On Tuesday we (and the rest of the free world) mocked the Obama administration for including pitiful addendums at the bottom the biographies of almost every president from the last century.

The Obama administration, true to narcissistic form, don’t really understand why people are making a big deal out of it. Besides, technically, they didn’t change any of the bios:

The Obama White House is drawing ridicule for appending the official online biographies of nearly every president over the last century, in order to link President Barack Obama’s accomplishments to the former commanders-in-chief.

The Obama team went into the pages of US presidents dating back to Calvin Coolidge to add “Did you know?” fact boxes to the end of their bios. Those additions were used to plug a host of Obama administration initiatives.

For instance, the following line was added to the official bio of Ronald Reagan, “In a June 28, 1985, speech, Reagan called for a fairer tax code, one where a multimillionaire did not have a lower tax rate than his secretary. Today, President Obama is calling for the same with the Buffett Rule.”

The White House defended itself, saying, “No biographies have been altered. We simply added links at the bottom of each page to related content, which is a commonly used best practice to encourage people to browse more pages on a site.”

The additions do include links, but each one touts an Obama administration policy or practice in the process.

So it’s kind of like Obama building a monument of himself next to the Lincoln Memorial with the inscription “Yeah, what he said,” and then saying, “What’s the big deal? We didn’t make any changes to the Lincoln thing.” But I’ll stop talking about that because I don’t want to give them any ideas.

(h/t JWF)


30 Responses to “White House Denial: No Biographies Have Been Altered”

  1. Marshall_Will on May 17th, 2012 11:16 am

    "which is a commonly used best practice to encourage people to browse more pages on a site.”

    Yes. That's why they're called p0rn-sites.

  2. jeffythequick on May 17th, 2012 12:02 pm

    Which will help with those erectile dysfunction stud-ies!

    I can't wait for the pop-up to explode from

  3. Marshall_Will on May 17th, 2012 12:18 pm

    Tell Meanchelle You're In!

    Next thing you know people will be sayin' Joan Jett didn't write I Love Rock and Roll? Ooops!

    That's "The Arrows" a full 5 years prior. In terms of R & R, several lifetimes. From the moment the song took off, she felt there was no way she could own up to the fact it was a COVER version. It's associated w/ her name first and foremost to this day…

  4. backwoodsconsr on May 17th, 2012 12:22 pm

    But enough about me, let's talk about me.

  5. Granny55 on May 17th, 2012 12:22 pm

    How is all this non-sense going to be undone?

  6. Marshall_Will on May 17th, 2012 12:47 pm


    The difference this go round is, we have fine folks like Doug & MM to help us set the record straight. Just this AM Michelle was on F&F talking about how Conservative Bloggers are making an impact. ( Even if it was a bit self-congratulatory? ) I say take a BOW!

    My point was, before there was MTV, let alone an internet, plagiarism was infinitely more viable. It's been a stormy period these last few years but objective people are learning the distinctions.

  7. Patti on May 17th, 2012 1:04 pm

    Hey there Marshall_Will ….. I caught Michelle this morning, too ( fabulous, as always !…… last night my Palinista friends and I were discussing the blog, twitter, Facebook phenom (many of them already involved….some not.. but realize we must ALL get in the game…'s a great piece from Breitbart yesterday:

    Why Conservatives Must Join the Battle for America On Twitter

    Twitter is the online equivalent to "Easy Rider," the 1969 film that changed Hollywood forever. When that film hit and became a national sensation, a whole generation of filmmakers were ready to capitalize and take over the industry because they had spent years in television and film learning their craft. In this same way, Twitter came of age after conservatives had already spent a decade-or-so learning their craft online through blogs. We learned how to write, how the media works, and how to fight. Twitter arrived and when it did, our foundation to utilize it effectively was already in place.

    Yes, now we are winning, but the left will never stop adapting and neither should we. Even if we oust President FailureTeleprompter in 2012, that's just the beginning of the beginning. This is an eternal war of inches and it requires tireless patriots unwilling to give up even one of those inches.

