Saturday, August 29, 2009
Friday, August 28, 2009
Bill would give president emergency control of Internet
Post: 9/11 Patriot Act, anyone?...where's the outrage now?
What is this, Iran?
Internet companies and civil liberties groups were alarmed this spring when a U.S. Senate bill proposed handing the White House the power to disconnect private-sector computers from the Internet.
They're not much happier about a revised version that aides to Sen. Jay Rockefeller, a West Virginia Democrat, have spent months drafting behind closed doors. CNET News has obtained a copy of the 55-page draft of S.773 (excerpt), which still appears to permit the president to seize temporary control of private-sector networks during a so-called cybersecurity emergency.
The new version would allow the president to "declare a cybersecurity emergency" relating to "non-governmental" computer networks and do what's necessary to respond to the threat. Other sections of the proposal include a federal certification program for "cybersecurity professionals," and a requirement that certain computer systems and networks in the private sector be managed by people who have been awarded that license.
"I think the redraft, while improved, remains troubling due to its vagueness," said Larry Clinton, president of the Internet Security Alliance, which counts representatives of Verizon, Verisign, Nortel, and Carnegie Mellon University on its board. "It is unclear what authority Sen. Rockefeller thinks is necessary over the private sector. Unless this is clarified, we cannot properly analyze, let alone support the bill."
Representatives of other large Internet and telecommunications companies expressed concerns about the bill in a teleconference with Rockefeller's aides this week, but were not immediately available for interviews on Thursday.
A spokesman for Rockefeller also declined to comment on the record Thursday, saying that many people were unavailable because of the summer recess. A Senate source familiar with the bill compared the president's power to take control of portions of the Internet to what President Bush did when grounding all aircraft on Sept. 11, 2001. The source said that one primary concern was the electrical grid, and what would happen if it were attacked from a broadband connection.
When Rockefeller, the chairman of the Senate Commerce committee, and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) introduced the original bill in April, they claimed it was vital to protect national cybersecurity. "We must protect our critical infrastructure at all costs--from our water to our electricity, to banking, traffic lights and electronic health records," Rockefeller said.
The Rockefeller proposal plays out against a broader concern in Washington, D.C., about the government's role in cybersecurity. In May, President Obama acknowledged that the government is "not as prepared" as it should be to respond to disruptions and announced that a new cybersecurity coordinator position would be created inside the White House staff. Three months later, that post remains empty, one top cybersecurity aide has quit, and some wags have begun to wonder why a government that receives failing marks on cybersecurity should be trusted to instruct the private sector what to do.
Rockefeller's revised legislation seeks to reshuffle the way the federal government addresses the topic. It requires a "cybersecurity workforce plan" from every federal agency, a "dashboard" pilot project, measurements of hiring effectiveness, and the implementation of a "comprehensive national cybersecurity strategy" in six months--even though its mandatory legal review will take a year to complete.
The privacy implications of sweeping changes implemented before the legal review is finished worry Lee Tien, a senior staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation in San Francisco. "As soon as you're saying that the federal government is going to be exercising this kind of power over private networks, it's going to be a really big issue," he says.
Probably the most controversial language begins in Section 201, which permits the president to "direct the national response to the cyber threat" if necessary for "the national defense and security." The White House is supposed to engage in "periodic mapping" of private networks deemed to be critical, and those companies "shall share" requested information with the federal government. ("Cyber" is defined as anything having to do with the Internet, telecommunications, computers, or computer networks.)
"The language has changed but it doesn't contain any real additional limits," EFF's Tien says. "It simply switches the more direct and obvious language they had originally to the more ambiguous (version)...The designation of what is a critical infrastructure system or network as far as I can tell has no specific process. There's no provision for any administrative process or review. That's where the problems seem to start. And then you have the amorphous powers that go along with it."
Translation: If your company is deemed "critical," a new set of regulations kick in involving who you can hire, what information you must disclose, and when the government would exercise control over your computers or network.
The Internet Security Alliance's Clinton adds that his group is "supportive of increased federal involvement to enhance cyber security, but we believe that the wrong approach, as embodied in this bill as introduced, will be counterproductive both from an national economic and national secuity perspective."
Thursday, August 13, 2009
GovernmentCare’s Assault on Seniors
Dr. McCaughey exposes and explains what is in the proposed single-payer/socialized health care program that was written by House Democrats and POTUS. Her interview is chilling and revealing, especially for older Americans.
