I've spent some time on a news-interview program I host expressing myself about the quality of representation my US House district, FL - 1, covering the western quarter of the Florida panhandle and marked specifically by Pensacola, gets from its incumbent, Jeff Miller (R).
Today, I got an email from a listener and I responded. I'm sharing this not because everything in it is of national importance in and of itself, but rather to express that what we get from Congress is the result of all the individual House districts having incumbents who are . . . disappointing.
You may well be disappointed in your congressman, or some other public figure that impacts your life. Take this exchange as a clarion call to yourself to pen a letter - or email, these days - to express that disappointment. If enough of us do, maybe it will awaken congressional members to understanding why they rate so far down the ladder in America's hierarchy of trust, and confidence.
++++++++++++
In reply to your message:
-----Original message-----
From: "kathy" XXXXX@cox.net
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 16:29:05 -0500
To: kenneth@kennethelamb.com
Subject: Jeff Miller
> Ken, why do you have such "hard" feelings for him?????
> > > > Cutie Pie>
Kenneth E. Lamb writes:
It is so strange that I answer your email about Jeff today. Just this afternoon, I had a man come into my store and thank me because "you are doing your job" putting Jeff - and a number of other officeholders - in the spotlight for their conduct.
Now about me and my attitude about Jeff Miller (FL Dist 1 - R).
Jeff is a brilliant, articulate, hard-working person. I don't have "hard" feelings about him; I am disappointed in him. And I express that disappointment regularly because new things keep coming up that involve him that further disappoint me in him.
Jeff cut his political teeth at the University of Florida (UF), and did so well he got tapped into Florida Blue Key - you can Google it. It is an honorary for aspiring political types. I attended UF, wrote for the Florida Alligator, and got a number of awards from the university for my work and leadership on behalf of bettering the university. I know Florida Blue Key.
One of its cardinal principles is that you shut up, keep your head down, and do what you are told by those above you.
In the FL House, Jeff excelled. By following the Blue Key model, he rose quickly. That was the right way to move up the ladder. Of course, it also explains why the Florida Legislature is such a mess. I have no qualms with how he played the legislative game; term limits meant that in 4 years he would be one of those with an additional 4 years left before hitting his term limits who would be in charge of the House. He was a whip in first term - that is, sincerely, very impressive.
But now Jeff is in the US House. I know that the adage is that to "get along you go along."
However, that adage fails to incorporate the reality that Jeff will be a member of the US House for as long as he wants to be a member. I believe the House re-election rate for incumbents is about 97%.
Jeff, for the first time in his political life, now has the freedom to do what he wants vis a vis being able to "rock the boat." As I once told his Chief of Staff, "The Bushes need Jeff more than Jeff needs the Bushes."
What that means is that he doesn't have to shut up, keep his head down, and do what he is told.
But regardless of that reality, he does it anyway.
Besides squandering his freedom, and his intellect, I am extremely disappointed in the way he's handled his Armed Forces committee assignment. For example, his public remark when the Walter Reed controversy about conditions there became a national story of disgrace was, "I didn't know anything about it."
Uh, excuse me congressman, it's your job to know about it. Are you so disconnected from your committee assignment that with veterans coming through your district office no one on your staff ever once heard any of them talk about Walter Reed?
Kathy, there is no way on the face of this planet he didn't hear about it. But he shut up, kept his head down, and did what he was told - implicitly told even if not explicitly told.
Well, I consider that to be an absolute crime against those who passed through the hospital - people who put their life on the line for this country - and Jeff moves it down the ladder of his priorities to place it below protecting the then-Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfield, and of course, his BFF, George Bush. That's disgusting, Kathy.
Or take his trips to Iraq. Here we have a situation of national visibility that our service members were under-armored, both in the equipment they used, and in their own body armor. How many stories did you read about families in the US sending Kevlar jackets, and scrap metal to Iraq to try to protect their loved ones?
So where was Jeff? I guess at The Fish House, hanging out with his homies, or lushing it up on the cocktail circuit. While people are dying - and while Jeff has the intelligence to know it - he doesn't say a word. He lets them die because he keeps his mouth shut, his head down, and does what he is told by those he considers to be over him. I really don't see how he faces himself in the mirror - any normal person would be dying of guilt for selling out those service members the way Jeff did.
How much blood is on his hands through his selling his soul to his political ladder-climbing?
If Jeff thinks I'm wrong, and that the members were properly protected - then I'd love to see Jeff spend 30 days in the field with them in Sadr City, or the Sunni Triangle. Let's see what great things he has to say when it's his life on the line.
You may recall when Sec. Rumsfield made his most arrogant, and disgusting remark, essentially along the lines of, "You go to war with the Army you've got."
That from a guy who spent his service time flying jets over NY City, serving a president who went AWOL from his reserve unit, with a VP standing only a heartbeat away from the presidency that believed he "had more important priorities" than ever serving in the military.
Kathy, it's pretty easy to not worry about combat deaths if you've never been in the thick of them.