    If you’re not on Twitter, sign up immediately. Watch, learn, pick your spots and then … fight.

    I'm convinced that by ending the left's corrupt bottleneck of the flow of information, Twitter has become the most important political invention since the American Constitution; and like that document, we must cherish, protect, and use it.


  8. clu seatoe on May 17th, 2012 1:13 pm

    Once again we see the high school/college pranksters who have yet, if ever, to mature. Who continue to push the envelope and the boundaries of propriety. Then they sit in class giving each other quick glances and guilty grins about having hacked into the campus computer system and amended the database somehow or rewritten code to produce a different outcome. And then come up with the childish response of ‘we really didn’t CHANGE anything’ just (from our (the childish mind) perspective) fixed it.

    The problem here is that there is so much guilt to go around in the house, senate, and WH that there is no one to stand and man the fence line, no one to stand for common decency and accepted protocol. No one to say NO. No one to say this ‘far and no further.’ Hence the need for the Tea Party. Just like in homes of today’s culture, no parent who wants to be a leader, to be the ‘bad guy’, to be the one to say ‘NO.’

    In all aspects of life, raising children to proper adulthood is a never-ending job.

  9. Marshall_Will on May 17th, 2012 2:11 pm

    Widely considered the 'sequel' to Easy Rider, a wonderful review of "Vanishing Point" ( 1971 w/ Barry Newman )

    Kowalski himself had tried to "fit in" with the Establishment as a soldier and police officer and later, attempted to do the same with the blossoming 1960s counterculture, but soon disappointingly found that they both were ridden with their own various forms of dishonesty and insincerity. Personal honor, self-reliance and genuine respect–Kowalski's stock in trade–were tragically valued very little by either, despite each one's shrill and haughty claims to the contrary."

    What a shame there was no Tea Party for our beloved "marginal man" to join back then! Vanishing Point can and should be our rally cry going into Nov.

  10. jeffythequick on May 17th, 2012 2:42 pm

    O/T, but catching this on Rush about the need for another Earth to sustain the impact of humans on the current planet, and how we're going to run out of resources by 2030 (another take on AGW):

    Here's my solution:
    We already have another earth, and it's called Venus. We need to get a bunch of Progressives to move Venus into an orbit 180 degrees out of phase with the Earth, and Mercury as a moon for Venus. (hang with me here…) If we get it done in the next year or two, hopefully Venus should cool by then, and we can start colonizing, and we can move the progressives there, and they can show us what a Progressive paradise is!

  11. SignPainterGuy on May 17th, 2012 3:09 pm

    That`s enough of me talking about me; what do YOU think about me ?

  12. SignPainterGuy on May 17th, 2012 3:22 pm

    I like it ! Now to get Soros to stop destroying the USA and the Hollyweirdos to stop giving to Obumble; pool THEIR money and git`er done !

  13. SignPainterGuy on May 17th, 2012 3:26 pm

    I have only one issue with your interesting metaphor; Kowalski and his white Challenger came to a fiery end against a D-8 Cat dozer blade !

  14. Marshall_Will on May 17th, 2012 3:43 pm

    As will WE if we don't get this a-corn-hole out of office!

    Only this time, The Revolution WILL be televised. I know you guys are aware I've been hitting the gym but here's a little taste of what Nov. will look like for the Progs:

  15. jeffythequick on May 17th, 2012 3:52 pm

    Yeah, but instead of Venus, they'll want Uranus.

  16. jeffythequick on May 17th, 2012 3:53 pm

    I think that I should be talking about me.

  17. swede on May 17th, 2012 4:57 pm

    If I were you I'd be talking about me 'cause I am the one I'm talking about when I talk about what really matters to me. In fact I wrote two books about me and I read them whenever I need to know more 'bout me 'cause I'm so me I can't even stand it. I am me, and me's all I can be. See?

    (Note: The Greek word for "I" is actually "ego". Guess here's why.)

  18. Ike on May 17th, 2012 5:08 pm

    "Thanks to the thoughts of President Obama, we now have elected Members of Congress!"