“War on Senior Citizens”: Mark Levin Interviews Dr. Betsy McCaughey on ObamaCare Details
(broadcast interview on page)
Also, WSJ Article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203517304574303903498159292.html
By Betsy McCaughey
Since Medicare was established in 1965, access to care has enabled older Americans to avoid becoming disabled and to travel and live independently instead of languishing in nursing homes. But legislation now being rushed through Congress—H.R. 3200 and the Senate Health Committee Bill—will reduce access to care, pressure the elderly to end their lives prematurely, and doom baby boomers to painful later years.
The Congressional majority wants to pay for its $1 trillion to $1.6 trillion health bills with new taxes and a $500 billion cut to Medicare. This cut will come just as baby boomers turn 65 and increase Medicare enrollment by 30%. Less money and more patients will necessitate rationing. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that only 1% of Medicare cuts will come from eliminating fraud, waste and abuse.
The assault against seniors began with the stimulus package in February. Slipped into the bill was substantial funding for comparative effectiveness research, which is generally code for limiting care based on the patient’s age. Economists are familiar with the formula, where the cost of a treatment is divided by the number of years (called QALYs, or quality-adjusted life years) that the patient is likely to benefit. In Britain, the formula leads to denying treatments for older patients who have fewer years to benefit from care than younger patients.
When comparative effectiveness research appeared in the stimulus bill, Rep. Charles Boustany Jr., (R., La.) a heart surgeon, warned that it would lead to “denying seniors and the disabled lifesaving care.” He and Sen. Jon Kyl (R., Ariz.) proposed amendments to no avail that would have barred the federal government from using the research to eliminate treatments for the elderly or deny care based on age.
In a letter this week to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, White House budget chief Peter Orszag urged Congress to delegate its authority over Medicare to a newly created body within the executive branch. This measure is designed to circumvent the democratic process and avoid accountability to the public for cuts in benefits.
Driving these cuts is the misconception that preventative care can eliminate sickness. As President Obama said in a speech to the American Medical Association: “We have to avoid illness and disease in the first place.” That would make sense if most diseases were preventable. But the two most prevalent diseases of aging—cancer and heart disease—are largely caused by genetics and their occurrence increases with age. Your risk of being diagnosed with cancer doubles from age 50 to 60, according to the National Cancer Institute.
The House bill shifts resources from specialty medicine to primary care based on the misconception that Americans overuse specialist care and drive up costs in the process (pp. 660-686). In fact, heart-disease patients treated by generalists instead of specialists are often misdiagnosed and treated incorrectly. They are readmitted to the hospital more frequently, and die sooner.
“Study after study shows that cardiologists adhere to guidelines better than primary care doctors,” according to Jeffrey Moses, a heart specialist at New York Presbyterian Hospital. Adds Jeffrey Borer, chairman of medicine at SUNY Downstate Medical Center: “Seldom do generalists have the knowledge to identify the symptoms of aortic valve disease, even though more than 10% of people over 75 have it. After valve surgery, patients who were too short of breath to walk can resume a normal life into their 80s or 90s.”
While the House bill being pushed by the president reduces access to such cures and specialists, it ensures that seniors are counseled on end-of-life options, including refusing nutrition where state law allows it (pp. 425-446). In Oregon, some cancer patients are being denied care by the state that could extend their lives and instead are afforded the benefit of physician-assisted suicide instead.
The harshest misconception underlying the legislation is that living longer burdens society. Medicare data prove this is untrue. A patient who dies at 67 spends three times as much on health care at the end of life as a patient who lives to 90, according to Dr. Herbert Pardes, CEO of New York Presbyterian Medical Center.
What is costly is when seniors become disabled. In a 2007 Health Affairs article, researchers reported that surgeries to unclog arteries and replace worn out hips and knees have had a major impact on steadily reducing disability rates. And nondisabled seniors use only one-seventh as much health care as disabled seniors. As a result, the annual increase in per capita health spending on the elderly is less than for the rest of the population.
Nevertheless, Medicare is running out of money. The problem is the number of seniors compared with the smaller number of workers supporting the system with payroll taxes. To remedy the problem, the Congressional Budget Office has suggested inching up the eligibility age one month per year until it reaches age 70 in 2043, or asking wealthy seniors to pay more.
These are reasonable solutions—reducing access to treatments and counseling seniors about cutting life short are not. Medicare has made living to a ripe old age a good value. ObamaCare will undo that.
