NationStates Jolt Archive

http://change.gov/page/content/openforquestions

That's Obama's site, and you get to ask questions.

Do a search for "Blago".

Most of the questions about Blagojevich, or related to him, have been flagged as inappropriate.

Such as:

"In light of the recent corruption scandals (Blagojevich, Rangel, Jefferson, Stevens, etc) that have dominated the political scene,is there any ethics legislation being crafted to actually curb corruption and prevent another wave of nixonian cynicism?"

or

"Is Obama aware of any communications in the last six weeks between Rod Blagojevich or anyone representing Rod Blagojevich and any of Obama's top aides?"

or

"Given the current corruption charges involving Blagojevich, will "serious" campaign finance reform that takes money completely out of politics through publicly funded elections be a priority in the first term?"

Those questions don't seem inappropriate. Looks like the idea of openness has just gone out the window.

http://change.gov/page/content/openforquestions

That's Obama's site, and you get to ask questions.

Do a search for "Blago".

Most of the questions about Blagojevich, or related to him, have been flagged as inappropriate.

Such as:

"In light of the recent corruption scandals (Blagojevich, Rangel, Jefferson, Stevens, etc) that have dominated the political scene,is there any ethics legislation being crafted to actually curb corruption and prevent another wave of nixonian cynicism?"

or

"Is Obama aware of any communications in the last six weeks between Rod Blagojevich or anyone representing Rod Blagojevich and any of Obama's top aides?"

or

"Given the current corruption charges involving Blagojevich, will "serious" campaign finance reform that takes money completely out of politics through publicly funded elections be a priority in the first term?"

Those questions don't seem inappropriate. Looks like the idea of openness has just gone out the window.

Well he is a politician;), I can't say I'm surprised.

This must have been an error by one of his aides. Uncle Barack, our infallible and just messiah, would never have agreed to such censorship himself. He should purge his team of these corrupt elements, who are evidently focused on derailing the Obama project, and send them off to labour camps.

How dare they. Obama is GOD! such disrespectful questions! don't they know that Obama cannot do no wrong?

We found 0 results for “blago”
We found 0 results for “Blagojevich”


....maybe I'm doing it wrong....

Edit: Yup, doing it wrong. Got it now. *ahem*

We found 0 results for “blago”
We found 0 results for “Blagojevich”


....maybe I'm doing it wrong....

Edit: Yup, doing it wrong. Got it now. *ahem*

I was going to say...

I think he might be flagging any of them because of the trolls that are entering his site asking the same question, which happens to be:
"Is Barack Obama aware of any communications in the last six weeks between Rod Blagojevich or anyone representing Rod Blagojevich and any of Obama's top aides?"

So, perhaps he is just taking an assumption that questions about it right now are flooding in from internet trolls. You know how that goes.

I think he might be flagging any of them because of the trolls that are entering his site asking the same question, which happens to be:
"Is Barack Obama aware of any communications in the last six weeks between Rod Blagojevich or anyone representing Rod Blagojevich and any of Obama's top aides?"

So, perhaps he is just taking an assumption that questions about it right now are flooding in from internet trolls. You know how that goes.

The flagging is done by visitors to the site. You know, the ones who love him.

They don't want anyone to ask questions. A lot of the questions are quite good, and very fair.

This is not the openness that was promised.

Looks like anyone who is on the site can say if they like a question or not or consider it inappropriate. I just flagged one as inappropriate (mostly because it stupid) just to check. There are plenty of questions up there about his conversations with Blagojevich that people are tagging as relevant or not.

Looks like anyone who is on the site can say if they like a question or not or consider it inappropriate. I just flagged one as inappropriate (mostly because it stupid) just to check. There are plenty of questions up there about his conversations with Blagojevich that people are tagging as relevant or not.

That's hardly openness.

The flagging is done by visitors to the site. You know, the ones who love him.


Well it's not really Obama's fault then.

Looks like anyone who is on the site can say if they like a question or not or consider it inappropriate. I just flagged one as inappropriate (mostly because it stupid) just to check. There are plenty of questions up there about his conversations with Blagojevich that people are tagging as relevant or not.

