A deaf ear?
Published Thu, Mar 19 2009 6:47 AM
Months ago (just after the inauguration) I visited the White House web site and used their comment form to voice my objections to several of the agenda items and other statements that were published there. Today I have finally received a response.
Dear Perri Nelson:
Thank you for your recent note, and for sharing your thoughts with me. Your kind words echo the messages of millions of Americans who have welcomed me and my family to the White House with an outpouring of goodwill.
On January 20th, Americans spoke with one voice, choosing hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord. Our Nation faces serious challenges, but we will overcome them if our imagination is joined to common purpose.
Now is our time to work together, reaffirm our enduring spirit, and choose our better history. With your help, we will renew our Nation's promise to carry forth the great gift of freedom to future generations, as our forebears have delivered it to us.
Sincerely,
Barack Obama
To be a part of our agenda for change, join us at www.WhiteHouse.gov
There are a few problems I have with this response. First of all, it’s obviously a “form-letter” type of response. For an administration that’s supposed to be so “technically savvy” that they managed to find a way for the President to keep his Blackberry, you’d think that they could deliver a canned response like this in a more timely fashion.
Second, you’d hope that somehow they’d get their facts straight in their reply. My words weren’t exactly kind. They were respectful, but not kind. Americans didn’t vote on January 20th, it was back in November, and we certainly did not speak with one voice. While over fifty million Americans did vote for Barack Obama, very nearly fifty million Americans voted against Barack Obama.
Third, the agenda that the President is implementing and that our largely liberal Congress is carrying forth is not an agenda of freedom. We are spending trillions of dollars on a socialist takeover of our nations major private enterprises. Banking firms have been strong-armed into giving up ownership shares in exchange for unwanted taxpayer dollars. Insurance companies have been effectively taken over.
Congress tries to avoid taking responsibility for the gaffes and blunders they made while ramming through their unconstitutional bailouts of businesses, deflecting attention away from the hundreds of billions of dollars they are throwing away by acting outraged and vindictive over bonuses that are a thousand times, or in some cases a million times smaller.
Our federal deficit has swelled to outrageous proportions, more than doubling in a single year, and doubling again since then. Our President pledges to cut the deficit in half, but it will still be twice what it was a year and a half ago after that. But that won’t be for several years yet.
We’re told that the stimulus package will have “done its job” within a year. If that’s the case you’d think that since the bulk of it isn’t set to be spent until after three years have passed we could eliminate the bulk of it. It’s not going to happen, because such cuts in government programs would be considered “draconian”1 even if the programs haven’t yet been implemented.
Saddling future generations with so much debt that they won’t be able to ever pay it off isn’t the way to carry forth the great gift of freedom to them. No, it’s a sure way to enslave them to a government grown beyond sense.
The White House’s letter was correct in at least one respect. Millions of people did vote for hope and change in November. Sadly it was a false hope, and the only change we’ve seen is for the worse. The plain fact is, they’re not listening to what we have to say. A canned response that reads more like a campaign statement than anything else isn’t worth the recycled electrons it took to issue it. At least they didn’t kill a tree to send it to me.
1What's wrong with dragon's anyway?
Trackback URI for this post: http://perrinelson.com/track.aspx?postid=1326
Permalink URI for this post: http://perrinelson.com/2009/3/19/1326.aspx
Subscribe to this entry's
comment feed. (Atom)
David responded with:
 | "What's wrong with dragon's anyway?"
*heh* [D]ragons? Funny man.
But back on topic... I seem to recall Crittendon (or other?) had a piece up recently about the O's White House ("Mocha Latte-with-a-twist" House?) shutting down avenues of dialog: comments turned off on the White House "blog" for example. This cluelessness about dialog--Hey, O! Dialogue is two way, ya know!--is typical of close-minded ideologues, though. Recently, Lord Christopher Monckton made note of the fact that he and three climate scientists accepted an invitation to debate the merits of the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis in Madrid against Al Gore, Pachauri, the head of the U.N.’s climate science working group, Sir Nicholas Stern, the author of the U.K. Socialist Government’s report on the economics of climate change and the Environment Minister of Spain (who were also invited to the debate). Lord Mockton and his fellows were not joined at the debate by the others, because they refused to participate unless only they were allowed to speak.