“War on Senior Citizens”: Mark Levin Interviews Dr. Betsy McCaughey on ObamaCare Details
(broadcast interview on page)
Also, WSJ Article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203517304574303903498159292.html
By Betsy McCaughey
Since Medicare was established in 1965, access to care has enabled older Americans to avoid becoming disabled and to travel and live independently instead of languishing in nursing homes. But legislation now being rushed through Congress—H.R. 3200 and the Senate Health Committee Bill—will reduce access to care, pressure the elderly to end their lives prematurely, and doom baby boomers to painful later years.
The Congressional majority wants to pay for its $1 trillion to $1.6 trillion health bills with new taxes and a $500 billion cut to Medicare. This cut will come just as baby boomers turn 65 and increase Medicare enrollment by 30%. Less money and more patients will necessitate rationing. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that only 1% of Medicare cuts will come from eliminating fraud, waste and abuse.
The assault against seniors began with the stimulus package in February. Slipped into the bill was substantial funding for comparative effectiveness research, which is generally code for limiting care based on the patient’s age. Economists are familiar with the formula, where the cost of a treatment is divided by the number of years (called QALYs, or quality-adjusted life years) that the patient is likely to benefit. In Britain, the formula leads to denying treatments for older patients who have fewer years to benefit from care than younger patients.
When comparative effectiveness research appeared in the stimulus bill, Rep. Charles Boustany Jr., (R., La.) a heart surgeon, warned that it would lead to “denying seniors and the disabled lifesaving care.” He and Sen. Jon Kyl (R., Ariz.) proposed amendments to no avail that would have barred the federal government from using the research to eliminate treatments for the elderly or deny care based on age.
In a letter this week to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, White House budget chief Peter Orszag urged Congress to delegate its authority over Medicare to a newly created body within the executive branch. This measure is designed to circumvent the democratic process and avoid accountability to the public for cuts in benefits.
Driving these cuts is the misconception that preventative care can eliminate sickness. As President Obama said in a speech to the American Medical Association: “We have to avoid illness and disease in the first place.” That would make sense if most diseases were preventable. But the two most prevalent diseases of aging—cancer and heart disease—are largely caused by genetics and their occurrence increases with age. Your risk of being diagnosed with cancer doubles from age 50 to 60, according to the National Cancer Institute.
The House bill shifts resources from specialty medicine to primary care based on the misconception that Americans overuse specialist care and drive up costs in the process (pp. 660-686). In fact, heart-disease patients treated by generalists instead of specialists are often misdiagnosed and treated incorrectly. They are readmitted to the hospital more frequently, and die sooner.
“Study after study shows that cardiologists adhere to guidelines better than primary care doctors,” according to Jeffrey Moses, a heart specialist at New York Presbyterian Hospital. Adds Jeffrey Borer, chairman of medicine at SUNY Downstate Medical Center: “Seldom do generalists have the knowledge to identify the symptoms of aortic valve disease, even though more than 10% of people over 75 have it. After valve surgery, patients who were too short of breath to walk can resume a normal life into their 80s or 90s.”
While the House bill being pushed by the president reduces access to such cures and specialists, it ensures that seniors are counseled on end-of-life options, including refusing nutrition where state law allows it (pp. 425-446). In Oregon, some cancer patients are being denied care by the state that could extend their lives and instead are afforded the benefit of physician-assisted suicide instead.
The harshest misconception underlying the legislation is that living longer burdens society. Medicare data prove this is untrue. A patient who dies at 67 spends three times as much on health care at the end of life as a patient who lives to 90, according to Dr. Herbert Pardes, CEO of New York Presbyterian Medical Center.
What is costly is when seniors become disabled. In a 2007 Health Affairs article, researchers reported that surgeries to unclog arteries and replace worn out hips and knees have had a major impact on steadily reducing disability rates. And nondisabled seniors use only one-seventh as much health care as disabled seniors. As a result, the annual increase in per capita health spending on the elderly is less than for the rest of the population.
Nevertheless, Medicare is running out of money. The problem is the number of seniors compared with the smaller number of workers supporting the system with payroll taxes. To remedy the problem, the Congressional Budget Office has suggested inching up the eligibility age one month per year until it reaches age 70 in 2043, or asking wealthy seniors to pay more.
These are reasonable solutions—reducing access to treatments and counseling seniors about cutting life short are not. Medicare has made living to a ripe old age a good value. ObamaCare will undo that.
Health Care Bill Figured Out!
You.......You're Good, Barry! You're good!!!!This health care reform bill has been told that, while ridiculously costly to put in place, will in turn save us a few billion down the road, as well as stimulate the economy and create jobs. I get it, now. I see what Barry's plan is, you sneaky guy you....you're a genius!