So, if its the case that people are able to flag it themselves, who says this isn't some sort of conservative scheme to make him look bad? You know, they ask a question and then flag it themselves? I wouldn't put it past arm chair pundits.

The flagging is done by visitors to the site. You know, the ones who love him.

They don't want anyone to ask questions. A lot of the questions are quite good, and very fair.

This is not the openness that was promised.

What promises? A part of Obama's site was put up where people could ask questions and seemingly those who looked at the site would rank the questions and flag them. What the fuck are you talking about?

The Dark Lord is the Sgt. Schultz of American politics: whenever anyone asks him anything about the shady, corrupt, racist, criminal and/or anti-American activities of anyone even remotely connected to him, his answer is, "I know NNNOTHHH-THING!!!"

Now if only he were as worthy to be President as John Banner was :p

What promises? A part of Obama's site was put up where people could ask questions and seemingly those who looked at the site would rank the questions and flag them. What the fuck are you talking about?

Obama promised that he would personally exemplify more openness and transparency, and the ability to question his government.

Starting with the way he's getting ready before the inauguration.

Oh, so you missed all the promises...

So, if its the case that people are able to flag it themselves, who says this isn't some sort of conservative scheme to make him look bad? You know, they ask a question and then flag it themselves? I wouldn't put it past arm chair pundits.

I guess I usually recognize that there is a tenuous, at best, connection between people who comment on websites and the owner(s) of that website content, and thus take any of these kinds of things with a grain of salt anyway. It's a website, for cryin' out loud, with a bunch of numbskulls posting on it.

In real life, I would expect a measured response from the transition team, even for some something as clearly egregious as this.

Obama promised that he would personally exemplify more openness and transparency, and the ability to question his government.

Starting with the way he's getting ready before the inauguration.

Oh, so you missed all the promises...

What has this to do with this particular part of his site? Its supposed to be regulated by the people who view the site. Also, please source where he made these promises so the context of these promises can be viewed.

The flagging is done by visitors to the site. You know, the ones who love him.

Visiting the site means you love Obama?


....



Therefore you love Obama!

Oops no you don't. For all we know, you and your millions of internet alts are the ones doing the flagging just so you can make yet another trolling argument which you'll stoutly refuse to ignore ever having lost.

What has this to do with this particular part of his site? Its supposed to be regulated by the people who view the site. Also, please source where he made these promises so the context of these promises can be viewed.

You missed every one of his speeches, I see. Will this be your answer whenever he fails to deliver in the future on any promise?

"What? What promise? I never heard him promise anything during the election!"

You missed every one of his speeches, I see.

"My fellow Americans, I will run a website in a fashion that Hotwife will approve of."

Yeah I don't think I heard that in any of his speeches.

"My fellow Americans, I will run a website in a fashion that Hotwife will approve of."

Yeah I don't think I heard that in any of his speeches.

He promised openness and transparency.

His website seems to be lacking that. It's designed and run in a way that encourages cover up.

You missed every one of his speeches, I see. Will this be your answer whenever he fails to deliver in the future on any promise?

I forgot to when he said he'd answer every single question put to him, where in an interview he would put all his cards out on the table, where he said that on this site he wouldn't allow people to flag questions they thought were innapropiate

I see that you are trolling, twisting the meaning of Obama's promises, and taking the actions of numerous people with no personal or professional relation to Obama as proof of Obama's own policies.

Visiting the site means you love Obama?


....



Therefore you love Obama!

Oops no you don't. For all we know, you and your millions of internet alts are the ones doing the flagging just so you can make yet another trolling argument which you'll stoutly refuse to ignore ever having lost.

Exactly.

I forgot to when he said he'd answer every single question put to him, where in an interview he would put all his cards out on the table, where he said that on this site he wouldn't allow people to flag questions they thought were innapropiate

I see that you are trolling, twisting the meaning of Obama's promises, and taking the actions of numerous people with no personal or professional relation to Obama as proof of Obama's own policies.

If you're not answering pertinent questions (and there are quite a few there), and you aren't putting all of your cards on the table, you're not being open and transparent.

