I agree. I am finding the Obama administration scary too. However I blame the MSM more than the administration itself. Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan etc etc, these huge powerful political machines could all be counted on to use subterfuge, intimidation, all kinds of dirty and scary tactics to 'win'. Short of the ideal political setup of balanced power (I doubt it will happen but one house of congress desperately needs to go Republican), it is the people via the press that keeps them semi honest. As much as the MSM has always slanted left, it is unprecedented how much the MSM has abdicated their crucial role.

Those in power along with a press that will not keep them semi honest? Yeah, that seems like a super recipe for free people.

The 0b0z0 Admin is quite scary. He's surrounded himself with radicals, some of whom admire Chairman Mao. It wouldn't surprise me if some of us 0b0z0 critics aren't long for this world, given that we have a probable Marxist in the White House.

> He's surrounded himself with
> radicals, some of whom admire
> Chairman Mao.

It's not that you're wrong, it's just that the admiration of those radicals is a teenage kind of thing, like how Duran Duran used to be their favorite rock group or whatever. Obama's a lefty, and I'd be a fool to deny it, but there's just no feeling that his spirit is profoundly ideological. He's more political careerist than socialist.

Gates is still his SecDef.

Can't say that I'm sympathetic on the FTC thing... what, you want the perks of getting gifts or paid, without the loss of credibility that comes with it?

Having said that, I'm not thrilled with Obama either. The problem is, I don't think there ARE any politicians who aren't on a power-grabbing binge. Maybe a few randoms from the House of Reps.

you want the perks of getting gifts or paid, without the loss of credibility that comes with it?

A review copy is not a gift, nor do I mention every book I get free, nor is sending me a free book a way to get mentioned.

As I pointed out before, if I were for sale, it wouldn't be for the price of an $11.95 review copy. And if I were recommending copies simply because I got them free, I'd have no credibility. Furthermore, if anything, free books are a problem. I live in a small house and I have to get rid of a lot of them, and beg publishers not to send me novels, which I will never mention.

If you've ever gotten a book from Random House for free, for example, it seems you need to say so if you mention a Random House book you paid for. And these standards are not being applied to mainstream media, just bloggers.

And come on, who here isn't able to see a blogger who's a shill? Do you really think I'm going to tell you to buy Deepak Chopra's latest because the advance reading edition is sitting in a pile by my desk (awaiting transport to the "ditch" stack with all the other free woo)?

The marketplace does and should rule here. If people reading me found me to be an unreliable source for books or any other source of information, they wouldn't keep coming back. Note that there aren't a lot victim feminists or multicultis commenting here. I'm just not a satisfying site for people who think that way.

"As I pointed out before, if I were for sale, it wouldn't be
for the price of an $11.95 review copy."

That puts you one-up on politicians/judges. In a lot of
payoff scandals, the surprise wasn't as much that they were on
the take but just how low the prices were - traffic court judges
in particular.

I snort coffee out of my nose laughing every time you write, "Fuck you FTC!"

Its not just the free speech. He has involved himself in local politics pressuring people not to run against candidates he favors. I'd like to decide who I vote for and not because he narrowed down my choices!

--Oh, and (fuck you, FTC!) I didn't get a free book from anybody in exchange for saying so.--
They are not interested in the type of compensation, they just want to know if your compensation is coming from any right-wing PAC's, sort of a mini "Fairness Doctrine".

I have to say for all the overheated rhetoric during the Bush administration, this is the first time in my life where I've actually felt that my ability to publicly hold an opinion might be threatened.

Don't worry, the FTC has your back! They announced that you're not to worry your pretty little head about all those complicated rules because they'll decide who to go after on a "case-by-case" basis, and they'll probably never even notice you!
In other words, they'll pick on whoever they feel like, according to their secret, ever-changing standard.

OK, I agree that the book thing is over the line, especially since the book is -to review-. But there are sites that pay people to write rave reviews about their products, and I think it is fair to disclose that they are being paid to review. Just like we know that the lady on TV who is waxing poetic about Tide is an actress, and being paid to say that.

I think Medicare officials should shut up, given that eliminating the "fraud, waste, and abuse" in their program is going to save billions.

Start now, the deficit is at a record high, and we need all the help we can get.

I've got a scary freedom of speech thing for you!

I was all set to go hear Geert Wilders speak at Temple tomorrow, but it was cancelled because of complaints from... guess who! The Muslim Student Association!

Crid.

Not to be difficult. But ask yourself, Why is Gates still SecDef? Is it because he is the only person who can perform the job? Clearly, there are a host of former military types with the understanding of how the DoD works and who could exercise proper control of the Dept. Think General W Clark. I may not like him (or you) or even his politics. But the man knows how the DoD works.

Why did Obama keep Gates?

Simply, if; and more likely, and more likely now, we fail in the Astan, he gets to blame it on someone other than himself, or his party.

Our failure in Astan, coming soon! While on the Obamaessiah's watch, will be, despite his own decisions, his own posturing, his own support or non-support, be BUSH's fault.

You laugh. Just watch.

> Simply, if; and more likely,
> and more likely now, we fail
> in the Astan

CLARITY. What the fuck are you saying?

> You laugh.

Again someone who interviews himself. What's up with that?

A company doesn't have the right to use a mailing list for whatever it wants, regardless of how it got that mailing list.

If you gave a company a list of email addresses of people who might be interested in your book so that they could promote it to those people, and instead the company wrote those people "Don't buy Amy Alkon's book" then you wouldn't say that was OK because the company was using Free Speech.

Think General W Clark. I may not like him (or you) or even his politics. But the man knows how the DoD works.

I'm not sure that Clark would be an effective SecDef. I watched Clark as an analyst on CNN during the first Gulf War and was amazed someone could rise to the rank of general and know so little about how his own army worked.

Which was strange considering that Clark's army career was full of outstanding performance reviews, promotions, decorations, and experience (in both combat and staff positions). He won the Silver Star in Vietnam. In addition, he was valedictorian of his West Point class, a Rhodes Scholar, and has a Master's degree in Military Science. He has commanded the NTC at Fort Irwin, First Cav at Fort Hood, and NATO forces in Europe. In addition, he has written two books on modern warfare and global politics.

I've got a scary freedom of speech thing for you!

I was all set to go hear Geert Wilders speak at Temple tomorrow, but it was cancelled because of complaints from... guess who! The Muslim Student Association!

The only way this sort of attack on freedom of speech can be countered is: you and the others who want to hear him speak must be louder than the poor, offended Muslim Student Association.

http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/politics/Firefight-Over-the-Red-White-and-Blue-64647657.html

So, let me get this straight....it's perfectly "constitutional" and acceptable to exercise your "freedom of expression" by burning the national flag, but you can't have a flag sticker on your freakin' locker at work?

Hmmmmmm....something's wrong here...

Not able to pull up the article again because I wanted to re-read it; I thought it read something along the lines of "no stickers of any political, etc. association" not simply "no stickers."

Still, I find it sad that the symbol of our flag could be twisted into somehow being an "offense" to any American. You wouldn't have seen something like this right after 9/11; but 8 years later and our collective sense of national identity has cooled somewhat, to say the least. It's a shame; just another example of self-loathing as a nation while we pay homage to the god of PC.