You see, it WILL save us money. Because that's what this bill is really all about. Reducing cost of national health care. Not really about controlling cost of the private system, but just reducing cost, yet promoting it by claiming its purpose is to get everyone health care insurance, including those who don't have any right now. Think about it - with the end of life counseling and the deterance of spending $ on our seniors.....and further along down the road all those who approach and become part of the cutoff age.....you see, all those people simply WON'T GET MEDICAL TREATMENT. Think of ALL THE MONEY WE WILL SAVE!!!! I mean, who cares about lives and stuff, but we'll be SAVING MONEY by simply NOT TAKING CARE OF THEM! Wow, awesome!
And you see - this WILL stimulate the economy, and create jobs - because the FUNERAL HOMES and CEMETARIES will be BOOMING WITH BUSINESS!!!! Just imagine all the JOBS this is going to create, we're gonna have to hire a ton of limmo drivers and build more funeral homes, which WOW that will even get the real estate and construction market BOOMING!
Barry - you......you're good!!!! Pure genius. I don't know what took so long to see the light!
p.s. READ THE DAMN BILL, PEOPLE!
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
More People Wanting Freebies....
Best Buy $9.99 TV offer was too good to be true
Every **** one of you (with their very own WEBSITE now...) who bought it online and ran to the store waiting in line first thing in the morning with your receipt in hand and all ready for battle, knew that was a typo. There is no 52" TV set for $9.99
Quit the "honor the price" crap, claiming it's bad customer service (like you're a normal customer or something...), get your refund and go back to your hole and shut up. Quit trying to get something for nothing and another freebie in this country, and in turn cost me (the normal shopper) more $ down the road as the company would have to try to recover its losses.
Or, maybe have Barry Obama have a press conference and state that Best Buy acted stupidly, and somehow relate it to an example of profiling/racism in this country. It would be just as applicable as the last time he made that correlation.
Analysis: Press Largely Ignored Incendiary Rhetoric at Bush Protest
Analysis: Press Largely Ignored Incendiary Rhetoric at Bush Protest
News outlets that are focusing on the incendiary rhetoric of conservatives outside President Obama's town hall meeting Tuesday ignored the incendiary rhetoric -- and even violence -- of liberals outside an appearance by former President George W. Bush in 2002.
News outlets that are focusing on the incendiary rhetoric of conservatives outside President Obama's town hall meeting Tuesday ignored the incendiary rhetoric -- and even violence -- of liberals outside an appearance by former President George W. Bush in 2002.
When Bush visited Portland, Ore., for a fundraiser, protesters stalked his motorcade, assailed his limousine and stoned a car containing his advisers. Chanting "Bush is a terrorist!", the demonstrators bullied passers-by, including gay softball players and a wheelchair-bound grandfather with multiple sclerosis.
One protester even brandished a sign that seemed to advocate Bush's assassination. The man held a large photo of Bush that had been doctored to show a gun barrel pressed against his temple.
"BUSH: WANTED, DEAD OR ALIVE," read the placard, which had an X over the word "ALIVE."
Another poster showed Bush's face with the words: "F--- YOU, MOTHERF---ER!"
A third sign urged motorists to "HONK IF YOU HATE BUSH." A fourth declared: "CHRISTIAN FASCISM," with a swastika in place of the letter S in each word.
Although reporters from numerous national news organizations were traveling with Bush and witnessed the protest, none reported that protesters were shrieking at Republican donors epithets like "Slut!" "Whore!" and "Fascists!"
Full article:
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/08/12/analysis-press-largely-ignored-incendiary-rhetoric-bush-protest/
News outlets that are focusing on the incendiary rhetoric of conservatives outside President Obama's town hall meeting Tuesday ignored the incendiary rhetoric -- and even violence -- of liberals outside an appearance by former President George W. Bush in 2002.
News outlets that are focusing on the incendiary rhetoric of conservatives outside President Obama's town hall meeting Tuesday ignored the incendiary rhetoric -- and even violence -- of liberals outside an appearance by former President George W. Bush in 2002.
When Bush visited Portland, Ore., for a fundraiser, protesters stalked his motorcade, assailed his limousine and stoned a car containing his advisers. Chanting "Bush is a terrorist!", the demonstrators bullied passers-by, including gay softball players and a wheelchair-bound grandfather with multiple sclerosis.