No twisting necessary. I see a lot of twisting on your part, as though he never promised a single thing.

The flagging is done by visitors to the site. You know, the ones who love him.


At least you admit it. That's a bold first step.

Myself, I don't go in for that kind of hero-worship, and I'm not really jealous of you, but I'm glad you've made your peace.

He promised openness and transparency.

His website seems to be lacking that. It's designed and run in a way that encourages cover up.

One would think that a bottom-up questions format(so that questions were ranked on the number of people interested in said issue) and self regulation by the viewers would aid transparency.

He promised openness and transparency.

His website seems to be lacking that. It's designed and run in a way that encourages cover up.

There is a HUGE difference between transparency in the actions that he is doing in his transition into government, and some random people on the 'net flagging everything they see on a website. His team is not doing the flagging, its people off of the net. Anyone can do it.


Remember: website being attacked by random net-tards =/= breaking promises about keeping government transparent.

Obama promised that he would personally exemplify more openness and transparency, and the ability to question his government.

Starting with the way he's getting ready before the inauguration.

Oh, so you missed all the promises...

But, Obama and Obama's camp aren't the ones flagging these questions, are they? Isn't that a public domain thing?

What you are basically doing - is arguing against people who visit the site, the majority, not the politician. Why do you hate democracy?

If you're not answering pertinent questions (and there are quite a few there), and you aren't putting all of your cards on the table, you're not being open and transparent.


Looking at the wording of some of the questions - I wouldn't have been happy with them, anyway - since they are leading. There's actually some good cause for arguing that ALL questions about an ongoing investigation, are inappropriate.

But it isn't even the site policing itself, is it? Isn't the same sort of mechanism being employed here, as Youtube's 'spam-flagging' activity?

But, Obama and Obama's camp aren't the ones flagging these questions, are they? Isn't that a public domain thing?

What you are basically doing - is arguing against people who visit the site, the majority, not the politician. Why do you hate democracy?

If the site was designed correctly, a moderator would approve a flag.

Obviously, this isn't the case.

It's as fucked up as the campaign website blogs were, where every left wing nutjob in the universe (including raving anti-Jewish Arab Democrats) were allowed to post blogs.

Only when conservative websites pointed out the kinds of people giving him support, did anyone try to edit those off of the campaign website.

Above all, he should answer the questions.

He isn't.

If you're not answering pertinent questions (and there are quite a few there), and you aren't putting all of your cards on the table, you're not being open and transparent.

Please fin one speech where he made these promises that he would do this. If ALL of his speeches had them you should be able to find one of them. Do so or you are a incompetent troll.

No twisting necessary. I see a lot of twisting on your part, as though he never promised a single thing.

You are twisting Obam's words. I never said that he didn't make any promises. WHat I doubt that his promises were what you think they were. Source or shut the fuck up.

He promised openness and transparency.

His website seems to be lacking that.

Did he promise openness and transparency in that website? No. But of course you're deliberately misconstruing it to be a universal and absolute statement.*

Next you'll be saying that because he hasn't posted full body nude pictures of himself, he's hiding something and thus reneging on a campaign promise.

God. Get a real fucking argument already.


It's designed and run in a way that encourages cover up.

OHNOES A COVER UP! Perhaps the CIA is involved too! I bet they did 9/11!

This must have been an error by one of his aides. Uncle Barack, our infallible and just messiah, would never have agreed to such censorship himself. He should purge his team of these corrupt elements, who are evidently focused on derailing the Obama project, and send them off to labour camps.

OHNOES LABOR CAMPS!

Christ.


*(In much the same way people are deliberately misconstruing "change" to mean "pick people I've never heard of for cabinet positions").

Did he promise openness and transparency in that website? No. But of course you're deliberately misconstruing it to be a universal and absolute statement.*

Next you'll be saying that because he hasn't posted full body nude pictures of himself, he's hiding something and thus reneging on a campaign promise.

God. Get a real fucking argument already.


OHNOES A COVER UP! Perhaps the CIA is involved too! I bet they did 9/11!