  19. Granny55 on May 17th, 2012 5:53 pm

    That's what I meant in my previous post. These progs are running around plastering Ozero's crap all over. Thank goodness we do have great IT people on our side to catch them in the act. But it still scares the bezeebies out of me of what they will do if they get 4 more years!!!

  20. SignPainterGuy on May 17th, 2012 8:13 pm

    Yes, and on 1-24-13 or so, a lot of us will show it to them ! ;-)

  21. jeffythequick on May 18th, 2012 12:31 am

    I'm thinking 12:01pm, 1/20/2013. Since it's a Sunday, I wonder if Romney will make it not unholy.

    There is a small catch, though… 1/20/2013 is a Sunday, and Romney will be a member of the Washington DC 3rd ward (go to, then Visit us, then put in 1600 Pennsylvania Ave), and this year, they meet at 1pm, so next year, they'll have the early schedule, so it looks like 9am church, skip Sunday School and Priesthood, and get inaugurated, then have a ball (or 8).

    Those members of the ward, how would you like to be the President's home teacher?

    "How are things going?"
    "Is there anything we can do? Do you need the Elder's quorum to help you move in?"
    "When is a good time to come by next month?"

    and the visiting teachers can leave cookies on the doorstep for Ann and the kids.

  22. jeffythequick on May 18th, 2012 1:01 am

    one person representing 740,000 people is hardly representation.

  23. jeffythequick on May 18th, 2012 1:38 am

    I thought it was Joan Jett too, but now that I've seen that version, it makes sense. It was a "masculine" song, and just changing the she's to he's makes it appropriate, but no less masculine.

    Next, you're going to tell me the Michael J. Fox didn't originally sing "Johnny B Goode" and it was Marvin Berry's brother who did…

    Mrs. thequick never heard the ding-a-ling song. She gets such an education from me!

  24. SignPainterGuy on May 18th, 2012 2:25 am

    Hmmm, lifelong Baptist. Even as a Deacon, it`s simpler, but I still like cookies ! ;-) Sounds like a loooong day for the Mittster and not all of it fun !

    Hey, re; your email addy. Is it "me" at j….t..q…. dot com ? I put jeffytheqick dot com in my addy box and got a GoDaddy page. It said I`d arrived at your domain thing, but there wasn`t anything but GoDaddy stuff. What gives ?

  25. jeffythequick on May 18th, 2012 2:31 am

    yeah, just send an e-mail to that address. I registered with GoDaddy last night, and I do my own mail hosting. Web Hosting is something entirely different. I may start a blog, but it's too much fun here on Doug's.

    Plus, I have a day job.

  26. jeffythequick on May 18th, 2012 2:35 am

    Plus, the President has to do his home teaching too… I can just picture him, on the 30th, going, "geez… can we (there's always 2 home teachers) come over tonight and get the home teaching done?"

    -same questions…

    "Is there anything we can do for you"
    Yeah, Mitt. Protect and defend the Constitution.

  27. SignPainterGuy on May 18th, 2012 2:44 am

    "Home Teachers" ? I take it these are a bit more than tutors and prayer partners !?

  28. jeffythequick on May 18th, 2012 2:48 am

    Yeah… this kind of thing too:

  29. Ike on May 18th, 2012 11:28 am

    @jeffythequick: You're right, but the Congresscritters decided back in the early 1900's that they didn't want to have too many Representatives, because that diluted their power. I mean, if there were 370,000 people per Representative, that would means 870 Reps and that's hardly any power for each one; isn't it? Nearly all of those kinds of things aren't in the Constitution, but rather are Rules of the House or of the Senate or laws that the Congress passed for their direct political benefit. That's part of the problem.

  30. jeffythequick on May 18th, 2012 5:25 pm

    Agreed. I'm a big supporter of 30-50,000 people per Rep. Yep, 10,000 in the House. If you want to get rid of a rep, you only need 25,0001 people to get them out, not 360,001. Plus, there's a better chance you and they will know each other.

    One Rep, two staff, 3 weeks in district, 1 in Washington.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.