Eli linked to this NYT story in today’s Morning News, but I wanted to comment. To get a job with the Obama administration, applicants have a fill out a six page form and answer questions about their finances, their spouses, their children, their professional lives, their diaries, their traffic tickets, any embarrassing emails they might have sent (!), and on and on and on. But this detail leapt out at me:
The application also asks applicants to “please list all aliases or ‘handles’ you have used to communicate on the Internet.”
All aliases you’ve used to communicate on the Internet? It’s hard not to interpret this an attempt to pry into the private sexual conduct of applicants for positions in the Obama administration. Are applicants expected to cough up their AdultFriendFinder aliases? Their ManHunt aliases? Their CL aliases? Their Slave4Master aliases? Remember when Dems were generally opposed to invading people’s sex lives? Remember when Dems thought Bill Clinton’s adulterous Oval-Office blowjobs were a private matter?
A smart applicant would try damn hard to google up any thread of connection between their real name and their handles. If you are absolutely sure that there’s no way anybody could ever tie you to an alias, don’t list it. Otherwise, they will find it so you’d best admit it up front.
Won’t the Republican eventually flush people out (they are keen on cruising for gay sex online) and politically embarrass the admin. Doesn’t Ceasar’s have to be beyond reproach?
I know it’s hard to believe, Dan, but some people use the Internet for things other than sex.
I suspect they’re more worried about an Amanda Marcotte type kerfuffle.
No Jeff Gannon gonna be in THIS White House (whew)!
*sigh* There goes my cabinet position.
Seriously, who hasn’t said stupid shit on the internet? This is just the first president who understands that, or more likely, intends to recruit heavily from modern internet participants.
@3 — like what?
Of course these are questions Barack Obama never had to answer. Nor did he have to answer (the) questions (which) appear on Standard Form 86 (SF 86) “Questionnaire for National Security Positions” which can be found at: http://www.opm.gov/forms/html/sf.asp
There is also SF 85 “Questionnaire for Public Trust Positions that asks some of the same questions.
We knew more about “joe the Plumber” in 24 hours then we ever knew about B.O. in two years.
All? Like, your very first AOL address from the mid-90’s? Your AIM screennames, your ICQ handles, Yahoo, MSN, your Weezer message board name? Who honestly remembers all that shit?
Mr. Poe = SOL
Your focus on sex is understandable, but I’m not sure that’s what they’re going for. There was a big dust-up some time back, a CEO (Whole Foods, maybe?) who was posing as not-the-CEO on stock message boards to talk up the company.
Problem is what if you use a handle all the time, and someone else uses that same handle to conduct embarrassing activities? It’s like being guilty of having the same first name.
It looks like the Obama administration is vetting every potential staff gofor more than McCain vetted his vice-president running mate.
I know all the good liberals are worried about this, but I just can’t get that exercised about it. He’s being careful that nothing comes out of nowhere and bites him in the ass. As he should be.
Well, since I’ve been using the same handle for at least ten years, and since it also happens to be my actual name, I could probably skate through that form in no time flat.
@9
steadyjohn, your blog has a photograph of ACTUAL WOOL to illustrate the removal of wool from the nation’s eyes as you reveal the TRUTH. That is fucking classic.
You know what would go good with that? A picture of some eyes, but with NO WOOL. Get it? That would like just make it crystal clear, you know what I mean? Like there was this wool, and now? NO WOOL! Gone! You can go ahead and use my idea, if you want.
Sure Dan, but remember that whole impeachment thing and the freezing of any reasonable agenda for two years while these bullshit scandals were all that anyone could focus on?
Remember the campaign? How nothing really leaked, there were no overwhelming problems with any staffers, the “No Drama Obama” thing? I think it’s fair to say that he expects similar smoothness in the administration.
Everyone should do what they want, but from a political perspective there are choices you make that will exclude you from an administration job. I’m personally fine with that – no one has a right to a Cabinet spot. We all have the right to an administration that’s run smoothly, smartly, and without scandal after scandal bogging down the country and the administration’s agenda.
You can’t blame him for trying to cover his ass. The last thing he needs is to hire someone for a high financial position and 2 months down the road the press finds out that he’s been posting on Ron Paul’s website about how we should disband the treasury dept.
Or hire someone for religious outreach to find out they were a youth pastor.
I’m sure they’ll keep the info from these surveys totally secret but they need to know the info ahead of time or the world will certainly know about it afterward.
This is why you should never mix your work and online profiles.
Ever.
That said, more than half of all high level executives have fraudulent or overstated credentials, according to today’s Wall Street Journal, so who says you have to tell them “all” your online personae?
i dunno dude. i think this is one those instances where to the hammer everything looks like a nail. when i had read about that, i had figured they were looking for all AIM MSN, Blogger names for political association checks.
Oh please. I don’t see how this question will lead to anyone being reconsidered from a job.
Why on earth wouldn’t they pry? This is politics and they don’t want to be embarrassed, because yes, finding out that the person who’s going to be spearheading your health care reform is into bareback parties tends to distract from the substance of the debate. Best not give the GOP any ammo.
If you’ve been smart, your sex-related handles will not lead investigators back to you. Therefore, leave those handles out.
The internet is not just for porn (or sex), and everyone knows it would be bad if a person were appointed to work for Obama and was then discovered to have (for example) a blog discussing ideas that went against the presidential agenda.
It’s the wise and prudent thing to do, and if people want to use the internet for sex or other purposes that might cause shame when they decide to pursue a public career, I strongly suggest that you thoroughly cover your tracks. If one wants a career in politics, the time to start planning it is in your teen years, when you decide which college to attend, what you’re going to study, and how NOT to leave sex and/or drug trails around on the internets. Watch your Facebook pages!
@ 25 and everyone: How many teenagers have you honestly known that wanted to become politicians? How many politicians–and I’m using that word loosely here (all levels of government)–knew in their teen years what they wanted to do? Well?
Both Obama and Clinton knew in their teen years what the wanted to do, which is why they planned their lives accordingly by attending the right schools and keeping career damaging activities (drug usage) to a minimum. Yes, the teen years are fraught with hormonal changes, mood swings, and indecisiveness, but the stand-out leaders tend to rise above that and think before they do something that will cause severe set-backs for their chosen careers. Or, as we used to say in the Navy: Prior Planning Prevents Piss-Poor Performance.
Whether or not the Dems oppose invading people’s sex lives, the Republicans will certainly be busy trying to dig up dirt on everyone in the administration (they won’t have much else to do the next four years). Forewarned is forearmed, and I don’t blame Obama one bit for wanting to make sure that folks are thoroughly vetted so that they can do their jobs without turning into the next installment of the Politicos with their Pants Down circus.