Fishy?

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Thu Aug 06, 2009 4:57 pm

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts-Ar ... rn-Things/

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 flag@whitehouse.gov.

Does this pass the smell test for you?

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Thu Aug 06, 2009 6:29 pm

I'm not sure this is how Joe McCarthy would have handled things, but perhaps given the opportunity..

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 4:41 am

I get regular emails from my senator, John Cornyn. This was his latest.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sen. Cornyn Sends Letter To President Obama About "Fishy" Activities Program At White House

Sen. Cornyn appeared on Fox News today to discuss his letter to President Obama regarding the collection of emails and other communications opposing the President's health care policies. Click here to watch the interview.

In a letter to President Obama, Sen. Cornyn expressed serious concern about the White House's new program requesting Americans to forward email chains and other communications opposing the President's health care policies. Sen. Cornyn is seeking assurances that the program is being carried out in a manner consistent with the First Amendment and America's tradition of free speech and public discourse.

Sen. Cornyn's letter also inquires about the collection of names, email addresses, IP addresses, and private speech of U.S. citizens that will be reported, which raises the specter of a data collection program.

"I am not aware of any precedent for a President asking American citizens to report their fellow citizens to the White House for pure political speech that is deemed ‘fishy' or otherwise inimical to the White House's political interests," Sen. Cornyn wrote. "You should not be surprised that these actions taken by your White House staff raise the specter of a data collection program. As Congress debates health care reform and other critical policy matters, citizen engagement must not be chilled by fear of government monitoring the exercise of free speech rights."

--The full text of Sen. Cornyn's letter is below--

Dear President Obama,

I write to express my concern about a new White House program to monitor American citizens' speech opposing your health care policies, and to seek your assurances that this program is being carried out in a manner consistent with the First Amendment and America's tradition of free speech and public discourse.

Yesterday, in an official White House release entitled "Facts are Stubborn Things," the White House Director of New Media, Macon Phillips, asserted that there was "a lot of disinformation out there," and encouraged citizens to report "fishy" speech opposing your health care policies to the White House. Phillips specifically targeted private, unpublished, even casual speech, writing that "rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation." Phillips wrote "If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov."

I am not aware of any precedent for a President asking American citizens to report their fellow citizens to the White House for pure political speech that is deemed "fishy" or otherwise inimical to the White House's political interests.

By requesting that citizens send "fishy" emails to the White House, it is inevitable that the names, email addresses, IP addresses, and private speech of U.S. citizens will be reported to the White House. You should not be surprised that these actions taken by your White House staff raise the specter of a data collection program. As Congress debates health care reform and other critical policy matters, citizen engagement must not be chilled by fear of government monitoring the exercise of free speech rights.

I can only imagine the level of justifiable outrage had your predecessor asked Americans to forward emails critical of his policies to the White House. I suspect that you would have been leading the charge in condemning such a program-and I would have been at your side denouncing such heavy-handed government action.

So I urge you to cease this program immediately. At the very least, I request that you detail to Congress and the public the protocols that your White House is following to purge the names, email addresses, IP addresses, and identities of citizens who are reported to have engaged in "fishy" speech. And I respectfully request an answer to the following:

How do you intend to use the names, email addresses, IP addresses, and identities of citizens who are reported to have engaged in "fishy" speech?

How do you intend to notify citizens who have been reported for "fishy" speech?

What action do you intend to take against citizens who have been reported for engaging in "fishy" speech?

Do your own past statements qualify as "disinformation"? For example, is it "disinformation" to note that in 2003 you said:"I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer universal health care plan"?

I look forward to your prompt response.

Sincerely,

JOHN CORNYN

United States Senator

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 5:06 am

If anything suspicious about a threat to the government was present and bodily harm to the citizens, I can see sending that off to the White House. But opposotion to the President's Health Care proposal? I don't think so. They just want to frighten anyone showing up to Town Hall Meetings, which are getting heated up I hear. I have heard about several of them being held here this weekend, my local congressman refuses to hold one.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 5:16 am

Makes one wonder. :yh_think

Why squelch opposition? If it's such a great thing it should withstand open debate, right?

