Jump to content

Menu

Sentor Spector's Town Hall


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 410
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The 1 hour of un-interrupted coverage of Senator Spector's Town Hall Meeting is now over.

 

It was amazing. I am so very proud to be an American. These Americans had read the bill. A man quoted the bill saying, "There shall be no health care until birth." It was in the government provided health care portion of the bill.

Edited by Gretchen in NJ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watched it. Great commentary on the state of our nation. Spector looked like a deer in the headlights. His audience came prepared. No angry mob, just thoughtful citizens who want their voices heard.

 

It was trully amazing. I think the people have read more of the bill then Senator Spector.;) I give him points for showing up and still having the town hall meeting. I also liked how everyone who wanted to ask a question (that I saw) was given a number. The questions did not appear to be pre-screened.

Edited by Gretchen in NJ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You mean there were no angry mobs, no Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin regurgitators, no brown-shirts, no swastikas!! Has Nancy Pelosi been fibbing to us??? :lol: Politicians seem surprised when we show them that we can think for ourselves. They seem more surprised when we disagree with them. I think they are afraid that we might get a glimpse of "the man behind the curtain". The reason they are surprised that some of us have taken the time to read the bill is because they did not. (He did have that deer-in-the-headlights stare, didn't he??)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You mean there were no angry mobs' date=' no Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin regurgitators, no brown-shirts, no swastikas!! Has Nancy Pelosi been fibbing to us??? :lol: Politicians seem surprised when we show them that we can think for ourselves. They seem more surprised when we disagree with them. I think they are afraid that we might get a glimpse of "the man behind the curtain". The reason they are surprised that some of us have taken the time to read the bill is because they did not. (He did have that deer-in-the-headlights stare, didn't he??)[/quote']

 

:lol: But see, per some of these senators, we really don't know what is best for us so they need to make these decisions for us. I need to go mindlessly run into walls now, hoping one of those senators who know so much better, can come rescue me from my stupor. I'm so grateful!!! ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I felt that the person screaming at the top of his lungs literally waving papers in front of the Senator was appalling behaviour. It certainly is not civil discourse nor was it at all helpful . This behaviour denigrates the political process and I believe that the manner in which he spoke denigrates our political process. It is just as convincing to calmly , quietly offer one's opinion. I think it is sad when people enjoy whipping others up into a screaming frenzy and call it a "grass roots" movement. I have read the bill and it is lengthy but suffice it to say that much of what is being said about the bill is merely conjecture about what the portions of the bill could mean not the plain language of the bill. I did not find it at all difficult to read just cumbersome. I strongly urge you to read the bill. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.3200:

If you lack the time to read this huge bill please read the portions being referred to on talk radio, the news etc and you will find that the bill as written is not being read aloud or discussed as written . Rather it is conjecture from the talking heads-all of them. Read for yourself and be ready to be stunned at the distortion all the way around. Big Pharma, members of AMA , insurance industry all corporate interests are driving the responses to the bill. I await comment from the Catholic church as regards health care as a social justice issue along with poverty . I am not holding my breath on a response that is anything other than political there either. It seems business as usual all the way around .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wish my reps would take the time to listen to us. My congresswoman won't, she sorta held one where she spoke and then left without taking questions or hearing comments. The next day she said the protesters made her feel that it was more important than ever that this pass. What????? Senator Nelson (D-FL) will vote however he is told to by his party, he represents NO one but his party. And then Senator Martinez (R-FL) isn't going back to DC, he's quit!! So, I've lost the only rep that will actually talk and listen to the people who vote for him and pay his salary! The governor is planning on running for the Senate next year, so he's going to end up replacing Martinez with some lame duck! Frustrating when you feel you have no one who represents you in DC!! Vent over.

