firearms though?
 
#11
#11
KB5252 said:
Why would it be important that Obama know if potentials exercised their constitutional right to own firearms though?
Click to expand...

because Obama doesn't want people who actually know what's in the Constitution as part of his administration.
 
#12
#12
KB5252 said:
Why would it be important that Obama know if potentials exercised their constitutional right to own firearms though?
Click to expand...

After reading the form, it is only asking to make sure the gun(s) is legally owned and registered. And follows up to make sure it hasn't been used to cause body or property damage.

I see no problem with those two very legitimate questions about a gun. Reading anything more than that into it is just looking for something to complain about.
 
#13
#13
UT IE 95 said:
After reading the form, it is only asking to make sure the gun(s) is legally owned and registered. And follows up to make sure it hasn't been used to cause body or property damage.

I see no problem with those two very legitimate questions about a gun. Reading anything more than that into it is just looking for something to complain about.
Click to expand...

I did not, if that is all that was asked I have no problem.
 
#16
#16
truefan said:
You don't actually believe this, do you???? If so, then I can say you are 100% wrong.
Click to expand...

Reading through political public forums, it's almost scary that there are really people that believe that and other ridiculous things about Obama to be true.

I laugh off a lot of it as comic relief, but there are some hardcore people out there that are drop dead serious about things like Obama not being an American citizen, him being a Muslim, and him being a sign of the apocalypse.
 
#17
#17
truefan said:
You don't actually believe this, do you???? If so, then I can say you are 100% wrong.
Click to expand...

do I really need to direct you to the definitions of "hyperbole" and "sarcasm"?

I don't know why the incoming administration is bothering with such a detailed anal exam. It's not like the press, other than FNC, is going to bother delving into the backgrounds of his appointees and unless he appoints someone like Richard Armitage or Don Rumsfeld, the democrat controlled senate is going to rubber stamp whoever is put before them.
 
#18
#18
UT IE 95 said:
Reading through political public forums, it's almost scary that there are really people that believe that and other ridiculous things about Obama to be true.

I laugh off a lot of it as comic relief, but there are some hardcore people out there that are drop dead serious about things like Obama not being an American citizen, him being a Muslim, and him being a sign of the apocalypse.
Click to expand...

I've heard it all.

I agree with you on your earlier assessment of this inquiry. Obama is quickly becoming known as one of the more disciplined politicians ever. The manner in which his team is making this transition is proof he has done his homework and done it well.
 
#19
#19
This is called vetting. Its what you do as a national political figure who wants to make sure that the people you bring in aren't going to embarrass you by saying or doing something which is either a) contrary to what you have said you stand for, or b) something inherently embarrasing as your appointment or pick for a position of power and influence.

John McCain could learn a lesson vis-a-vis Sarah Palin.
 
#20
#20
UT IE 95 said:
It's question 59. After reading through the whole document, I may take some of the questions to screen future hires myself.
Click to expand...

13. If you have ever sent an electronic communication...that could...be a possible source of embarrassment to you, your family, or the President-Elect if it were made public, please describe.

14. Diaries: If you keep or have ever kept a diary that contains anything that could...be a possible source of embarrassment to you, your family, or the President-Elect if it were made public, please describe.
Click to expand...
These two questions do not raise eyebrows, IE? This is BHO specifically asking applicants to hand over information which he can easily use to blackmail or to hold power over future members of his administration should they be a thorn in his side.

I also find all the questions somewhat ironic considering the lack of scrutiny that BHO's questionable relationships and financial dealings received from the media.
 
#21
#21
therealUT said:
These two questions do not raise eyebrows, IE? This is BHO specifically asking applicants to hand over information which he can easily use to blackmail or to hold power over future members of his administration should they be a thorn in his side.

I also find all the questions somewhat ironic considering the lack of scrutiny that BHO's questionable relationships and financial dealings received from the media.
Click to expand...

ehh. Not really eyebrow raising for me. I guess I didn't read that much into it. It's giving applicants the opportunity to explain all the bones in their closet before the door gets opened - is how I read it.
 
#22
#22
lawgator1 said:
This is called vetting. Its what you do as a national political figure who wants to make sure that the people you bring in aren't going to embarrass you by saying or doing something which is either a) contrary to what you have said you stand for, or b) something inherently embarrasing as your appointment or pick for a position of power and influence.

John McCain could learn a lesson vis-a-vis Sarah Palin.
Click to expand...

You cannot be serious. Obama picked Biden the Human Gaffe Machine as his running mate.

What's the over/under on how long before Biden has Obama on TV trying to explain one of his hoof in mouth comments?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top