One protester even brandished a sign that seemed to advocate Bush's assassination. The man held a large photo of Bush that had been doctored to show a gun barrel pressed against his temple.
"BUSH: WANTED, DEAD OR ALIVE," read the placard, which had an X over the word "ALIVE."
Another poster showed Bush's face with the words: "F--- YOU, MOTHERF---ER!"
A third sign urged motorists to "HONK IF YOU HATE BUSH." A fourth declared: "CHRISTIAN FASCISM," with a swastika in place of the letter S in each word.
Although reporters from numerous national news organizations were traveling with Bush and witnessed the protest, none reported that protesters were shrieking at Republican donors epithets like "Slut!" "Whore!" and "Fascists!"
Full article:
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/08/12/analysis-press-largely-ignored-incendiary-rhetoric-bush-protest/
Um, no we didn't - AARP
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/12/obama-claim-aarp-endorsement-inaccurate/
At the town hall in Portsmouth, N.H., Obama said, "We have the AARP onboard because they know this is a good deal for our seniors." He added, "AARP would not be endorsing a bill if it was undermining Medicare."
But Tom Nelson, AARP's chief operating officer, said, "Indications that we have endorsed any of the major health care reform bills currently under consideration in Congress are inaccurate."
Like Obama, AARP wants action this year to cover the uninsured and restrain health care costs, but the organization has refrained from endorsing legislation. Nelson said AARP would not endorse a bill that reduces Medicare benefits.
FISHY BUSINESS! Report it to flag@whitehouse.gov
Smelly Reid, Barry Speaks Stupidly, Town Hall Plants - Oh My!
Thought of the day - remember at these town hall meetings who you're talking to?
The Capitol Visitors Center, which opened this morning, may have tripled its original budget and fallen years behind schedule, but Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid found a silver lining for members of Congress: tourists won't offend them with their B.O. anymore.
"My staff tells me not to say this, but I'm going to say it anyway," said Reid in his remarks. "In the summer because of the heat and high humidity, you could literally smell the tourists coming into the Capitol. It may be descriptive but it's true."
Those smelly mobsters.....
Good reads for this morning -
Exactly who are the people in the community organized to ask questions at Barry's town hall meetings?
The illustrated guide to Obamacare human props
A Brilliant Post Office Statement by a Teleprompter-less Barry
How Will Media Spin Obama's 'It's the Post Office Always Having Problems?'
TOTUS comments on Mr. Stupidly and his metaphor...
Signs saying "mean things" girl has political connection? What a surprise!
Little girl at Obama town hall has not-so-random political connections
"Over at MSNBC, Keith Olbermann is their resident moron over there. He knows nothing about politics, nothing about economics. He has never covered politics until they put him in that chair and said, ‘Hey, you know, go try it out.' I mean, it's crazy.
Lou Dobbs: Olbermann the 'Resident Moron' at MSNBC
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Live Blog during Obama's Pep Rally, er, Town Hall Health Reform Meeting
http://michellemalkin.com/2009/08/11/obama-kabuki-theater-in-portsmouth/
He.
Is.
Still.
Campaigning.
Complete with a young girl asking about those mean health signs.
ARE YOU KIDDING ME?
Town Hall w/Specter
Town Hall w/Specter
Who's the guy in the hat that takes it upon himself to get up and rough house a fellow citizen?
Who's the guy in the hat that takes it upon himself to get up and rough house a fellow citizen?
Monday, August 10, 2009
The One-Way Media Street
Media Ignore HCAN's 'Playbook For Thwarting Town Hall Protesters'
via NewsBusters
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/08/10/media-ignore-hcans-playbook-thwarting-town-hall-protesters
Last Tuesday, a liberal advocacy group sent a "playbook" to its members with detailed instructions to counter "the 'tea-bagger' protesters and right-wing activists" showing up at town hall meetings from coast to coast.
According to its website: "Health Care for America Now (HCAN) is a national grassroots campaign of more than 1,000 organizations in 46 states representing 30 million people dedicated to winning quality, affordable health care we all can count on in 2009. Our organization and principles are supported by President Obama, Vice President Biden, and more than 190 Members of Congress."
Despite HCAN's size, scope, and apparent support from the current President, at the same time the media diligently castigated the dissent at recent political gatherings as being set up by outside conservative organizations, not one major press outlet thought this advocacy group's "Playbook For Thwarting Town Hall Protesters" was at all newsworthy.