OHNOES LABOR CAMPS!

Christ.


*(In much the same way people are deliberately misconstruing "change" to mean "pick people I've never heard of for cabinet positions").

I'm talking about openness in how he's dealing with pertinent questions.

His website is a sham.

Now you're sticking in ridiculous stuff I've never said, so you're only making yourself look like an idiot.

It's not misconstruing his promise to be open and transparent.

I'm not even asking for an absolute - I'm asking for something other than a meaningless sham and no answers.

How about having him pony up Rahm Emanuel, and let the press have 90 minutes of free questions, and have Obama order him to answer them, no matter what they are.

I'm sure all the questions would be about Blago, and the relationship the three shared over the last 10 years. Which would be pertinent, and worthy to be asked and answered.

Doesn't look open and transparent to me yet, and none of what I said looks like the tripe you put in your post.

So perhaps you need a real argument.

OHNOES LABOR CAMPS!
Well, that's one way to end unemployment! :p:D

I'm talking about openness in how he's dealing with pertinent questions.

No, you're leaping to conclusions based on completely false conclusions based, again, on false premises.

You assumed that "openness" was a universal, absolutist statement applying to mean, essentially, no regulation of any kind, anywhere - even a website. It doesn't.

You then assumed that the flagging was done by "visitors to the site... you know, the ones who love him." As if visiting the website means you're an Obama supporter! (Again, this would mean that you "love him" too by your own fucked-up logic... but try to ignore this again, maybe it'll go away.)

Then you concluded of course that

His website is a sham.

Which of course is supposed to mean

This is not the openness that was promised.

Now you're sticking in ridiculous stuff I've never said, so you're only making yourself look like an idiot.

I apologize for your complete inability to think rationally and for your disturbing need for attention.

Hmm... a leap at the slightest pretense- often disproven or irrelevant to serious matters- that supposedly proves Obama is a fraud. My, aren't we getting those a lot lately.

Well we've got New Mitanni, Miami Shores, Dorksonia, Potato Boy, and now Kimchi can all get together to start the Obama Iz Teh Ebil Club. If they have one more member, then they can combine their power rings to summon Captain Pundit.

Please fin one speech where he made these promises that he would do this. If ALL of his speeches had them you should be able to find one of them. Do so or you are a incompetent troll.

You are twisting Obam's words. I never said that he didn't make any promises. WHat I doubt that his promises were what you think they were. Source or shut the fuck up.

There's no need for such language or to flamebait. Consider yourself WARNED.

In the mean time, you may want to review the rules over here: The One-Stop Rules Shop (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=416023).

Hmm... a leap at the slightest pretense- often disproven or irrelevant to serious matters- that supposedly proves Obama is a fraud. My, aren't we getting those a lot lately.

Well we've got New Mitanni, Miami Shores, Dorksonia, Potato Boy, and now Kimchi can all get together to start the Obama Iz Teh Ebil Club. If they have one more member, then they can combine their power rings to summon Captain Pundit.

Do not fuel the flames.

And to everyone else, let's just play nice. We don't want to have a thread locked because we couldn't play nice, do we?

The flagging is done by visitors to the site.

This is not the openness that was promised.

Combining these two statements of yours (made within a single post to boot), I can only draw the conclusion that Obama promised that people who'll go onto his website will show an "openness" as regards their "flag as inappropriate" behavior.

...

I have not followed all and any speeches Obama gave, but I'm fairly certain he's only ever talked about how he himself was going to behave, and what he himself would encourage, and never promised anything re: how people visiting his website would behave.

The One-Stop Rules Shop (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=416023).


I motion that this link be included prominently in every moderating post.

Oh, and when did you become MODified? Congrats! Damnit, now I need to learn to spell your handle, eh?

This thread is absolutely hilarious. Damn that Obama and his...um...not personally tracking down each and every random person who dislikes a question on his site and forcing them to retract their criticism? Or something? Anyway, the point is, HE'S DESTROYING AMERICA!

Anyway, the point is, HE'S DESTROYING AMERICA!

