White House: We’ll cut off criticism of Porkulus

posted at 9:55 am on May 30, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

Mark Tapscott notices an interesting blog post by Norman Eisen, who works for Barack Obama as Special Counsel to the President on Ethics and Government Reform.  Anticipating a deluge of criticism over the thus-far ineffectual spending plan, Eisen has a straightforward plan to deal with criticism.  He’ll simply use the power of the federal government to silence it.  Problem solved!

“First, we will expand the restriction on oral communications to cover all persons, not just federally registered lobbyists. For the first time, we will reach contacts not only by registered lobbyists but also by unregistered ones, as well as anyone else exerting influence on the process. We concluded this was necessary under the unique circumstances of the stimulus program. [emphasis mine — Ed]

“Second, we will focus the restriction on oral communications to target the scenario where concerns about merit-based decision-making are greatest –after competitive grant applications are submitted and before awards are made. Once such applications are on file, the competition should be strictly on the merits. To that end, comments (unless initiated by an agency official) must be in writing and will be posted on the Internet for every American to see.

“Third, we will continue to require immediate internet disclosure of all other communications with registered lobbyists. If registered lobbyists have conversations or meetings before an application is filed, a form must be completed and posted to each agency’s website documenting the contact.”

Silencing dissent and criticism is “necessary under the unique circumstances of the stimulus program”?  Gee, what “unique circumstances” might those be?  Perhaps the fact that it costs more than the Moon shot, and has yet to halt the economic skid.  Maybe it’s the fact that most of the stimulus package doesn’t actually stimulate anything except doctrinaire liberal dreams and the pens that check off the items from the Democratic wish list.

Remember when the Left took to the streets to declare dissent “patriotic” during wartime?  I didn’t have a problem with dissent then, but apparently the Left has a curious definition of “patriotism”.  Now, suddenly, the federal government can silence their critics at will, not to protect critical national-security programs or keep from undermining a war effort, but to protect a Democratic president intent on seizing control of private industry across a wide swath of the nation.  Suddenly, that kind of dissent threatens America.

Can the Obama administration get away with this?  I doubt it; I’m sure this is just a misunderstanding.  After all, if that were true, then I’ d be one of the first peo

Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air



Trackback URL


Here is Norman, the fascist mutt.

pabarge on June 1, 2009 at 9:25 AM

Can we just disban Congress and the courts, declare Giggles dictator, and be done with it? The slow meltdown is painful to watch.

crazy_legs on June 1, 2009 at 9:46 AM

We would be so much better off witha giant lottery over elections. Randomly choose a person for every spot in Congress and as President. It may not be a good thing, but it can’t be any worse!

So what is the count on the Bill of Rights now? Is that 2 down 8 to go?

jeffn21 on June 1, 2009 at 10:28 AM

Instead of ending with “people silenced”, clearly Ed made a spelling mistake of “peons”. This is a 2 letter change as opposed to 3 letters plus another whole word. Ocams razor suggest the simplest solution is best. As a represntative of the Government, I’m here to help you know what Ed realy meant to say. Ed was about to express his willing worshipfulness of the One, as should you all.

AnotherOpinion on June 1, 2009 at 1:58 PM

Looks to me like he is trying to outlaw whistleblowing.

crosspatch on June 1, 2009 at 4:47 PM

“………..Veee Haf Vays……”

StimulateTHIS on June 1, 2009 at 8:28 PM

What they really want is a “Stalin” type purge.

TrickyDick on June 2, 2009 at 1:46 PM