White House watch, day three: not even an automated response

Posted on April 2nd, 2009 – 1:37 PM
By James Shiffer

Prodded by Jay Lunde of Bloomington, I first posed my question on Tuesday about the cost, scope and cast of President Obama’s overseas visit on the White House web site on Tuesday. I reposted the question on Wednesday, just to be sure that my tiny test of the administration’s promised openness isn’t derailed by my own typos. We’re on the third day, and I haven’t even gotten an email receipt. Not that I particularly like form letters, but they at least indicate my question hasn’t gotten completely lost. I hope I get some kind of answer before the president returns to the United States next week.

8 Responses to “White House watch, day three: not even an automated response”

  1. Camden Pike Says:

    James,
    Don’t worry three days is nothing. It took over
    a month to receive a response from Senator Klobachar,
    When I wrote her about my concern over the confirmation
    of Senator Daschle, and the stimulus bill. The only
    thing they wrote was a prepared response saying
    Daschle had withdrawn. I know she’s busy, but I would
    image it will take much longer with the President.

  2. Pal Says:

    Maybe they do send an email receipt to verify your email was received,
    and you didn’t get one because yours wasn’t. Re-send.

  3. T. Booker Says:

    Sen. Klobuchar generally takes upwards of 5 to 6 weeks to get an automated reply. Say what you want about Norm Coleman, I generally got a receipt notice within a day or two and a reply within a week. He kept up with his constituents.

  4. R. Gonyea Says:

    James, sorry but exactly what were you expecting? You all ran into electing a guy with no experince in governing only in running for the office of. He did notingwhile actually in the senate. The press in the EU is ripping him apart. I wouldn’t expect him to answer any questions from the press

  5. guido Says:

    This is as good a place as any to post my good bye to the Star-Tribune, which will be going broke soon. I haven’t been to this web site for two years and a quick look around shows I haven’t missed much.

    The newspaper isn’t going broke because it acts as an outlet for the the Democrats propoganda, but that’s the reason it won’t be missed when it goes.

    For those who’ll miss it, here’s the Star-Tribune’s endorsements for the next four presidenttial elections:

    2012: the Democrat
    2016: the Democrat
    2020: the Democrat
    2024: the Democrat

    These predictions were arrived at using the same careful analysis done by the Star-Tribune editors in every election.

    Anyway, thanks for making my day by going bankrupt. Good luck on finding work. Maybe the Obama campaign/administration needs more proganda writers.

  6. alan holden Says:

    Hey Guido try some of the sweet grapes there waaaay better then the sour ones. The “trib” is far and away Minnesotas best info source.
    Bubalai

  7. Bonnie B. Says:

    I used to think the Mpls paper(s) were pretty good but I xdldom recognize the reporters names the last year.

  8. Cheshire Says:

    I wrote to the White House over a month ago and never
    a response. I wrote to State Senator Linda Berglin in dorect response to something that she had said asking her something and never even an automated thank you. Hard to commit to vote for these people the next time they are up for election if their offices can’t even manage to master automated returns.