At least he's open about it. *nod*

This thread is absolutely hilarious. Damn that Obama and his...um...not personally tracking down each and every random person who dislikes a question on his site and forcing them to retract their criticism? Or something? Anyway, the point is, HE'S DESTROYING AMERICA!

At least he's open about it. *nod*

It's not like Obama went out of his way to conceal the fact that he's a Closet Muslim With A Whitey-Hating Christian Pastor Who's Out To Turn America Into A Socialist Caliphate.

Those questions don't seem inappropriate. Looks like the idea of openness has just gone out the window.

I notice that the questions that have been flagged/removed are still visible to the public. So the website is open about which questions that would be.

And you seem to expect Obama to have an active role in everything, including running his website... Hmm... So you really are expecting him to be the Messiah?

Also, note that some questions that have not been removed are for example:

"Are you less corrupt than, more corrupt than, or equally corrupt as Governor Blagojevich?"

"Did you BUY your senate seat the same way the governor was going to sell it this time??"

"When President Biden pardons you as a result of Blagoyogate, will you run for Illinois Governor? You seem qualified."

"Will your first act as President be to pardon Governor Blagojevich and will you pardon Mr Rezko and Jesse Jackson Jr while you're at it?"

Oh, and when did you become MODified? Congrats!

I was wondering the same.

Congratulations Kryozerkia! :wink:

I was wondering the same.

Congratulations Kryozerkia! :wink:

In answer to the two questions wondering why... in mere mortal time, it was a few days ago. Now, please refrain from hijacking the thread. :p

If the site was designed correctly, a moderator would approve a flag.


I disagree. Flagged by users should mean flagged by users.

Anything else is trying to impose a restriction.


Obviously, this isn't the case.

It's as fucked up as the campaign website blogs were, where every left wing nutjob in the universe (including raving anti-Jewish Arab Democrats) were allowed to post blogs.


No, it's not even vaguely comparable. In one case, you seem to be arguing that leftwing commentators should be deprived of freedom of speech, and in the other case, you seem to be arguing that a deus ex machina should be regulating opinions regarding spam-worthyness.

The only similarity between the two is that you seek to control free expression in both cases.


Only when conservative websites pointed out the kinds of people giving him support, did anyone try to edit those off of the campaign website.

Above all, he should answer the questions.

He isn't.

I disagree. He shouldn't have to answer leading questions. As I mentioned earlier, I've looked at some of the questions and - even if they weren't flagged as inappropriate, they wouldn't be reasonable questions to have to answer.

A lot of it is the political equivalent of 'did you stop beating your wife, yet'.

If the site was designed correctly, a moderator would approve a flag.
No, the site is designed to be OPEN and TRANSPARENT, so you see exactly the flags that people have decided to put there, not just what a "moderator" approves, that would be CENSORSHIP!

Oh God, I think Hotwife has a half-decent point... *half-vomits*

However, open flagging =/= broken promise. He promised a more transparent government. Just because a few decent questions have been blocked does not mean he's this lying, egomaniacal windvane that neocons have been painting him as.

I personally do not see that Obama has any liability for his liberal crazy followers who flag questions they don't like.

I actually like Obama as a person and (potentially) a fellow Christian, with exception to his policies on gun control and abortion.

However the fact that he has people who follow him who will censor anything they find difficult to answer and in the same breath accuse their opponents of opressing them is a big reason I voted against him in the general election.
You can tell a lot more about a candidate by the people who support him the most rabidly than by actions of the candidate himself even. Mainly because politicans have to act nicer then the people who put them into power.

Edit: Tech-gnosis, since when is posting a thread you don't agree with "trolling?"

There's no need for such language or to flamebait. Consider yourself WARNED.

In the mean time, you may want to review the rules over here: The One-Stop Rules Shop (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=416023).



Do not fuel the flames.

And to everyone else, let's just play nice. We don't want to have a thread locked because we couldn't play nice, do we?

Holy crap, you's a mod now?

The flagging is done by visitors to the site. You know, the ones who love him.

They don't want anyone to ask questions. A lot of the questions are quite good, and very fair.

This is not the openness that was promised.

Yes, because he runs his own site, Im sure.