But Jeff - all he did was quack the same old Bush support - and I find that immoral. It's not political - it's life and death. It's not GOP or Democrat - it's life or death. It's not conservative or liberal - it's life or death. And Jeff let death win - because he shut up, kept his head down, and did what he was told.
Finally, I have a real problem with someone whose family is getting corporate welfare - in his case, farm subsidies. Jeff voted against helping the elderly pay for their prescriptions, and against raising the minimum wage. Both were programs that involved earned money.
But when it comes to his family, well, he has no problem with getting "money for nothing." Welfare, Kathy, is welfare. And hypocrisy is hypocrisy.
I could go on, but my point is ultimately that I don't have any "hard feelings" for Jeff - I have extreme disappointment. I am vocalizing that disappointment in what has proven so far to be a vain attempt to get through to him: "Jeff, you can be yourself now - the only people that matter will send you to Congress forever - so why don't you live up to your potential?!"
Allow me to share one other point: I've been following the congressman in the New York Times and the Washington Post - well, actually, I've been waiting to see him quoted in a significant manner on some national issue.
So when does Jeff finally end up at the top of the story? When he was quoted coming out of Washington's Mayflower Hotel following a Fred Thompson rally. Great - he sure knows how to pick them.
And speaking of his support for Fred, did you know his local district office actively participated in arranging a campaign appearance for the former senator on a visit to Pensacola? Did you know that is highly illegal? And did you know it is so illegal everyone knows it's illegal? And did you also know that no one in a position to do so said a word about it?
Yes, Kathy, this area is corrupt.
I want to add this last item in answer to your question:
I was first introduced to Jeff by the former Escambia County attorney, David Tucker, when Jeff was getting ready to run for the FL House. He was "Jeff who?" running against an incumbent.
Rule One: Never bet against an unindicted incumbent's re-election. So putting my name with his was the height of political folly.
But I was so impressed with him that when I was invited to attend Jeff's campaign kick-off rally at the Santa Rosa Community Center in Pace, I jumped when asked to give the rally's "make the crowd come alive" speech immediately before he gave his speech.
I did it because I truly believed he would be different. I truly believed he would throw off the yoke of politics as usual and actually make a difference.
I am so very, very, disappointed . . . that I was so very, very, wrong.
-30-
Published Monday through Friday by journalist, op-ed columnist, radio news-interview program host, Kenneth E. Lamb. "Reading Between the Lines" cuts through the clutter to let you see for yourself the real effect of the news on you. Be sure to check the full list of posts to the right of the Meet Kenneth E. Lamb column! Also check his blog from the upcoming book, "Andropause: A Man's Fate; a Woman's Fear" at andropauseeverymansfate.blogspot.com
Showing posts with label google. Show all posts
Showing posts with label google. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
Obama's Authoritarians Shut Down This Blog
Add this blog, Reading Between the Lines, to the list of blogs shut down by Mr. Obama's authoritarian foot-soldiers.
I had posted a number of articles about Mr. Obama's ethnic make-up. It is nothing that his camp wants to discuss. So apparently, the fastest way for the Obama "true believers" to act out their rage is to flag blogs hosted by Blogspot, a division of the so-called "Do No Harm" Google monolith, and have them frozen as "spam blogs."
I hadn't thought of that at first when, about 2 weeks ago, I went to post an update about Mr. Obama and found I was blocked out as a "spam blog." OK, so I innocently clicked the email button to get a human from Google to check the blog and get it freed.
Well, that didn't work in a 48-hour period, and so I did it again. I did it a total of 4 times over 14 days.
About 3 or 4 days ago it dawned on me that Google was playing footsie with the Obama campaign and blocking out blogs that the authoritarians running his campaign wanted silenced.
As you can see for yourself, the blog is now open. But here is what else showed up today; an article by Anna Phillips of the NY Sun:
Anti-Obama Bloggers Say They Were Silenced
Web loggers who are campaigning against Senator Obama's presidential run are accusing Google and Obama supporters of silencing them after their Web logs were marked as spam and their accounts temporarily frozen.
On Thursday, hours after publishing a post about an online petition demanding that Mr. Obama publicly produce his birth certificate, an associate professor of business administration at Brooklyn College, Mitchell Langbert, found that he could no longer access his Web log.
Google's Blogger hosting service had suspended "Mitchell Langbert's Blog," which Mr. Langbert describes as "two-thirds academic stuff I'm working on and one-third politics," until it could verify the Web log was not a "spam blog," or a site designed solely to increase the page views of associated Web sites.
A day later Google lifted the block on the account, but the incident and earlier Web log freezes in late June have led Mr. Langbert and other anti-Obama bloggers to accuse the Illinois senator's supporters of intentionally identifying their blog addresses to Google as spam blogs. They also say the company has reflexively suspended the sites.
"These tech-savvy smart alecks have figured out that if you report a blog you don't like, you can do some damage to a person," Mr. Langbert said.
A spokesman for Google, Adam Kovacevich, said in a statement that an overzealous antispam filter was responsible for the blocks.
