Change.gov: GSA: “We Disapprove; No, Wait: We Approve!”
As a follow up to this article concerning Obama’s Civilian National Security Force and “What’s Up with Change.gov?”, Michelle Maulkin (via theobamafile.com) is now reporting the following:
Michelle Malkin has obtained documents regarding the creation of Barack Obama’s Change.gov website that answer several questions about the propriety of allowing the perpetual Obama campaign to use a .gov domain name for what appeared to be a fund-raising front. Readers and industry observers noted that the decision appeared to violate General Services Administration rules governing government domains.
Guess what? They were right. The FOIA documents reveal that the GSA [link added] initially rejected Obama’s application for “Change.gov.” On Oct. 21, Peter Alterman, Deputy Associate Administrator of Technology Strategy at the GSA, denied the Obama campaign’s request for a government domain because:
1) It would be a a violation of the government’s naming conventions (too generic); and
2) using ‘change’ in the domain name would be political, since it was the trademark slogan of the Obama campaign.
The day after the election, on Nov. 5, GSA Chief Information Officer Casey Coleman overruled Alterman after apparently receiving a waiver from Chris Lu, Executive Director of Obama’s Transition Project. As reader Lance discovered through his FOIA request, Ms. Coleman did not elaborate on the granting of this waiver except to say that she had “determined that it is in the best interest of the Federal Government to register the subject domain name.”
As another GSA official who facilitated the convenient change in policy regarding change.gov exulted to the Obama campaign after the domain was granted, “Rock and roll!”
A look at Maulkin’s article shows copious amounts of documentation that is certainly worth a read…
My wife commented about this: “What if I were wanting to establish a government-sponsored domain for http://www.savethetatas.com/ in an effort to make the federal government look like they’re officially sanctioning breast cancer awareness? Would they reject me from doing so? Since they probably would, couldn’t I sue the government for discriminating against a white woman?”
I think she has a valid point. theobamafile.com goes on to say the following:
Obama is presently violating the U. S. Constitution regarding his eligibility to be POTUS. Violating GSA rules is nothing more than a low-priority interrupt…
Can we be expecting more from President-elect Barack Hussein Obama?
-Phil
[...] The Right Side of Life » Change.gov: GSA: “We Disapprove; No, Wait … [...]
Kathleen,
Biblically-speaking, I believe that would be called, “righteous anger,” something that God himself invoked countless times when dealing with we humans throughout history
Thanks for commenting,
-Phil
Ok, Judy and Phil, you all have touched on something I have been thinking a lot about and that is the Right’s reticence to take off the gloves and fight knuckle-to-knuckle with those on the Left who are only too willing to destroy this country for their own personal gain. It’s time the Right rises up and fights like it is a matter of life or death, because it very well could be. And if it gets bloody, then so be it!
You can be a “good” person and still fight like a tiger for what is worth the effort. And fighting for the revelation of the truth, however inconvenient, is worth it! And if saving this country from an ineligible candidate and a Constitutional crisis isn’t worth fighting for, I don’t know what is.
Phil,
Very Good Point and it is True that by voicing our concerns and IN
NOT LETTING UP ON THEM, we at the Right are “moving out of Character” and into the battle… and even though, at the moment,
our blogs “Preach to the Choir” and “energize the Base”, some things are getting noticed out there, as MSM rules and It’s a Very good start, however, we sure have our work cut out for us.
Thanks to websites like Yours, we’re becoming informed and
invited to get Busy! I really Appreciate All your good work.
Thank You so Much!
JudyP,
I think you’ve helped to put to words the conundrum that the political right has been in, historically, for some time. This is why the Democrats, in general, have had such a relatively easy time trampling all over the attitude of the right.
Having said that, the fact that individuals on the right begin to speak out against unethical/illogical/immoral/amoral behavior on the left causes the left to have conniption fits; elitists have always believed that the People should be kept in their proverbial place. When individuals begin to speak up — and are consistent and persistent — that really gets their knickers in a twist, big time.
So, yes. In that past, most liberals have been activists, most conservatives have been quiet. That’s why I’ve maintained that all it takes is a consistently and persistently vocal minority to keep the dream of individual liberty alive.
-Phil
Phil,
My opinion is that “we the people on the Right”, as a
whole, aren’t bred to be as Politically “RUTHLESS” as the people
on the Left.(Please Hear me out) The Character of “the Right” is
different, so much so that We Get “Exposed” and”Called to the Carpet” with so much as the slightest overstep of any Character
trait we publicly uphold because what we stand for is viewed
as “rediculously” high morals. And it is the Case. The Right
doesn’t instinctly conjure up an idea to hold house meetings with
the desire to covertly change the world. We’re more aligned to the path of law and order and to playing by the rules. Our
instinct isn’t to “Play dirty” at all costs or to bend the rules.
Not only is the Right unfamiliar with what we’re presently up
up against, we’re not necessarily BRED to fight this thing
successfully. It’s going to be Righteous anger that will
motivate the right to stand up and do something, in unfamiliar
waters yet I wonder how effective our stand can be, not to
say that effectiveness or ineffectives should at all negate
getting on board to try do something. Indeed this is where
your website and those similar are very much Appreciated.
Hopefully our righteous anger doesn’t turn to civil war.
JudyP,
And this is exactly why sites like mine exist on the Net.
As the Sam Adams quote says, I like to “diffuse” “virtue and knowledge” among the People so that the People will therefore have their great security.
Notice in your comment that the behavior completely revolves around getting the People on board. Nothing happens until this happens.
Thanks,
-Phil
Phil,
What bothers me is that any “brainstorms” agreed
upon that may come out of these House meetings, have the
potential to Blossom into “we the People” type thinking
and if they make enough noise (lets say, OH… just as
successful as Al Gore’s Melting Earth Theory that has
Blown out of proportion across the world, caught on by
pursuading the public)
and enough people come together in a movement from these
house meetings, potentially PEOPLE
may start Doing things without them being actual laws,
until the brainstorms are accepted as “common Law”.
Disturbing to say the least.
In a long shot, I’d suspect any ideas formulated out
of these meetings, might have to be presented to
some type of Obama oversight committee and then
presented to legislators or what have you, however,
I really see a vision of an Obama PLEASED to watch
a movement, in his favor, with possible “planted”
agendas, doing just fine and moving along all on their
own. Just my opinion.
We need a similar strategy to defend and preserve our
constitution and our rights within the Constitution
and not have our country swept over with a wave of
God knows what. We need to be one step ahead.
Thank You
JudyP,
What’s more, I had heard the question posed, “What are they going to do with the email listing of all the contributors when the website was a privately-held site?”
Thanks for the comment,
-Phil
Early on,On the change.gov website, there was also a button
to click on to find ‘A HOUSE MEETING NEAR YOU” All You have
to do is enter a Zip Code. Needless to Say, I was IN SHOCK,
when you line this up with all the civilian National Security
Talk.
I no longer see these House meetings (set up for local Community
Organizing!) mentioned on change.gov website, but just do a Search
titled “Obama House Meetings” and you will find that this
website is alive and well and thriving. What is this all
about. It’s a MUST READ to see the Names of who have Signed
up to Open up their Homes and discuss what THEY think can
be done to “better” our communities in Obamaland.
God Help us all.
For one thing America needs to get straight.
There is no such thing as the office of the president elect.
And Obama is NOT the president elect until after January 09, 2009 when Congress certifies the electoral votes.
So Obama is lying to the public on that front as well.