Subscribe in a reader

Jan 31, 2012

0 White House Chris Dodd Petition Response, Comment


You agree to only create petitions consistent with the limited purpose of the We the People platform, which is to allow individuals to petition the Administration to take action on a range of issues — to address a problem, support or oppose a proposal, or otherwise change or continue federal government policy or actions. To focus discussion, the platform is limited to a discrete set of topics, which may be adjusted over time.
  • Chris Dodd's admission of using financial coercion for a specific legislative gain is a problem that the American people care deeply about. There should be no bribery, extortion, blackmail, coercions, or any other illegal actions dictating our governing law.
  • This is a proposal to change or continue federal policy or actions by petitioning the government to investigate a former congressmen turned MPAA/CEO that publicly addressed the government and the people on illegal grounds.
  • This email is to focus discussion on this issue and address the response by the White House which was avoided over possible technicality that I believe does not exist or coincides with this Terms of Participation. At the very least, The White House could comment on the process which is currently being acted upon concerning this instance, without reveling needed to know information for the purpose of investigating.
You agree not to create petitions that fall outside this limited purpose—for example, petitions that advertise or call for the endorsement or purchase of commercial goods or services, petitions that expressly urge the support or opposition of candidates for elected office, petitions that do not address the current or potential actions or policies of the federal government, or petitions that address a topic not included in We the People at the time the petition was created.
  • The Chris Dodd petition doesn't fall outside the scope of the limited purpose and intent of the petitioning platform. It does not call for an endorsement or commercial purchase or action; it does not urge support or opposition of candidates for government election; it DOES address current and potential actions or policies of the federal government, namely, the investigation of Chris Dodd and government corruption. How else is the People suppose to ensure that our government officials and government law isn't being abused, or manipulated for illegal means?
  • This is deeply disheartening and encourages a lost of faith in our government and their commitment to the People of the United States of America. It is a slap in the face for anyone who respects the process of petitioning and laws to not address this issue. Not addressing this issue over a possible technicality, when a former congressmen/current MPAA/CEO is concern, who has ties to government law and an organization that does political lobbying, is suspicious.
You also agree not to post threats of unlawful violence or harm to any individual or group; obscene, vulgar, or lewd material; defamatory or fraudulent statements; terms commonly understood to constitute profanity or abusive or degrading slurs or epithets; information invading an individual’s privacy; and information that if published would violate criminal law or give rise to civil liability. These categories of material are inconsistent with the limited purpose of We the People and the larger purpose and function of the White House’s website.
  • I agreed and did not post threats or unlawful violence or harm to any individual or group, nor did I sign any petition which would be construed or constitute such a claim. I did not post any comments which were vulgar, nor lewd, nor defamatory, nor fraudulent: the words discussed are of Chris Dodd's own devising and were open to public scrutiny; this is neither defamatory or fraudulent; this neither constitutes profanity, nor is it abusive or slurs or epithets. This information is not infringing on an individual's privacy, as it was Chris Dodd/MPAA which opened the statements for public scrutiny; it would not violate criminal law or give rise to civil liability: in actuality, Chris Dodd/MPAA statements constitutes civil unrest.
  • In conclusion, I find it suspicious that the White House declined to respond, due to a possible technicality, instead of encouraging a forum for discussion on this important matter. If Congress can't comment or act on this matter, it should have been transferred to the appropriate branch of government like the petitioning platform suggests. Instead, the White House's response elicits concerns with our governments bodies and civil unrest, and their commitment to justice. This is especially true when concerning Chris Dodd, who is closely tied to government policy, closely tied to a lobbying organization which is pushing through legislative which infringes on our rights, and the rights and freedoms on the internet; this is suspicious when legislative gets pushed through the current process, so fast that: the people almost had no way to respond and protest such legislation without drastic means implemented by/and only could have been through the internet. This is deeply reflective of our governments commitment to justice, and the legitimacy of our governing officials.
    Therefore, I petition the government in this email to properly addressed, through the respective branches, to handle the concerns of the people about government coercion, Chris Dodd, and manipulation of government law. This, indeed, should not be allowed to continue and opens dangerous precedent for future incidents concerning: bribery, extortion, blackmail, and coercion of the government and law.

    Investigate Chris Dodd and the MPAA for bribery