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 5:19 am

Doesn't seem to be, they seem to fear oppostion to the current policy changes being proposed. That is what is really fishy!

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 5:20 am

Current topic on Fox right now..................

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 5:21 am

:wah: I thought about emailing them all the claims their czars are making in support of government healthcare, but then I realized they'd have my email address on file.

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 5:26 am

Mail it out of the local library computers.....

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 6:48 am

'Nobody Is Collecting Names': White House Responds to Charge It’s Monitoring Speech of Health Care Reform Opponents

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 6:52 am

Yeah, and they said the National Archives collects that data, to be released after how many years? Depends on how they are classified, it can be up to fifty years I think. (though don't quote me on that time span)

It is not available for public perusal, like duh!:rolleyes:

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 7:21 am

There's a law enacted preventing the White House from gathering such information. Happened because of Nixon. I'm searching for the statute number.

Nomad · Post by **Nomad** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 7:30 am

I firmly believe the administration is merely trying to put out fires.

Limmouth and Hannity are starting little fires and trying to incite chaos.

I dont think its the names theyre interested in as much as trying to dispel inaccurate information as they try to proceed with their initiative.

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 8:16 am

I think alot of it is the backlash that the Town Halls have a vocal percentage who are against the plan-leading to Peloski's unwise comment about them. Since when did a different viewpoint become likened to "Nazis" and "swastikas?" There would not have been an American Revolution in the first place if there was not dissent about something, and differing viewpoints. It is how we handle it now that counts. Because there are ominous undertones to a great many things about the Health Care Proposal, and the political analysis of it can see a trend towards socialism. IMO

Nomad · Post by **Nomad** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 8:21 am

chonsigirl;1226793 wrote: I think alot of it is the backlash that the Town Halls have a vocal percentage who are against the plan-leading to Peloski's unwise comment about them. Since when did a different viewpoint become likened to "Nazis" and "swastikas?" There would not have been an American Revolution in the first place if there was not dissent about something, and differing viewpoints. It is how we handle it now that counts. Because there are ominous undertones to a great many things about the Health Care Proposal, and the political analysis of it can see a trend towards socialism. IMO

Which side are you talking about Chons?

Limbaugh called Pelosi and Obama Nazis on his program yesterday.

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 8:42 am

I am Against the Proposed Health Program and for monitoring the e-mails.

I dot not listen to the talk radio, Nomad. Limbaugh I see if he is on the news, otherwise I try to watch Fox and CNN for the differing viewpoints. I just get to watch the news more during summer.

For the Health Program, I do not agree with it: (and I will write these things among friends, who chose to disagree and we respect each other, but I have thought on some of these items this week alot):

1. Religious beliefs (I do not want one cent of my money paying for abortions, it is the taking of life) And I would not have a choice whether to allocate my money to go into other parts of the program. That is a violation of my First Ammendment rights.

2. Socialization of the system: it is not based one our Constitution, we are a republic with democratic ideals. This is a dangerous tendancy to begin.

3. I am not certain, and maybe you can clarify it for me, where do the homeless, the illegals obtain medical assistance in this program? (and my take on the illegals is this-you may call it the Conqueror's Country, we are all illegal aliens unless Native Americans, and where are their services provided also, still under the BIA and Indian Health Services? Very inadequete)

Mandatory insurance-what if they do not have it? Under the Hippocratic Oath, how can services be refused to these people? I do not agree with the latest judgments on it, it is a moral/ethical issue.

But if you can address #3 for me, I would appreciate it my dear. #2 is a view of the change in the system, and that is a topic that should probably have a thread of it's own. (but please do if you want to) #1 I am immovable about, and I pray about it daily.

I have been asked to attend Town Hall meetings this weekend, and worry because of the escalation of them. I am afraid my 60s tendancies would arise again, and I might blurt out-rather loudly-something....who knows what. I would not want to take a trip in a paddy wagon and leave my beloved at home with no one to care for him. But I think that is coming in the meetings....