Such a blackout seems virtually impossible for an organization whose members include:
ACORN, AFL-CIO, AFSCME, AFT, Americans United for Change, Campaign for America’s Future, Center for American Progress Action Fund, Campaign for Community Change, Children’s Defense Fund Action Council, Communications Workers of America, International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW), MoveOn.org, NAACP, National Council of La Raza, National Education Association, National Women’s Law Center, SEIU, UFCW, USAction, Women's Voices, Women's Vote and Working America.
Making more curious the media's silence concerning HCAN's memo, signs created by this group were prominent at an event attended by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Cali.) last week:
If media had shown some interest in this "playbook," they might have uncovered the following interesting instruction:
Bring more signs and leaflets, and whenever possible, post your signs all over the place so that you visually out-perform the other side. Make sure you have people holding signs in every place where a TV camera is likely to be and that next to every right wing sign, there's one of your signs with your message.
You mean like this?
Another thing the media might have found interesting was the following instruction inside the "playbook": "Their side will be smaller but noisier. You must bring enough people to drown them out..."
Somewhat ironic given what Pelosi and Steny Hoyer (D-Mary.) wrote in Monday's USA Today: "Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American."
If that's true, maybe Pelosi and Hoyer should speak out against this group that's actually instructing people to do exactly that.
More importantly, maybe so-called journalists should point out this obvious hypocrisy to their readers, listeners, and viewers. Fortunately, news media members don't always ignore memos like this.
As my colleague Brent Baker previously reported, ABC's "World News with Charles Gibson" pointed out such a piece of correspondence last Tuesday:
JAKE TAPPER, ABC: Bob MacGuffie, a grass roots conservative activist wrote a widely circulated memo advising others at town hall meetings to put the Congressman quote, “on the defensive with your questions and follow up.” The Congressman “should be made to feel that a majority, and if not, a significant portion of at least the audience, opposes the socialist agenda of Washington. The goal is to rattle him. Get him off his prepared script and agenda.”
BOB MacGUFFIE, GRASS ROOTS CONSERVATIVE ACTIVIST: They need to hear the people's voice. That's what a democracy's about.
CNN also reported MacGuffie's memo, as did NPR, MSNBC, and several newspapers.
I guess such correspondence is newsworthy when it comes from a small conservative group in Connecticut with five members but NOT when published and disseminated by "a national grassroots campaign of more than 1,000 organizations in 46 states representing 30 million people" that's "supported by President Obama, Vice President Biden, and more than 190 Members of Congress."
Any questions?
via NewsBusters
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/08/10/media-ignore-hcans-playbook-thwarting-town-hall-protesters
Last Tuesday, a liberal advocacy group sent a "playbook" to its members with detailed instructions to counter "the 'tea-bagger' protesters and right-wing activists" showing up at town hall meetings from coast to coast.
According to its website: "Health Care for America Now (HCAN) is a national grassroots campaign of more than 1,000 organizations in 46 states representing 30 million people dedicated to winning quality, affordable health care we all can count on in 2009. Our organization and principles are supported by President Obama, Vice President Biden, and more than 190 Members of Congress."
Despite HCAN's size, scope, and apparent support from the current President, at the same time the media diligently castigated the dissent at recent political gatherings as being set up by outside conservative organizations, not one major press outlet thought this advocacy group's "Playbook For Thwarting Town Hall Protesters" was at all newsworthy.
Such a blackout seems virtually impossible for an organization whose members include:
ACORN, AFL-CIO, AFSCME, AFT, Americans United for Change, Campaign for America’s Future, Center for American Progress Action Fund, Campaign for Community Change, Children’s Defense Fund Action Council, Communications Workers of America, International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW), MoveOn.org, NAACP, National Council of La Raza, National Education Association, National Women’s Law Center, SEIU, UFCW, USAction, Women's Voices, Women's Vote and Working America.
Making more curious the media's silence concerning HCAN's memo, signs created by this group were prominent at an event attended by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Cali.) last week:
If media had shown some interest in this "playbook," they might have uncovered the following interesting instruction:
Bring more signs and leaflets, and whenever possible, post your signs all over the place so that you visually out-perform the other side. Make sure you have people holding signs in every place where a TV camera is likely to be and that next to every right wing sign, there's one of your signs with your message.
You mean like this?
Another thing the media might have found interesting was the following instruction inside the "playbook": "Their side will be smaller but noisier. You must bring enough people to drown them out..."
Somewhat ironic given what Pelosi and Steny Hoyer (D-Mary.) wrote in Monday's USA Today: "Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American."