Melissa

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am no fan of Specter's, but I must give the man props for facing his constituency and allowing everyone to have a full voice. I appreciated the way the people's questions were numbered and allowing a large number of people to ask their question. There was no apparent pre-screening since he obviously had a lot of opposition there. He even waited patiently for people to get their entire question out. I was not impressed with most of his answers...he just kept regurgitating the same platform and did not back it up with actual facts. But he did at least listen respectfully and didn't appear easily "ruffled"...except for once when a woman stated that the bill would exclude the elderly.

 

The point is, that much of the anger in this county would likely dissipate if people felt like they were actually being heard. That is what impressed me about this meeting. After seeing numerous news clips of congressmen and other government leaders trying to shout down the opposition or belittle it, Specter was at least giving the people a chance to talk. Treat us like we are grown up and intelligent and worthy of having a dissenting opinion, and you might find that this will smooth the way toward actually coming up with compromises that we can all live with.

 

And I was really impressed with the number of people who were very well informed about the bill...more so than some of the lawmakers considering it. There is no way they could have been described as an "angry mob".

 

 

Susu

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is being covered live on Fox News. I love America.:D

 

It was awesome. In another country, some of those people would've been arrested, jailed, or worse. I'm glad to see that the basics still apply (like free speech). And although I am -- and never have been -- a fan of his, Arlen Specter at least stood there and took what those who he works for gave him. I was waiting for him to walk out, but he didn't. Good for him!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I felt that the person screaming at the top of his lungs literally waving papers in front of the Senator was appalling behaviour. It certainly is not civil discourse nor was it at all helpful . This behaviour denigrates the political process and I believe that the manner in which he spoke denigrates our political process. It is just as convincing to calmly , quietly offer one's opinion. I think it is sad when people enjoy whipping others up into a screaming frenzy and call it a "grass roots" movement. I have read the bill and it is lengthy but suffice it to say that much of what is being said about the bill is merely conjecture about what the portions of the bill could mean not the plain language of the bill. I did not find it at all difficult to read just cumbersome. I strongly urge you to read the bill. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.3200:

If you lack the time to read this huge bill please read the portions being referred to on talk radio, the news etc and you will find that the bill as written is not being read aloud or discussed as written . Rather it is conjecture from the talking heads-all of them. Read for yourself and be ready to be stunned at the distortion all the way around. Big Pharma, members of AMA , insurance industry all corporate interests are driving the responses to the bill. I await comment from the Catholic church as regards health care as a social justice issue along with poverty . I am not holding my breath on a response that is anything other than political there either. It seems business as usual all the way around .

 

I can tell from your comments that you did not watch the whole hour.;) I have read parts of some of the BILLS. Yes, there is more then one bill in the house alone. I think there are at least 3 proposed bills.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I felt that the person screaming at the top of his lungs literally waving papers in front of the Senator was appalling behaviour. It certainly is not civil discourse nor was it at all helpful . This behaviour denigrates the political process and I believe that the manner in which he spoke denigrates our political process. It is just as convincing to calmly , quietly offer one's opinion. I think it is sad when people enjoy whipping others up into a screaming frenzy and call it a "grass roots" movement. I have read the bill and it is lengthy but suffice it to say that much of what is being said about the bill is merely conjecture about what the portions of the bill could mean not the plain language of the bill. I did not find it at all difficult to read just cumbersome. I strongly urge you to read the bill. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.3200:

If you lack the time to read this huge bill please read the portions being referred to on talk radio, the news etc and you will find that the bill as written is not being read aloud or discussed as written . Rather it is conjecture from the talking heads-all of them. Read for yourself and be ready to be stunned at the distortion all the way around. Big Pharma, members of AMA , insurance industry all corporate interests are driving the responses to the bill. I await comment from the Catholic church as regards health care as a social justice issue along with poverty . I am not holding my breath on a response that is anything other than political there either. It seems business as usual all the way around .

 

:iagree: I also felt that some of the behavior at the town hall was atrocious. Since when is booing, screaming, and interrupting polite or civil disourse?

I also felt that some of the participants were uniformed.