Nomad · Post by **Nomad** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 9:09 am

Fair enough. Well said and I respect your opinion.

As for an answer to #3 I really dont know. I assume at present if a homeless person or illegal immigrant were injured they would be cared for by a county hospital. Im certain provisions exist for this as its probably a daily occurence in every city in the country. I dont imagine they jusy leave them in the street bleeding or dying.

#2 - If caring for ill people is considered socialistic then I dont care. We could do far worse things like destroying civilians in foreign countries for political agendas. That is unacceptable and its not what were supposed to be doing.

The fact that we are over extended throughout the world in military affairs while we need so many patches and repairs at home is such a contrast that I just cant fathom why this would be such a problem for so many.

If we get our own ducks in a row we become stronger.

In my opinion the entire govt needs a radical restructuring and Im ok with basic health care for our citizens. All of them. Im not ok with war and destruction. Isnt our involvement in foreign affairs a sense of socialism anyway?

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 11:01 am

Nomad;1226800 wrote: Which side are you talking about Chons?

Limbaugh called Pelosi and Obama Nazis on his program yesterday.
That was in response to this:

Newsmax.TV - Pelosi: Town Hall Protesters Carry Swastikas

Nomad · Post by **Nomad** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 12:18 pm

Accountable;1226899 wrote: That was in response to this:

Newsmax.TV - Pelosi: Town Hall Protesters Carry Swastikas

Well were they?

Anyway no his tirade was cornered around accusations that Pelosi was very near a Nazi party leader. He was making that statement as a description of her politics.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 12:43 pm

Nomad;1226918 wrote: Well were they?

Anyway no his tirade was cornered around accusations that Pelosi was very near a Nazi party leader. He was making that statement as a description of her politics.
Amazingly, all the swastikas people carried seemed to miraculously disappear whenever a camera was near. I haven't found even one instance of a swastika at a town hall meeting; and I've looked.

Don't mistake for my giving you that information as a defense of Rush or Hannity, but it is extraordinarily easy to draw parallels between what's happening now and what happened then.

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 1:24 pm

Nomad;1226843 wrote:

In my opinion the entire govt needs a radical restructuring and Im ok with basic health care for our citizens. All of them. Im not ok with war and destruction. Isnt our involvement in foreign affairs a sense of socialism anyway?

I think involvement in foreign affairs and continuing wars in countries other than our own would be imperialism. The time of it being a present threat to our own country has passed, and troops need to be withdrawn.

As far as restructuring the current government system, you are correct that it needs it. But having a two party system seems to lend itself to a swaying back and forth when the dominant party is in control. That is the downside of this form of government.

It would be more sensible along lines that AC has long described in previous posts, going back to the basic powers given in the Constitution to remain with the federal government, the states to have powers not specifically mentioned. (that is how it was originally written, but time has changed this)

But the current administration is not doing that, but continuing to encroach on state authority that has previously been assumed.

And the whole aspect of the czars-may I ask, who coined that term in the first place? The use of that word bring up images already preconceived and negative in connotation. Also, the number of them has increased in comparison to previous administrations to wonder about this excessive extension of power from the executive branch.

Nomad · Post by **Nomad** » Sat Aug 08, 2009 9:17 am

For the record 2/3 of insurance companies already cover the cost of abortion.

Medicaid does not unless its rape, incest or life threatening.

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Sat Aug 08, 2009 9:28 am

Yes, that is probably an accurate fact, Nomad.

It is a difficult thing for me, who must have health care coverage like all.

I think a provision should be included in all of them, that if desired, monies supplied for services do not have to include specific things or go towards them. (it is why I will never give to the United Way or other organizations, because the umbrellla organization pays for these other services)

It is a question that needs to be addressed, and not ignored. Like other questions people have that are valid.

But I saw in St. Louis there were problems last night at a town hall meeting, and I am afraid they will get a bad rep' because of these things.