If that's true, maybe Pelosi and Hoyer should speak out against this group that's actually instructing people to do exactly that.
More importantly, maybe so-called journalists should point out this obvious hypocrisy to their readers, listeners, and viewers. Fortunately, news media members don't always ignore memos like this.
As my colleague Brent Baker previously reported, ABC's "World News with Charles Gibson" pointed out such a piece of correspondence last Tuesday:
JAKE TAPPER, ABC: Bob MacGuffie, a grass roots conservative activist wrote a widely circulated memo advising others at town hall meetings to put the Congressman quote, “on the defensive with your questions and follow up.” The Congressman “should be made to feel that a majority, and if not, a significant portion of at least the audience, opposes the socialist agenda of Washington. The goal is to rattle him. Get him off his prepared script and agenda.”
BOB MacGUFFIE, GRASS ROOTS CONSERVATIVE ACTIVIST: They need to hear the people's voice. That's what a democracy's about.
CNN also reported MacGuffie's memo, as did NPR, MSNBC, and several newspapers.
I guess such correspondence is newsworthy when it comes from a small conservative group in Connecticut with five members but NOT when published and disseminated by "a national grassroots campaign of more than 1,000 organizations in 46 states representing 30 million people" that's "supported by President Obama, Vice President Biden, and more than 190 Members of Congress."
Any questions?
White House Launches Web Site to Battle Health Care 'Rumors'
The Obama administration has launched a new Web site to battle what it calls "wild rumors" about the health care reform plans being pushed through Congress -- including an invitation for the public to tattle on any other "myths" they come across.
The new "Reality Check" site features a half-dozen alleged rumors about health care reform, responding to them with videos of top aides rebutting them.
.....the Patriot Act chicken-little lefties continue to appear OK with this (double standard?), now not just an email address for you to tattle-tale on your neighbors and forward emails to the whitehouse (containing names, opinions, traceable IP information, etc)....but now an entire website devoted to it.
Amazingly enough, this page is like a town hall meeting, but just one-sided with no chance to discuss or debate it....just the way they like it. Freedom of speech? That only applies to them. Nobody else of differing opinion.
Friday, August 7, 2009
Is turnaround still fair play?
Fox News takes a look at the double standards of the Obama vampire poster and previous Bush posters.
http://www.foxnews.com/slideshow/2009/08/07/Politics/poster-outrage
The double standard of liberal hate speak......
Wow.
Libtalker Takes Hate Speech To New Level
Liberal Talker Mike Malloy Hopes Glenn Beck Commits Suicide
“I hope Glenn Beck kills himself”
DO IT LIVE, GLENN
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
Obama summons (manufactures?) his propaganda army!
Obama summons his army: “This is the moment our movement was built for.”>
So while the White House tries to say that all these pissed off people you are seeing at town hall meetings are just "manufactured anger" and you know, they're not REAL people or anything.......they just stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night or something......
meanwhile, ol' Barry is sending out emails....that.......looks to me.......IS attempting to MANUFACTURE support for his health care bill.....
HEY, MAYBE WE SHOULD SEND THIS TO THAT FLAG@WHITEHOUSE.GOV address!!! They wanted to know about any "fishy" emails about health care reform! This smells like some bad fish to me!
from President Barack Obama info@barackobama.com
reply-to info@barackobama.com
date Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 10:21 AM
subject This is the moment
mailed-by bounce.bluestatedigital.com
This is the moment our movement was built for.
For one month, the fight for health insurance reform leaves the backrooms of Washington, D.C., and returns to communities across America. Throughout August, members of Congress are back home, where the hands they shake and the voices they hear will not belong to lobbyists, but to people like you.
Home is where we’re strongest. We didn’t win last year’s election together at a committee hearing in D.C. We won it on the doorsteps and the phone lines, at the softball games and the town meetings, and in every part of this great country where people gather to talk about what matters most. And if you’re willing to step up once again, that’s exactly where we’re going to win this historic campaign for the guaranteed, affordable health insurance that every American deserves.
There are those who profit from the status quo, or see this debate as a political game, and they will stop at nothing to block reform. They are filling the airwaves and the internet with outrageous falsehoods to scare people into opposing change. And some people, not surprisingly, are getting pretty nervous. So we’ve got to get out there, fight lies with truth, and set the record straight.
That’s why Organizing for America is putting together thousands of events this month where you can reach out to neighbors, show your support, and make certain your members of Congress know that you’re counting on them to act.
