White House Memetics

[Telarus]

Recently, the White House setup the "We The People" website, where they take petitions and respond to any that achieve over a certain # of signatures within a stated time-frame. Five of the top 10 petitions on the "We the People" site are about some aspect of marijuana or drug policy reform.


Late yesterday, the White House chose to respond to 8 of the petitions re: Cannabis which have collectively garnered more than 150,00 signatures.

Let's briefly examine HOW they chose to respond.

1) Collectively responding to petitions which make distinct points in order to avoid them (granted, this is the weakest negative point, as it makes sense to respond to related queries together)

2) Responding late on Friday, when most well paid media professionals are off having fun, and letting the negative responses blow out before the Monday News Cycle.

3) Choosing as the responding representative the only person NOT LEGALLY ALLOWED TO DISCUSS LEGALIZATION OR RELATED OPTION.

I have run across a lot of screaming in certain circles (obviously), so as sources I will try to provide those with what I saw as the least overreaction-due-to-bias:

Law Enforcement Against Prohibition says: http://copssaylegalize.blogspot.com/2011/10/white-house-dismisses-popular-marijuana.html

Stop the Drug War examines the memetics a bit as well: http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/2011/oct/29/white_house_rebuffs_marijuana_le

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Wow. Talk about an empty gesture! But why? At this point, they are opening the door for a small-government Republican to come out in favor of legalization, which could gain favor with the Libertarian-leaning Republicans and stands a good chance of shifting many historically anti-legalization moderate Republicans to a pro-legalization standpoint. All they would have to do is align it with personal freedom and guns: "Gummint shouldn't be trying to tell us what to do!" and we could end up with a pro-legalization Right.

[Telarus]

ATF: Illegal to sell guns to med marijuana users

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

ATF: Illegal to sell guns to med marijuana users

There ya go! It's an open door.

[ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞]

I bring your attention to this meta-petition:

Respond to each of the 7 marijuana related petitions individually instead of one canned response.

The white house recently responded to 7 marijuana petitions with one canned response. The response did not address each issue separately.

It is disrespectful of the thousands of people who signed each petition to dismiss it in such a generic way.

We would like to hear from the white house what its position is on each petition.

[ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞]

Wow. Talk about an empty gesture! But why? At this point, they are opening the door for a small-government Republican to come out in favor of legalization, which could gain favor with the Libertarian-leaning Republicans and stands a good chance of shifting many historically anti-legalization moderate Republicans to a pro-legalization standpoint. All they would have to do is align it with personal freedom and guns: "Gummint shouldn't be trying to tell us what to do!" and we could end up with a pro-legalization Right.

That makes a lot of sense. If it could be more couched in a fear-based context I think you'd definitely win some converts.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I bring your attention to this meta-petition:

Respond to each of the 7 marijuana related petitions individually instead of one canned response.

The white house recently responded to 7 marijuana petitions with one canned response. The response did not address each issue separately.

It is disrespectful of the thousands of people who signed each petition to dismiss it in such a generic way.

We would like to hear from the white house what its position is on each petition.

Access denied!

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Haha, this one is really good:

https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions#!/petition/actually-take-these-petitions-seriously-instead-just-using-them-excuse-pretend-you-are-listening/grQ9mNkN

we petition the obama administration to:
Respond to each of the 7 marijuana related petitions individually instead of one canned response.

The white house recently responded to 7 marijuana petitions with one canned response. The response did not address each issue separately.

It is disrespectful of the thousands of people who signed each petition to dismiss it in such a generic way.

We would like to hear from the white house what its position is on each petition.

[ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞]

Haha, this one is really good:

https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions#!/petition/actually-take-these-petitions-seriously-instead-just-using-them-excuse-pretend-you-are-listening/grQ9mNkN

we petition the obama administration to:
Respond to each of the 7 marijuana related petitions individually instead of one canned response.

The white house recently responded to 7 marijuana petitions with one canned response. The response did not address each issue separately.

It is disrespectful of the thousands of people who signed each petition to dismiss it in such a generic way.

We would like to hear from the white house what its position is on each petition.

THAT'S THE ONE I WAS TRYING TO LINK TO! FUCKING INTERNETS!

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Wow. Talk about an empty gesture! But why? At this point, they are opening the door for a small-government Republican to come out in favor of legalization, which could gain favor with the Libertarian-leaning Republicans and stands a good chance of shifting many historically anti-legalization moderate Republicans to a pro-legalization standpoint. All they would have to do is align it with personal freedom and guns: "Gummint shouldn't be trying to tell us what to do!" and we could end up with a pro-legalization Right.

http://www.gunsanddopeparty.com/

[Rococo Modem Basilisk]

Wow. Talk about an empty gesture! But why? At this point, they are opening the door for a small-government Republican to come out in favor of legalization, which could gain favor with the Libertarian-leaning Republicans and stands a good chance of shifting many historically anti-legalization moderate Republicans to a pro-legalization standpoint. All they would have to do is align it with personal freedom and guns: "Gummint shouldn't be trying to tell us what to do!" and we could end up with a pro-legalization Right.

http://www.gunsanddopeparty.com/

The ostriches, though, are a core part of the G&D party. Arguably, they are more important than the actual guns and dope involved, since guns and dope are in there primarily to attract voters who support one and don't care very much about the other. So, I refuse to associate this with G&D unless ostriches or something equally surreal is involved. (Before someone answers claiming that surreal and patently ridiculous things have not been major parts of successful political campaigns in the past, please... engage your memory.)