"We believe this was caused by mass spam e-mails mentioning the 'Just Say No Deal' network of blogs, which in turn caused our system to classify the blog addresses mentioned in the e-mails as spam," he said. "We have restored posting rights to the affected blogs, and it is very important to us that Blogger remain a tool for political debate and free expression."
Several of the blogs that were blocked, including hillaryorbust.com and comealongway.blogspot.com, are part of the "Just Say No Deal" network of anti-Obama blogs.
But Mr. Langbert's blog is not, leading him to conclude that Obama supporters had targeted him.
On her right-leaning blog "Atlas Shrugs," Pamela Geller keeps a list of blogs that Google has temporarily blocked. "The blockings do come in waves," she said. "The last wave was this past week, and now it got very quiet."
Some writers have had their blogs unblocked, while others have moved them to WordPress, a rival blog host.
"I don't think" Google has "malicious intentions at all, it's just that spammers can literally overrun a service if you're not careful, so their defenses have become overzealous," a spokesman for WordPress, Matthew Mullenweg, said in an e-mail.
"We always have human review before turning off an active blog," he said. "People invest so much time into their blogs, to treat it with anything less than the utmost respect is criminal."
+++++++++++++
Well, there you have it. I have to ask, "Are you ready for the type of people who will shut down the First Amendment as soon as look at you running the government?"
And for journalists, what does this tell you?
I am amazed that Mr. Obama's campaign would be so amoral, but then what do you expect from him? The more you know, the scarier he is.
-30-
I had posted a number of articles about Mr. Obama's ethnic make-up. It is nothing that his camp wants to discuss. So apparently, the fastest way for the Obama "true believers" to act out their rage is to flag blogs hosted by Blogspot, a division of the so-called "Do No Harm" Google monolith, and have them frozen as "spam blogs."
I hadn't thought of that at first when, about 2 weeks ago, I went to post an update about Mr. Obama and found I was blocked out as a "spam blog." OK, so I innocently clicked the email button to get a human from Google to check the blog and get it freed.
Well, that didn't work in a 48-hour period, and so I did it again. I did it a total of 4 times over 14 days.
About 3 or 4 days ago it dawned on me that Google was playing footsie with the Obama campaign and blocking out blogs that the authoritarians running his campaign wanted silenced.
As you can see for yourself, the blog is now open. But here is what else showed up today; an article by Anna Phillips of the NY Sun:
Anti-Obama Bloggers Say They Were Silenced
Web loggers who are campaigning against Senator Obama's presidential run are accusing Google and Obama supporters of silencing them after their Web logs were marked as spam and their accounts temporarily frozen.
On Thursday, hours after publishing a post about an online petition demanding that Mr. Obama publicly produce his birth certificate, an associate professor of business administration at Brooklyn College, Mitchell Langbert, found that he could no longer access his Web log.
Google's Blogger hosting service had suspended "Mitchell Langbert's Blog," which Mr. Langbert describes as "two-thirds academic stuff I'm working on and one-third politics," until it could verify the Web log was not a "spam blog," or a site designed solely to increase the page views of associated Web sites.
A day later Google lifted the block on the account, but the incident and earlier Web log freezes in late June have led Mr. Langbert and other anti-Obama bloggers to accuse the Illinois senator's supporters of intentionally identifying their blog addresses to Google as spam blogs. They also say the company has reflexively suspended the sites.
"These tech-savvy smart alecks have figured out that if you report a blog you don't like, you can do some damage to a person," Mr. Langbert said.
A spokesman for Google, Adam Kovacevich, said in a statement that an overzealous antispam filter was responsible for the blocks.
"We believe this was caused by mass spam e-mails mentioning the 'Just Say No Deal' network of blogs, which in turn caused our system to classify the blog addresses mentioned in the e-mails as spam," he said. "We have restored posting rights to the affected blogs, and it is very important to us that Blogger remain a tool for political debate and free expression."
Several of the blogs that were blocked, including hillaryorbust.com and comealongway.blogspot.com, are part of the "Just Say No Deal" network of anti-Obama blogs.
But Mr. Langbert's blog is not, leading him to conclude that Obama supporters had targeted him.
On her right-leaning blog "Atlas Shrugs," Pamela Geller keeps a list of blogs that Google has temporarily blocked. "The blockings do come in waves," she said. "The last wave was this past week, and now it got very quiet."
Some writers have had their blogs unblocked, while others have moved them to WordPress, a rival blog host.
"I don't think" Google has "malicious intentions at all, it's just that spammers can literally overrun a service if you're not careful, so their defenses have become overzealous," a spokesman for WordPress, Matthew Mullenweg, said in an e-mail.
"We always have human review before turning off an active blog," he said. "People invest so much time into their blogs, to treat it with anything less than the utmost respect is criminal."
+++++++++++++
Well, there you have it. I have to ask, "Are you ready for the type of people who will shut down the First Amendment as soon as look at you running the government?"
And for journalists, what does this tell you?
I am amazed that Mr. Obama's campaign would be so amoral, but then what do you expect from him? The more you know, the scarier he is.
-30-
Labels:
2008,
Barack Obama,
blogspot,
censorship,
election,
first amendment,
google,
president
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)