MPAA-Dodd Investigation Petition Reaches Goal 270
An anonymous reader writes "The petition on 'We the People' website petitioning the administration to investigate Chris Dodd for corruption has reached the required 25,000 votes in two days: now the government has to officially respond to the petition. The petition ... stemmed from Chris Dodd's statement that tried to portray campaign donations as quid-pro-quos for SOPA/PIPA votes."
respond? (Score:5, Insightful)
Alright! (Score:5, Insightful)
HAS TO officially respond? (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't be silly.
There is no "HAS TO" when the government is involved.
And a one word response of "DENIED" is all you are likely to get, or the Washington equivalent, of a vague promise of having it looked into, followed by a chuckle-fest in the back room over brandy on the rocks.
The whole thing sort of reminds me of one of the typical flame fests here on Slashdot or Usenet. Lots of smelly wet wool. But nobody notices that you "won the internet".
25,000 sig petitions have alredy been ignored (Score:5, Insightful)
The petition titled "Actually take these petitions seriously instead of just using them as an excuse to pretend you are listening" reached 25,000 by the required date and currently has 33,000 signatures. It has received no response despite being almost 3 months old.
(Link: https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions#!/petition/actually-take-these-petitions-seriously-instead-just-using-them-excuse-pretend-you-are-listening/grQ9mNkN)
"We the people" is a propaganda tool to be exploited when convenient, and nothing more.
Awesome (Score:5, Insightful)
I await the generic response pulled from the filing cabinet soon
Re:In a perfect world... (Score:2, Insightful)
Had Dodd been a Republican, there would already be a call for a Special Prosecutor.
But asking this administration to investigate one of its own is pointless, and asking them to investigate their largest campaign contributors is simply ridiculous. The only hope of this gaining any legs is if the Republicans pick up this ball and run with it, but they won't do that either because they have just as many fingers in the till as the Democrats.
Re:Alright! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:respond? (Score:4, Insightful)
will respond but completely dodge (Score:4, Insightful)
Their response will be similar to all the other responses to petitions they don't like-- completely dodge any of the points and cut/paste a wikipedia like entry. See their response to eliminating the TSA for violating people's civil rights and being useless-- nothing more than Pistole cut/pasting the TSA's official mission statement.
This one will probably be more of a campaign like statement that they care about the people and protect their rights completely dodging the statements in the petition.
Re:In a perfect world... (Score:5, Insightful)
The only hope of this gaining any legs is if the Republicans pick up this ball and run with it, but they won't do that either because they have just as many fingers in the till as the Democrats.
Right, so:
Had Dodd been a Republican, there would already be a call for a Special Prosecutor.
Is false.
There's one party with minor differences paraded out for the masses to choose from. Understanding this is key to understanding Washington.
Concerns sound exaggerated (Score:4, Insightful)
I looked at his comments and I don't feel the outrage we're getting bombarded with on Slashdot. Especially over a 25K online petition. Believe me, I have a lot of problems with Dodd's cozy relationship with the financial industry (probably what's driving him out of the Senate), but this is hardly one of them.
Re:respond? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why would anyone expect Chris Dodd to be charged? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:respond? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:respond? (Score:5, Insightful)
STFU Defeatist Whiners (Score:5, Insightful)
"Oh... the government will do nothing!"
"The crooks won't investigate their handlers!"
"The petition will be ignored!"
Are you the **AA 'turfing or just fashionably rebellious with your doubt of the value of the US Judicial system? If you've given up already, why are you bothering to comment?
Remember when Nixon was investigated? What about when Clinton got some booty on the side? Big investigations DO happen and they have to start somewhere. If you don't like the idea of an investigation, then say so. I'd genuinely like to hear those comments. But if all you got are "Whaaa! They've done nothing in the past, they'll do nothing again!", then you're the worst kind. You remove value from the entire discussion and give nothing in return..
If you give in to your butt-hurt and so easily declare "They so rarely do what I want... why bother?", then WE can never get anything done. You are WORSE than those who do nothing because you KNOW something is bad and take the time to discourage others from acting on the injustice.
Re:respond? (Score:4, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Irrelevant, reduce government, reduce corruption (Score:4, Insightful)
because the Libertarians are incorruptible, right?
Nope. They are as corruptible as anyone.
But first, they will shrink government, so the corruption matters less and is on a smaller scale.
The greater the power the greater the temptation to corrupt or abuse it. That is why the ONLY successful way to fight corruption is to reduce the scale of temptation. When more power is in states hands it is easier to monitor for corruption, after all how easily can the voters in a state really keep an eye on what someone is doing all the way over in DC?
Re:Alright! (Score:5, Insightful)
Thank you for submitting your petition. Bribery is a serious offence which threatens the stability of governance, and as such we will not tolerate this behavior and will of course prosecute anyone who is caught engaging in it. However, based on our preliminary investigation, there is not enough evidence to merit a case.
Campaign contribution is a means by which one can legally support the spreading of information about one's political ideals. In and of itself, this is not bribery. Furthermore, it is reasonable to expect a politician who represents himself as an advocate for a specific political party to openly support, and take action that directly supports, the stated political positions of that party.
Chris Dodd observed that some candidates deviated from their party's stated position. Further, he observed this after having made significant campaign contributions to the party in question. While his words may have been ill-chosen, the mere expression of frustration over such position-switching is not sufficient grounds for a bribery charge.
Thank you for your interest in governance, and please continue to share your concerns with us, whatever they may be.
Put up or shut up (Score:5, Insightful)
You are as Anonymous as anyone else. If you think Anonymous should do something, then do it.
Re:ALL IS GOOD !! (Score:5, Insightful)
Why are we signing petitions? It's primary election season. Let's make an example of one of the congressmen-for-hire.
the Tea Party came to power when Scott Brown defeated an incumbent in a primary contest. Let's get an incumbent SOPA supporter out of office because he supported SOPA.
Primary congressional elections are where the real electoral power is... and we have a tendency to ignore them. I believe that nothing less than a primary loss from a SOPA or PIPA supporter would get their attention.
The problem is they get $50,000 for their campaign fund for supporting it. The solution, obviously, is to make it cost them more than $50,000 worth of publicity for supporting it.
Lamar Smith, who introduced SOPA, is currently running uncontested for the Republican Primary in his district.