Posted on 01/24/2010 11:44:53 AM PST by Shellybenoit
I think that the proper question is not who is Ellie Light, or Mark Spivey, but rather why do so many (more than 1) newspapers print this letter?I think that one place to start is here is the automated "Letter to the Editor" generator here:What is the common link?
http://my.barackobama.com/page/speakoutAfter you pick a topic, and give them your ZIP code, they give you links to your local, regional and national newspapers.
From FReeper JimWayne:
...they even state that they will make sure that each newspaper believes that they are the only one getting the email......[and they] give you talking points next to the box in which you compose your letter.
“If Mr. Obama does not make a major course correction, “
I cannot see him changing anything except to double down full speed ahead.
Our country will be paying for this debacle for decades just as we continue to pay for Jimmah.
“I’d like to believe that despite mounting evidence to the contrary, the POTUS is better than this.”
Well, Thanks! There went my keyboard.
Colleges use software and search engines to detect plagiarism. It seems media outlets that print letters need a similar technique to detect Obama robo mails, as if you can’t spot them easily anyway. All you have to do is find the phrase “8 years”.
Left to himself, it certainly appears that he tends to double down on his mistakes. However, his agenda is unpopular and his handling of the executive branch is raising eyebrows across the political spectrum. The president's big government agenda and his diminishing credibility are toxic to fellow democrats seeking to retain office. They will either have to separate themselves from the president, or go down with his ship. If the president continues on his present course, the Obama administration will become isolated and highly ineffective.
He hasn't personally selected a course correction, but pressure is undoubtedly being brought to bear upon his administration by fellow Democrats. Perhaps, after they have had a few days to absorb the impact of the political shift in the country, cooler heads may prevail. At this point, unfortunately, it doesn't appear that there is anyone in his administration who is willing to break bad news to him. Our president has a long standing tendency to run away from the consequences of his mistakes, and has been something less than honest. It does not appear to be in his nature to acknowledge his mistakes and take personal responsibility for his errors. Perhaps, however, the president is enough of a pragmatist that he can be persuaded to change course and his tone. The country is not buying his recriminations, and another round of blaming George Bush/fat cats/business will likely diminish him in the eyes of independents.
Y’know, I’m not surprised that the kenyan’s administration has to employ such desparate means to get their “message” out. In the past couple of election cycles I’ve noticed what appears to be a big increase in obviously-scripted letters to the editor. I wouldn’t be surprised if both sides did it.
What gets me is, how could they be so friggin stupid as to NOT EVEN CHANGE THE NAME OR WORDING! A Jr. High student could have figured that out! But then again, the kenyan and his lackeys aren’t exactly rocket surgeons, are they?
The problem is that he has never managed anything other than political campaigns in which the media took his side. He has never had to run a corporation or an institution, let alone turn one around that is failing. The emerging information suggests that he himself does not have it in his nature to assess the situation objectively and use sound judgment to change course. Bill Clinton faced political set backs as president, but he had been a governor, and in fact had regained office after being voted out. He understood something about changing direction. President Obama, on the other hand, is untried, and we are in a very bad position if he cannot find his footing. He's in way over his head, and he needs to get better, or we will all suffer potentially severe consequences.
I’d like to think we are well led but there is no evidence to support that position. IMO, he has the most radical and most inexperienced cabinet of any modern President. Their method of addressing discontent or disagreement is the Chicago way. Consensus building means you do what they say or you WILL be sorry. Its a very common theme among communists.
This is exactly what many of us on FR expected and feared. Hopefully the other Dems will wake up and find a backbone.
“What gets me is, how could they be so friggin stupid”
They are not that stupid. They think we are so stupid that we won’t notice. What else haven’t we noticed?
Actually I’m thinking the situation is a serious lack of oversight. I don’t think Axelrod or Emmanuel or any of zero’s czars is going to waste time typing out fake LTTEs, but some starry-eyed dumb college kid or junior staffer could easily embody the right combination of stupid and arrogant to do this.
I have no such illusions. Our president is incompetent, dishonest, and corrupt, and he tends to display poor judgment, probably because he has little experience dealing with his mistakes honestly. We are not being well led. General Emmanual is making a lot of our policy, with predictable consequences. Some of us are basically hoping that our president has a life changing experience that causes him to be a better man. Failing that, we hope external factors will compel him to follow good advice, and stop pursuing clearly flawed policies and treating his tenure like a small-time political campaign carried out in a corrupt backwater with media complicity. He ran as a blank slate, a “fresh face.” That ship has sailed. He doesn't seem to appreciate that, nor does he seem to appreciate the fact that we can actually examine a factual record of his past rhetoric and actions and note that the discrepancies are glaring. He still thinks he's in Chicago.
;^)
A very good point. Is his support so weak that there are no real letters of support, and they have to make them up in order to get any at all ? When polls consistently show 47% support ? It makes one wonder, and it demonstrates a real problem with astroturfing. Once it's exposed, all letters of support will be suspect.Thus, like all lies, it contains the seeds of it's own destruction.
I’ve accused defenders of Rutgers of the same thing. The best thing we can do is just ignore them...
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/194057.php
Also,http://biggovernment.com/2009/09/22/astroturfing-the-nea-winner-associates-in-on-the-scheme/
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.