God, this is getting fucking pathetic. Some of you need a life. Seriously, take a deep breath, and devout some of your time to something other than trying to prove Obama is teh ebil.

Lets see what he does before we attack, shall we? The flunkies that run his site arent him.

This proves exactly what about Obama?

This proves exactly what about Obama?

Apperantly, the fact that some dousche who is on his site is flagging questions about Blago as inappropriate means that Obama isnt being transparent and open with the public.


Really, its a stupid thread thats just chicken little crying that the sky is falling...again.

Edit: Tech-gnosis, since when is posting a thread you don't agree with "trolling?"

Since one makes claims that are absurd and are designed to incite anger and negative comments.

This proves exactly what about Obama?


At most that he had specific policy of his website that was was not very good and that he has overzealous fans/followers.

Oh God, I think Hotwife has a half-decent point... *half-vomits*

However, open flagging =/= broken promise. He promised a more transparent government. Just because a few decent questions have been blocked does not mean he's this lying, egomaniacal windvane that neocons have been painting him as.
nope.

his "point" whatever it is, sucks.

there is nothing opaque about the website--you still get to see these flagged posts--and you cant expect a quick answer to any question, obama has work to do.

nope.

his "point" whatever it is, sucks.

there is nothing opaque about the website--you still get to see these flagged posts--and you cant expect a quick answer to any question, obama has work to do.

Wait, some of Obama's supporters, some random schmuck on his website, thinks that some of those questions are inappropriate?!?

OMG! WHERE IS THE OPENESS! THIS IS NOT THE CHANGE WE WERE PROMISED!

Wait, some of Obama's supporters, some random schmuck on his website, thinks that some of those questions are inappropriate?!?

OMG! WHERE IS THE OPENESS! THIS IS NOT THE CHANGE WE WERE PROMISED!
if only this were february we could impeach the bastard for it

It's as fucked up as the campaign website blogs were, where every left wing nutjob in the universe (including raving anti-Jewish Arab Democrats) were allowed to post blogs.

Hotwife, this is borderline. Watch your choice of words in the future.

if only this were february we could impeach the bastard for it

why wait till then?

People are already crediting any economic upturn to him when he's not in office yet...

If he's gonna be assigned the credit now, then he can also be assigned the blame (or whatever you wanna call it.) :p

why wait till then?

People are already crediting any economic upturn to him when he's not in office yet...

If he's gonna be assigned the credit now, then he can also be assigned the blame (or whatever you wanna call it.) :p
dont be so vindictive junii. he deserves a 2 week honeymoon just like anyone else.

Hey, everyone! Hotwife just invented a new game!

Let me play it, too!

You know the abortion clinic bombings? All Bush's fault! After all, he doesn't support abortion, and neither do the bombers!

Kyo is right, people! Let's not flame Hotwife. Let's just join the game! All you have to do is pick a target, any target at all, and blame them for people loosely associated to them being assholes!

Obama promised that he would personally exemplify more openness and transparency, and the ability to question his government.

Starting with the way he's getting ready before the inauguration.

I'm curious. When was the last time a president elect put up a website like this at all?

dont be so vindictive junii. he deserves a 2 week honeymoon just like anyone else.

Hey, I'm all for waiting till, at least, May before critisising him. but some here are pretty much crediting any positive to him now. ;)

besides, I have no negative feelings for any of the Presidents. I may not agree with President Bush's policies, but I don't hate the man. and I have realistic expectations for Pres Elect Obama. :)

I'm curious. When was the last time a president elect put up a website like this at all?

Whenever I see you posting, I picture a knight-type with a BIG-ASS sword cleaving an opponent.

Hey, I'm all for waiting till, at least, May before critisising him. but some here are pretty much crediting any positive to him now. ;)


There almost certainly is an effect on the economy, though. Obama has been riding on a wave of goodwill, and nothing opens the coffers like goodwill. It's not unreasonable to speculate that Obama IS responsible for some upswing effect in the economy.

But, that's kind of a different matter. This topic, is whether or not Obama's website makes a lie of his campaign promises by.... well, apprantly, by NOT stopping people posting to it, and other people democratically objecting.

