It’s been bugging me lately, the number of seemingly offhand remarks from high level appointed and elected officials, which get the semblance of “FIRE!” in a crowded political environment, only to be “pushed back” by someone a little higher up the command structure.

Notable ones:

• The Fairness Doctrine.  Press Secretary wouldn’t answer the question, later a few representatives of the august body of Congress say it’s time to “Change back.”  UPROAR! ensues.  New statement…Oh, no, President Obama isn’t for it.
• Assault Weapons Ban.  AG opens mouth, we’re coming for your guns to make sure Mexico is safe.  UPROAR! again.  Nancy P and some Dems from areas with lots of hunters and the like:  Oh, no…won’t happen.
• Durban II:  We’re gonna go.  You know the drill.  Then “we” renege and we’re not going, because it’s a bunch of racist stuff.  While I’m there, why don’t we go with a “new” attitude?  Yes, go and stand up to the racist and quit being cowards about it.  Send Eric Holder to do Hillochio’s work.

Those are but a few major topics.  Consider the several other issues and begin, I invite you, to start looking at this as a way for President Obama to avoid having to pay for polling constantly.  They must have tightened that belt, and have figured out, by “putting the word out,” they will receive the temperature of the culture.  If it’s hot, the President, or a highly placed official, “senior” to the conveyor of the controversial message, can pull it back, politely mentioning someone spoke out of school, but not to worry, that’s not the official policy.  Conversely, if no one notices, then they know there’s an opening to pursue the policy further.

But, this article, about “overt acts” by other factions, postulated to either set perceptions askew, or to desensitize reminds me of this form of behavior, also.

Stand by to be constantly polled. Know this, also, as a “pollee,” it’s your voice they’re trying to listen to, so don’t be a “No Commeter”, when the time(s) come to speak your piece.