Comments on: Change.gov website allows Obamaniacs to “flag” questions they don’t like

By: Nolanimrod

Nolanimrod — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 04:21:37 +0000

Definitely one of the problems of the electronic age. There used to be newspaper “morgues” which could be studied either in the original or on micro-fiche. If everything is electronic then the idea of Winston, in 1984 going back and changing the historical record may become commonplace as long as the people involved have no integrity nor appreciation for truth.

By: Great White Rat

Great White Rat — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 21:55:01 +0000

Revising history to remove inconvenient or unpleasant facts is nothing new for those with totalitarian instincts. People who fall out of favor in communist countries, for example, became “non-persons” – a more severe form of being thrown under the bus. Many of the president-elect’s followers certainly have the same tendencies, so I’d not be the least bit surprised if someone from the transition team were strong-arming KHQA to remove anything that might tie him to Blagojevich.

By: Anthony (Los Angeles)

Anthony (Los Angeles) — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 18:01:17 +0000

In the end, I think you’re right not to be surprised, ST. Have a look at this piece from Doug Ross: RED ALERT: Chicago Tribune article referenced Obama-Blago discussions on Senate Seat!

Seems like “Hope and Change” really meant a “change back to the man from Hope.”

By: Sister Toldjah

Sister Toldjah — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 16:40:34 +0000

Anthony, I’m open to other explanations, but my main point was that it would not surprise me at all if this station caved under pressure. After all, we saw what the Obama campaign did during the primaries and general election campaign season.

By: Anthony (Los Angeles)

Anthony (Los Angeles) — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 16:31:44 +0000

As to the reason reason KHQA scrubbed the article?

While I believe (but I'm not certain) the station was right in its initial report, we have to be open to another possibility: that they were wrong initially and, instead of publicly correcting their mistake and owning up to it, they're hiding it out of embarrassment. In other words, no requests/orders/threats from Casa Obama -- just journalistic incompetence. Like I said, I think the truth is closer to ST's speculations (and AJ Strata has a fascinating article making a similar point), but, until hard(er) evidence comes out, we should be very cautious about the conclusions we leap to, lest that leap take us over the edge and into the pit of conspiracy-mongering and Trutherness. The implications for the country in this scandal potentially are too explosive to do otherwise.

By: Stanford Matthews

Stanford Matthews — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 16:00:52 +0000

I’m actually quite happy about the way things are beginning to develop. All the concerns expressed by those opposed to Obama’s election that were dismissed by the MSM and others supporting Barack Obama may get the attention they deserve with the Blagojevich arrest and related exposure to come.

Even before the inauguration of ‘the One’ elements of his history and associations are lining up to expose the fraud that was perpetrated during the campaign.

Okay, maybe I’m a little too optimistic but one has to be to remain sane under the circumstances.