There almost certainly is an effect on the economy, though. Obama has been riding on a wave of goodwill, and nothing opens the coffers like goodwill. It's not unreasonable to speculate that Obama IS responsible for some upswing effect in the economy.

But, that's kind of a different matter. This topic, is whether or not Obama's website makes a lie of his campaign promises by.... well, apprantly, by NOT stopping people posting to it, and other people democratically objecting.

ah, but that is due to the hope that others have in Obama, not due to Obama's policies or direct decision-making.

as I said, I'll wait before passing judgement on his policies.

ah, but that is due to the hope that others have in Obama, not due to Obama's policies or direct decision-making.

Still Obama's responsibility.

After all, if he can be held responsible for people who visit his website...

Still Obama's responsibility.

After all, if he can be held responsible for people who visit his website...

ahem... not my argument! :p

but ya gotta point there...

ahem... not my argument! :p

but ya gotta point there...

Oh, I'm not claiming it is. I'm pointing out that either BOTH of the notions are true or NEITHER is. ;)

His website seems to be lacking that. It's designed and run in a way that encourages cover up.

I saw this story on Politico (http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1208/Asking_questions_and_flagging_them.html?showall) before I spotted this thread. This whole argument about Obama's transparency is bogus. It's a damn technical feature that somebody figured out how to exploit.
"Let it be noted that 21 people liked it, but 7 people turned it down. Indeed, this is a technical glitch that is exploited by a very select few," continuing that "the feature's been announced less than half a day. So, it's not as if there's mischievous intent on the part of the Obama team."
This is no worse than the idiotic "This post has been moderated" bullshit feature here on Jolt. They set it up to filter common spam words like "iPhone" "sex", and "free". Guess what? A lot of NSers use those words in their posts. It was a dumb system, and Jolt eventually came to their senses and took it down. I expect the same to happen with Obama's webmasters.

ah, but that is due to the hope that others have in Obama, not due to Obama's policies or direct decision-making.


Right. Obama hasn't pushed any policies or directly made any decisions yet.

Even his cabinet suggestions are just suggestions at the moment... he's yet to work his first day in office yet.


...as I said, I'll wait before passing judgement on his policies.

Sounds like a plan to me. Some things about his policy talk has me a little tentative - he's hedging his bets, centering himself, sometimes even moving into 'right' territory. I don't think he's casting off the leftwing, as some have suggested... I think he's trying to establish a WORKING base - and we'll not really have any idea what he really wants to do for a couple of years yet, with all the other stuff on his plate to shift first.

I'm amazed by the sheer amount of scrutiny and judgment that is being heaped on Obama. It's unfair, really - he is being judged on his presidency before he's even started.

And the worst of it is the partisan dishonesty typified in the OP of this thread.

I haven't looked yet, how many are "Where is your Birth Certificate!!!" ones?

I haven't looked yet, how many are "Where is your Birth Certificate!!!" ones?http://www.geekologie.com/2008/06/27/wtf-plate.jpg
I'm seriously getting tired of those people.

http://change.gov/page/content/openforquestions

That's Obama's site, and you get to ask questions.

Do a search for "Blago".

Most of the questions about Blagojevich, or related to him, have been flagged as inappropriate.

Such as:

"In light of the recent corruption scandals (Blagojevich, Rangel, Jefferson, Stevens, etc) that have dominated the political scene,is there any ethics legislation being crafted to actually curb corruption and prevent another wave of nixonian cynicism?"

or

"Is Obama aware of any communications in the last six weeks between Rod Blagojevich or anyone representing Rod Blagojevich and any of Obama's top aides?"

or

"Given the current corruption charges involving Blagojevich, will "serious" campaign finance reform that takes money completely out of politics through publicly funded elections be a priority in the first term?"

Those questions don't seem inappropriate. Looks like the idea of openness has just gone out the window.

Kimchi, you make Obama sound like a dictator with the OP. *sigh*

Kimchi, you make Obama sound like a dictator with the OP. *sigh*

Y qué esperavas de él? o_O