 

I recommend the following government web site to get the facts:

 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/realitycheck/

 

 

Just my 2 cents:).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am no fan of Specter's, but I must give the man props for facing his constituency and allowing everyone to have a full voice. I appreciated the way the people's questions were numbered and allowing a large number of people to ask their question. There was no apparent pre-screening since he obviously had a lot of opposition there. He even waited patiently for people to get their entire question out. I was not impressed with most of his answers...he just kept regurgitating the same platform and did not back it up with actual facts. But he did at least listen respectfully and didn't appear easily "ruffled"...except for once when a woman stated that the bill would exclude the elderly.

 

The point is, that much of the anger in this county would likely dissipate if people felt like they were actually being heard. That is what impressed me about this meeting. After seeing numerous news clips of congressmen and other government leaders trying to shout down the opposition or belittle it, Specter was at least giving the people a chance to talk. Treat us like we are grown up and intelligent and worthy of having a dissenting opinion, and you might find that this will smooth the way toward actually coming up with compromises that we can all live with.

 

And I was really impressed with the number of people who were very well informed about the bill...more so than some of the lawmakers considering it. There is no way they could have been described as an "angry mob".

 

 

Susu

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree:Susu. Specter did not have a lot of answers that were fact based. I liked his favorite answer to all of the tough questions went something like, "That is in the House Bill. The Senate doesn't have a bill yet.":001_huh: I wish I had the exact wording, because it was priceless.

 

One of the scariest comments he made is that he believes that everyone should go for a yearly physical. I got the impression that he feels it should be required to have one every year by law. People would not have a choice.:glare:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was awesome. In another country, some of those people would've been arrested, jailed, or worse. I'm glad to see that the basics still apply (like free speech). And although I am -- and never have been -- a fan of his, Arlen Specter at least stood there and took what those who he works for gave him. I was waiting for him to walk out, but he didn't. Good for him!

 

:iagree:This is how it should be. I am so very glad that Fox aired it live for an hour. It wasn't a 30 second snippet. He even over ruled his handlers to let people speak.

 

DB it has been a long time. How are things?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is something I don't understand. Some people don't want others to control our healthcare. They don't want big government involved. Isn't it already like that (via the health insurance industry and other big business)? I certainly don't feel in control. I'm told how often I can go to the doctor and for what. Sure if I want to go more for things not covered I can pay for it. But not really since I can't afford it. I just keep paying and paying and paying for shoddy service. I'm in some serious need of healthcare and I can't get it because it is apparently reserved for the rich.

 

I am in the same boat here. Right now the bean counters at the private insurance companies are calling the shots for my health care. The private health insurance companies have been very good at limiting what doctor's I can choose, what tests I can have done and what medications I can take. I have also had to deal with denial of payment for legitimate services rendered to me or my ds on at least 5 occasions.

 

If a public option becomes available, I will be happy to pay for such an option, because the private health insurance that I have stinks.

Edited by priscilla
grammar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I recommend the following government web site to get the facts:

 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/realitycheck/

 

 

Just my 2 cents:).

 

That's not exactly an unbiased site.;)

 

I want to hear our politicians actually quoting and explaining the bill....repeating over and over promises that the bill(s) will or won't do this and that is not what will win the support of my mind. Calling a thing a rumor doesn't make it false...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The WH has nothing to do with the bill yet. Only HR3200 exists.

 

Actually this government site was put out to refute all of the mis-information out there on health care reform. I found it very informative especially since there have been many over the top mis-truths spoken by some of those in the public eye who are against health care reform.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is something I don't understand. Some people don't want others to control our healthcare. They don't want big government involved. Isn't it already like that (via the health insurance industry and other big business)? I certainly don't feel in control. I'm told how often I can go to the doctor and for what. Sure if I want to go more for things not covered I can pay for it. But not really since I can't afford it. I just keep paying and paying and paying for shoddy service. I'm in some serious need of healthcare and I can't get it because it is apparently reserved for the rich.