But these canvasses, town halls, and gatherings only make a difference if you turn up to knock on doors, share your views, and show your support. So here’s what I need from you:
Can you commit to join at least one event in your community this month?
In politics, there’s a rule that says when you ask people to get involved, always tell them it’ll be easy. Well, let’s be honest here: Passing comprehensive health insurance reform will not be easy. Every President since Harry Truman has talked about it, and the most powerful and experienced lobbyists in Washington stand in the way.
But every day we don’t act, Americans watch their premiums rise three times faster than wages, small businesses and families are pushed towards bankruptcy, and 14,000 people lose their coverage entirely. The cost of inaction is simply too much for the people of this nation to bear.
So yes, fixing this crisis will not be easy. Our opponents will attack us every day for daring to try. It will require time, and hard work, and there will be days when we don’t know if we have anything more to give. But there comes a moment when we all have to choose between doing what’s easy, and doing what’s right.
This is one of those times. And moments like this are what this movement was built for. So, are you ready?
Please commit now to taking at least one action in your community this month to build support for health insurance reform:
http://my.barackobama.com/CommitAugust
Let’s seize this moment and win this historic victory for our economy, our health and our families.
Thank you,
President Barack Obama
Michelle Malkin comments:
"Hey, no top-down direction here in President Obama’s latest mass e-mailing to his minions. Only thing missing is advice on how to dress like “real” grass-roots activists and instructions on how to snitch on friends and neighbors saying “fishy” things about socialized medicine."
Glenn Beck comments on the defending of misinformation...
In his own words, +our very own Baghdad Bob
....meanwhile, the White House has yet another very own Baghdad Bob, this one's name is Linda Douglass....who basically tells us all, 'that's not what he said.' Uh, yes he did....
Bill O'Reilly discusses this, plus catches up and comments on the Andrea Mitchell line....
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
White House Asks For Informants....
"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."
-whitehouse.gov
Apparently the Regime wants informants to turn in all people and communications discussing their Health Care Reform Bill. Do they really want to know what's fishy about it? .....and everything else going on in their administration as well?
Free Speech, the other Double Standard....
Multitudes of even more examples of the double standards in this country abound:
The Times quote:
A new poster depicting President Obama as a version of Heath Ledger’s Joker character in The Dark Knight has appeared in Los Angeles[.]
It has a bit of everything to appeal to the drunk tank of California conservatism: Obama is in white face, his mouth (like Ledger’s Joker’s) has been grotesquely slit wide open and the word “Socialism” appears below his face. The only thing missing is a noose.
So here we have the L.A. Weekly in an outrage over an Obama image, the same people who put the Bush image on their front cover during the Bush administration.....and of course, interject race into the mix. The infamous 'trump card' that is continuously played whenever the game is afoot.
Personally I don't like either image, but if one is ok, then it goes both ways, L.A. Weekly. You ran the BUSH image ON YOUR FRONT COVER!
Meanwhile, Malkin remembers some other fine memorabilia and quotes a fantastic gem of a speech by Hillary Clinton, and I quote:
"As Hillary Clinton famously yelled, “I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration, somehow you’re not patriotic, and we should stand up and say, ‘WE ARE AMERICANS AND WE HAVE A RIGHT TO DEBATE AND DISAGREE WITH ANY ADMINISTRATION!’”
It would appear we need to translate that now, it seems..........'we LIBERALS have a right to debate and disagree with any administration. Nobody else, tho. When WE'RE in office, and you debate or disagree with US, then that's not allowed and you're just some sort of extremist RACIST.
So let's resuse these words...
I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration, somehow you’re RACIST, and we should stand up and say, ‘WE ARE AMERICANS AND WE HAVE A RIGHT TO DEBATE AND DISAGREE WITH ANY ADMINISTRATION!
Thank you, Hillary. Couldn't have said it any better.
Monday, August 3, 2009
Lesson Learned Parents Everywhere?
People need to learn that the 'internet' is not just a world of a few family members and friends that you intend to look at those cute pictures of your little loved ones. When you put their pictures and information up on the internet, the entire world can see it. Criminals, pedophiles, whack jobs, you name it, it's endless. EVERYONE can see them. EVERYONE can save them. EVERYONE can do ANYTHING with them.
Get a clue, people. Password protect it or keep it private.
Mother Finds Her Baby Son Up for Adoption on Craigslist
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,536294,00.html
Get a clue, people. Password protect it or keep it private.
Mother Finds Her Baby Son Up for Adoption on Craigslist
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,536294,00.html
Sunday, August 2, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
