Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Call For Informants...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Call For Informants...

    http://www.redstate.com/jeff_emanuel...know-about-it/

    Call For Informants: If You Oppose Obamacare, Even in ‘Casual Conversation,’ the White House Wants to Know About It

    Posted by Jeff Emanuel (Profile)

    If you see anybody publicly opposing President Obama’s plan to implement a government-centric overhaul of the health care system, the White House wants you to report that person (or persons) ASAP.

    From the White House website:

    "There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to [email protected]."

    Emphasis added. Of course, as we’ve seen in the health care debate to date, the term “disinformation” is used by the Obama White House as a catchall to describe any opposition to the President’s push for single-payer, government-run health care — meaning the White House wants to be informed of any forwarded emails or blog posts or any “casual conversations” that could be taken as opposition to their health care overhaul plan.

    The White House has, as yet, offered no explanation of what it is they plan to do with the tips on policy opposition they hope to receive from citizen informers.

    Interestingly, as Jake Tapper pointed out on Twitter this morning, the title of that post on the White House is a quote from John Adams’ 1770 “Argument in Defense of the Soldiers in the Boston Massacre Trials.”

  • #2
    This sh*t is going to start giving me panic attacks.

    I will write to the white house about THIS one!
    "If Howdy Doody runs against him, I'm voting for the puppet." - SkyOwl's Wife, 2012

    Comment


    • #3
      Went to the site. Quoted the entry from Whitehouse.gov and added:
      Now if we get an email that we do or don't believe is garbage, we must INFORM?

      You people are nuts.

      <my name>
      Sierra Vista, Arizona

      AMERICAN, last I looked


      Now, I'll send them one of their "facts" every day and tell them it seems fishy. Since ALL of their "facts" do indeed, seem fishy.
      Last edited by Skyowl's Wife; 08-05-2009, 01:20 AM.
      "If Howdy Doody runs against him, I'm voting for the puppet." - SkyOwl's Wife, 2012

      Comment


      • #4
        Socialism here we come..... Makes me want to vomit!
        Wolverines!!!:D

        Comment


        • #5
          I ve read the fu.. health care reform and what people are saying is true. That is death care. Maybe they think we cannot read? Thats more money wasted on "No child left behind" lmao

          Comment


          • #6
            Wife is right. We need to use this chance to turn this against them...report any ads you see from the government, and stories that report their side of things and mention that "this looks fishy to me".;)

            Comment


            • #7
              Indeed. Love the idea. The only thing I'd caution against would be using your own email address or even a fake one from your own computer. This bunch gets so worked up over ANY roadblocks/criticism that I wouldn't put it past them to have the IRS at the ready for audits, etc.

              Comment


              • #8
                Were one step closer to communism

                Comment


                • #9
                  Should I send this? From a library of course.

                  Dear Mr. Insert name:

                  Thank you for contacting me regarding Judge Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama’s nominee to fill the current vacancy on the United States Supreme Court.

                  As your United States Senator, I will never play partisan politics when carrying out my constitutional duty to provide “advice and consent” on the President's nominations. I will only support nominees for the Supreme Court who I believe, based on their record, will be fair and objective in evaluating the cases that come before them in order to ensure that the United States Constitution is properly upheld.

                  Judge Sotomayor is one of the most qualified individuals ever nominated to serve on our nation’s highest court. Throughout her extensive career, as a prosecutor, a private practitioner, a District Court Judge and an Appellate Judge, she has demonstrated a mastery of the law. Her faithfulness to the rule of law is confirmed by the fact that in cases where she served on a panel with a Republican-appointed judge, Judge Sotomayor and the Republican appointee agreed on the outcome 95% of the time.

                  During the Senate Judiciary Committee’s nomination hearings, Senators spent hours upon hours questioning Judge Sotomayor’s judicial philosophy, her judicial record and comments she made at various speaking engagements. I found her answers to be thorough and forthright. On July 28, the Committee approved Judge Sotomayor’s nomination by a vote of 13 to 6. I remain convinced that Judge Sotomayor will be a exemplary addition to the Supreme Court, and I will vote in support of her nomination.

                  Again, thank you for sharing your concerns with me. It is a privilege to represent you. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future regarding other matters of interest or concern.

                  All best,
                  Senator Claire McCaskill

                  Blah bla blah Hitler blah bla blah Take over the world blah bla bla blah One world government. blah blah
                  G.I.H.S.O. Going In Hot, Safety Off.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I've snitched twice today.

                    One with quotes by Doctor Emanual Ezekial who said:
                    "Services provided to individuals who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens are not basic and should not be guaranteed. An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia."

                    "When implemented, the complete lives system produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years get the most substantial chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated."

                    "Strict youngest-first allocation directs scarce resources predominantly to infants. This approach seems incorrect. The death of a 20-year-old woman is intuitively worse than that of a 2-month-old girl, even though the baby has had less life. The 20-year-old has a much more developed personality than the infant, and has drawn upon the investment of others to begin as-yet-unfulfilled projects.... Adolescents have received substantial substantial education and parental care, investments that will be wasted without a complete life. Infants, by contrast, have not yet received these investments.... It is terrible when an infant dies, but worse, most people think, when a three-year-old child dies, and worse still when an adolescent does."

                    "Ultimately, the complete lives system does not create 'classes of Untermenschen whose lives and well being are deemed not worth spending money on,' but rather empowers us to decide fairly whom to save when genuine scarcity makes saving everyone impossible."

                    "Vague promises of savings from cutting waste, enhancing prevention and wellness, installing electronic medical records and improving quality are merely 'lipstick' cost control, more for show and public relations than for true change. Savings will require changing how doctors think about their patients. Doctors take the Hippocratic Oath too seriously, as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of the cost or effects on others."

                    "Unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination; every person lives through different life stages rather than being a single age. Even if 25-year-olds receive priority over 65-year-olds, everyone who is 65 years now was previously 25 years."

                    "Every favor to a constituency should be linked to support for the health-care reform agenda. If the automakers want a bailout, then they and their suppliers have to agree to support and lobby for the administration's health-reform effort."

                    This is BOs medical expert.

                    The other was quoting an ammendment in Congress that guarantees we will pay for abortions.
                    "If Howdy Doody runs against him, I'm voting for the puppet." - SkyOwl's Wife, 2012

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I think it is called eugenics? Hitler dabbled in it as the UK is doing so now. This is absolutely crazy stuff, all the tinfoilers were right! With a world controled by a 'single payer system' protestors, those who must be forced to pay for this monster, can be classified as unfit for healthcare and deleted like under Marxism, the NWO is only a president's signiture away!
                      The road to serfdom is paved with free electric golf carts.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Liberals want a reduction in world population by at least half.

                        Why not start with the elderly who are very likely the most moral portion of the population. They also actually remember what it was like to have true freedom and might *GASP* TELL people who MIGHT start to question The One.

                        Next will be "defectives". Or Christians. Or _______ (fill in the blank).
                        "If Howdy Doody runs against him, I'm voting for the puppet." - SkyOwl's Wife, 2012

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X