 

I don't think government involvement will make things any better. The absolute worst health care I've had as an adult was when I was a military dependent. I had an HMO for a couple of years and even that was better than the military.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think government involvement will make things any better. The absolute worst health care I've had as an adult was when I was a military dependent. I had an HMO for a couple of years and even that was better than the military.

 

At a town hall today by Senator McCasgill, she asked those in the audience to raise their hands if they have medicare and they did. Then she asked those who had medicare and wanted to give it up to raise their hands. No one raised their hands in favor of giving up Medicare:001_huh:.

 

My dh had health via the military as a military dependent and found the care to be excellent:).

Edited by priscilla
spelling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually this government site was put out to refute all of the mis-information out there on health care reform. I found it very informative especially since there have been many over the top mis-truths spoken by some of those in the public eye who are against health care reform.

 

 

....and do you not think that perhaps, just perhaps, there have been a few over the top misthruths spoken by some of those in the public eye who are for health care "reform."

 

If you want a serious debate then generally one goes to a non partisan site (or at least a site that offers both points of view in the earnest desire to generate understanding).

 

Don't forget that the White House will want you to report this site to them so that they can "correct" our misunderstandings.

 

http://www.syracuse.com/today/index.ssf/2009/08/white_house_asks_public_to_rep.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am in the same boat here. Right now the bean counters at the private insurance companies are calling the shots for my health care. The private health insurance companies have been very good at limiting what doctor's I can choose, what tests I can have done and what medications I can take. I have also had to deal with denial of payment for legitimate services rendered to me or my ds on at least 5 occasions.

 

If a public option becomes available, I will be happy to pay for such an option, because the private health insurance that I have stinks.

 

:iagree::iagree:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

....and do you not think that perhaps, just perhaps, there have been a few over the top misthruths spoken by some of those in the public eye who are for health care "reform."

 

If you want a serious debate then generally one goes to a non partisan site (or at least a site that offers both points of view in the earnest desire to generate understanding).

 

Don't forget that the White House will want you to report this site to them so that they can "correct" our misunderstandings.

 

 

 

The White House government web site is non-partisan web site. President Obama serves us all, both Republican and Democrat and third party.

 

I do not see a problem with the White House dispelling the un-truths regarding health care since they have been numerous and over the top.

Edited by priscilla
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The White House government web site is non-partisan web site. .

 

 

I am sorry, there is simply no arguing with someone who believes this. You must be one of a very few who believes that a modern president, republican or democrat, is non-partisan.

I would however ask you this. Accepting that health care "reform" is a partisan issue does it not follow that a site set up explicitly to support one side of a partisan issue and set up by an administration that has vocally supported one side on this partisan issue and a president who made this partisan issue part of his campaign might be partisan?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The White House government web site is non-partisan web site. President Obama serves us all, both Republican and Democrat and third party.

 

I do not see a problem with the White House dispelling the un-truths regarding health care since they have been numerous and over the top.

 

 

I'm sorry, but this sounds extremely naive to me. Non-partisan? Dispelling un-truths? Obama has an agenda with health care and the type of "reform" he wants, I think that makes him biased. Beside, didn't he even admit to not reading the entire bill?

 

Lisa

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am sorry, there is simply no arguing with someone who believes this. You must be one of a very few who believes that a modern president, republican or democrat, is non-partisan.

I would however ask you this. Accepting that health care "reform" is a partisan issue does it not follow that a site set up explicitly to support one side of a partisan issue and set up by an administration that has vocally supported one side on this partisan issue and a president who made this partisan issue part of his campaign might be partisan?

 

Health and healthcare does not recognize conservative or liberal. Anyone can be stricken ill or injured. All of us are bearing the costs of the failure of the current healthcare system.

