<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Our Country&#8217;s new CTO, un qualified for the job</title>
	<atom:link href="http://johnwilker.com/2009/04/our-countrys-new-cto-un-qualified-for-the-job/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://johnwilker.com/2009/04/our-countrys-new-cto-un-qualified-for-the-job/</link>
	<description>John Wilker: Community, Code, Randomness</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 28 Feb 2010 09:19:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: John Wilker</title>
		<link>http://johnwilker.com/2009/04/our-countrys-new-cto-un-qualified-for-the-job/comment-page-1/#comment-1700</link>
		<dc:creator>John Wilker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Apr 2009 21:57:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://johnwilker.com/?p=768#comment-1700</guid>
		<description>Maybe it comes across more angry than intended (guess the &#039;disgust&#039; part is to blame LOL). Though I am let down, whether the names that were initially thrown about were interested or not I don&#039;t much care, some of those would&#039;ve been bad choices in my opinion. 
 
I believe CTO and CIO&#039;s should come from a technology background. I have no love or respect for  bureaucrats who fancy themselves techies. I think there are enough bureaucrats in Washington, that we don&#039;t need to create new jobs for them.  
 
I think part of my &quot;disgust&quot; is that I had hoped President Obama wouldn&#039;t surround himself with lifelong bureaucrats, after all his rhetoric about such types. Guess you can only do so much taking the politics out of Washington, LOL 
 
I didn&#039;t even read O&#039;Reilly&#039;s piece, he seems like a nice enough guy, but I don&#039;t usually give a fig for his opinion. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maybe it comes across more angry than intended (guess the &#039;disgust&#039; part is to blame LOL). Though I am let down, whether the names that were initially thrown about were interested or not I don&#039;t much care, some of those would&#039;ve been bad choices in my opinion. </p>
<p>I believe CTO and CIO&#039;s should come from a technology background. I have no love or respect for  bureaucrats who fancy themselves techies. I think there are enough bureaucrats in Washington, that we don&#039;t need to create new jobs for them.  </p>
<p>I think part of my &quot;disgust&quot; is that I had hoped President Obama wouldn&#039;t surround himself with lifelong bureaucrats, after all his rhetoric about such types. Guess you can only do so much taking the politics out of Washington, LOL </p>
<p>I didn&#039;t even read O&#039;Reilly&#039;s piece, he seems like a nice enough guy, but I don&#039;t usually give a fig for his opinion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian Rinaldi</title>
		<link>http://johnwilker.com/2009/04/our-countrys-new-cto-un-qualified-for-the-job/comment-page-1/#comment-1697</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian Rinaldi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Apr 2009 15:35:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://johnwilker.com/?p=768#comment-1697</guid>
		<description>I actually didn&#039;t pay attention to this announcement until you posted but it is interesting. The thing is, I am not sure where your anger at this announcement is coming from (other than relating it to an experience you obviously disliked but seems generally irrelevant to this individual tbh). The quotes from TechCrunch make it sound as though they were critical of the appointment but in fact they weren&#039;t (they didn&#039;t seem to take a stance other than to mention that some names had been thrown around that never even necessarily expressed any interest in this position). If you follow the link to O&#039;Reilly&#039;s post about this person it goes into great detail and is very supportive. So while I guess I can understand how you may be disappointed that he chose a lifetime bureaucrat for the position, I don&#039;t know if your charge that this makes him unqualified really bears out and your anger seems outsized to the issue. Just my two cents. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I actually didn&#039;t pay attention to this announcement until you posted but it is interesting. The thing is, I am not sure where your anger at this announcement is coming from (other than relating it to an experience you obviously disliked but seems generally irrelevant to this individual tbh). The quotes from TechCrunch make it sound as though they were critical of the appointment but in fact they weren&#039;t (they didn&#039;t seem to take a stance other than to mention that some names had been thrown around that never even necessarily expressed any interest in this position). If you follow the link to O&#039;Reilly&#039;s post about this person it goes into great detail and is very supportive. So while I guess I can understand how you may be disappointed that he chose a lifetime bureaucrat for the position, I don&#039;t know if your charge that this makes him unqualified really bears out and your anger seems outsized to the issue. Just my two cents.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
