[Sprite518]

If true, then this White House is in a pant load of trouble.

[Adder]

From who?

The media going to run with this?

Or are we just going to be outraged and expect a lot from 2010?

NO ONE calls these clowns on anything it seems....

[MrPiper]

If true, then this White House is in a pant load of trouble

Why? They have openly broken laws and nothing was said or done. What makes this different?

[Never on my watch]

It is a real solicitation and a number of venders are interested. This would have led to the impeachment of President Bush.

I am interested in what is meant by "maintains a presence." I have not dug into the document too deeply, but there are some interesting vendor questions at the end:

2. Approximately how many sites are controlled by EOP?

Answer: The 7 networks where the EOP currently maintains a presence are: www.facebook.com/whitehouse www.twitter.com/whitehouse www.myspace.com/whitehouse www.flickr.com/whitehouse www.youtube.com/whitehouse www.vimeo.com/whitehouse www.slideshare.com/whitehouse

6. Will the tool/storage be integrated at EOP or at the vendor's site?

Answer: The government’s preference is the vendor’s site.

7. Does the EOP prefer a hosted solution, or is this system intended to run on their own internal equipment and network?

Answer: The Government requires a hosted solution.

9. The Presidential Records Act does not require the storage or archiving of non-EOP content, as such is there a specific reason as to why the content provided on EOP related websites in the form of comments is included in these archiving procedures?

Answer: The PRA includes in its definition of presidential records content "received"– by PRA components and personnel. Out of an abundance of caution, we are treating comments made by non-PRA personnel on sites on which a PRA component has a presence as presidential records, requiring them to be captured or sampled.

[Niuhuru]

It’s like they’re begging us to revolt. Amazing how Zero is doing everything that they accused Bush of doing on a daily basis.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Yes, they are because it is illegal for the White House to collect information on the people for whatever reason, and with this White House, I cannot believe that it would be for positive reasons.

[RightOnTheLeftCoast]

"If true, then this White House is in a pant load of trouble."

Actually, to my eye this is a dodge to avoid a pantload of trouble. The WH would smirk and say, "This is a private company collecting publicly-available information. None of the work is done by the government. It's all acquired and stored by a private business. You're not against private businesses, are you?"

The situation seems to parallel the deployment of Echelon, the NSA's massive data-mining operation which is staged out of the UK to avoid domestic legal issues. This might be, too, when the dust settles.

[Wife of D]

keep for later