Just so the complete non-response to your message to O.
I recall in 2003 sending an email to John Howard's office commenting, as an American, on Australian circumstances. I received a snail mail reply specifically referencing several comments I had made, over Howard's signature (probably a facsimile, but still... ). The letter made it clear that my email had actually been read, and I'm not even an Australian citizen. Could O's "Mocha Latte-with-a-twist" House approach the competence of John Howard's Australian administration? Actually, I doubt it, since that would require actually noting the contents of communications made TO it by citizens, and the O and his minions are above that sort of thing--actual contact with the peasants. |
Perri Nelson responded with: Dragons vs. Draco (The Lawgiver)
 | David, Thanks for that link. I wasn't aware that that was the source of the term “draconian.” I had always assumed that it referred to the attitude of dragons since draco is Latin for dragon. Once again you have presented me with yet another opportunity to learn something new. But yes, I was attempting to inject a small amount of humor into things with that footnote. Now I'm beginning to wonder. Since Draco is a proper name, shouldn't the term derived from it be “Draconian” rather than “draconian”? Again, thanks for the opportunity to expand my mind without the use of recreational pharmaceuticals. |
Stanford Matthews responded with:
 | Oh you are a lucky man Perri. I too tested the Obama claim of open government and received no response to date. In light of your White House reply perhaps I'm the lucky one.
I'm sure it comes as no real surprise for what happened. Expecting open government to be more ObamaBS I only attempted to communicate to prove to myself this was pure theatre. It was.
I get canned responses to most of my emails to Congressional offices as well. But I truly believe the reason for 'canned' responses or unresponsive government is to avoid the nasty prospect of putting words to 'paper' or having any other political risk associated with open communication to constituents. The only upside I see is the likelihood that comments, inquiries or other items directed toward government entities are in some way measured by the recipients and perhaps that has some small influence on how they address issues. Certainly when a ground swell such as the 'backlash' over bailouts that is brewing politicians eventually have to alter their plans in response as at least a matter of political survival.
Granted that still may produce more stupid ideas and policies but it does something nonetheless. So I always encourage everyone to keep it up as not doing so may be more problematic. |
David responded with:
| Well, Perri, you know the Latin and probably that it is used to refer to a class of lizards as well. I just thought you were being droll.
I, too, have "holes and gaps, absences and losses, vacancies and vacuities" in my historical tapestry. I've just probably spent more time in ancient middle-eastern/Mediterranean history than some. And even there, my knowledge is limited, fragmentary, and not at all what I think of as really well-informed.
The point of your post that the cluelessness of The O!'s administration when it comes to transparency, dialogue and openness is accented daily by the O! Team. You catch the one about the press being banned from a press award ceremony?
Truly this administration is stacking up to blow away the stupidity of the Carter administration with stupidity that is at least an order of magnitude greater. |
Glenn M Cassel AMH1(AW) USN RET responded with:
 | Sort of like the one's I got from Baucus when I still lived in Montana. At least with Roberts, Brownback and Tiahrt, I get real answers. They may not be the answers I would like, but they do answer.
Respect does have to be given to the Old Retired Petty Officer. |
ablur responded with:
 | I get similar letters from my representatives. They literally include statements in direct opposition to what I am asking as if I support their crazy notion. They don't read letters from their constituents and don't seem to care what we think.
I know all they get is a list of yeas and nays by their staff but some effort needs to be made to actually represent the people that put them in office.
The ruling elite always know better, so who am I to challange their position on anything. |
Comments to this entry are closed.