 

President Obama has gone out of his way to have a bi-partisan dialog and health care reform bill. The Democrats could have already pushed this through without Republican support if they wanted to. In the committee mark-up sessions on HR 3200, over 160 Republican amendments were accepted. Therefore, HR 3200 is as much a Republican bill as a Democrat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Health and healthcare does not recognize conservative or liberal. Anyone can be stricken ill or injured. All of us are bearing the costs of the failure of the current healthcare system.

 

President Obama has gone out of his way to have a bi-partisan dialog and health care reform bill. The Democrats could have already pushed this through without Republican support if they wanted to. In the committee mark-up sessions on HR 3200, over 160 Republican amendments were accepted. Therefore, HR 3200 is as much a Republican bill as a Democrat.

 

 

I would disagree that health care does not recognize conservative or liberal. When we are talking about governmental involvement in health care, and, Obama's ultimate goal of single payer (he's on record as stating this), this would absolutely contradict convervative ideals. I think the fundamental issues of what type of reform our country needs are based on liberal vs. conservative ideology.

 

Lisa

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Health and healthcare does not recognize conservative or liberal. Anyone can be stricken ill or injured. All of us are bearing the costs of the failure of the current healthcare system.

 

President Obama has gone out of his way to have a bi-partisan dialog and health care reform bill.

 

The president has openly lied about supporting a single-payer system in the past. Linda Douglass (from the WH) contributed to that lie, telling people to submit arguments they found "fishy" to the WH (thus violating the law). The WH is pro-Obama's agenda. It is not non-partisan any more than the president is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but this sounds extremely naive to me. Non-partisan? Dispelling un-truths? Obama has an agenda with health care and the type of "reform" he wants, I think that makes him biased. Beside, didn't he even admit to not reading the entire bill?

 

Lisa

 

One could argue that those against health care reform are biased and naive as well since many, not all, of those against healthcare reform have believed the mis-information put out there by conservative talk radio entertainers, private health insurance companies, and other powerful vested interests;).

 

As far as agendas, the only reason the health care reform is a so-called "agenda" at all is because of the millions of Americans, businesses, and state and local governments who are suffering due to the onerous health insurance premiums. I think the fact that as many as 71% of Americans want health care reform is the reason that it is an agenda and not for any sinister reasons at all.

 

We are all fellow Americans and all love our country:). Democrats may have different ideas than Republicans, but that does not make us the bad guys.

Edited by priscilla
spelling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The president has openly lied about supporting a single-payer system in the past. Linda Douglass (from the WH) contributed to that lie, telling people to submit arguments they found "fishy" to the WH (thus violating the law). The WH is pro-Obama's agenda. It is not non-partisan any more than the president is.

 

Exactly what law is it against to let the President know of any rumors and such about health care. Seeing as there have been numerous un-truths, I again see no problem with dispelling un-truths.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One could argue that those against health care reform are biased and naive as well since many,

Do you realize how loaded this question is? I'm for health care reform. But I'm against this health care reform.

 

As far as agendas, the only reason the health care reform is a so-called "agenda"

It's called an agenda because it's part of what the president wants to get done. The word "agenda" is judgement-neutral. Your scare quotes around the word are oddly placed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to 5 U.S.C. § 552a, United States agencies, including the Executive Office of the President shall, “maintain no record describing how any individual exercises rights guaranteed by the First Amendment unless expressly authorized by statute or by the individual about whom the record is maintained or unless pertinent to and within the scope of an authorized law enforcement activity.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the fact that as many as 71% of Americans want health care reform is the reason that it is an agenda and not for any sinister reasons at all.

 

We are all fellow Americans and all love our country:). Democrats may have different ideas than Republicans, but that does not make us the bad guys.

 

You are not bad guys, but if you honestly believe that

 

The White House government web site is non-partisan web site..

 

you are sadly misinformed.

 

In that vein....your numbers are not correct. I might even quote you and say that your numbers are "the un-truths regarding health care" Should I report you to the White house as spreading untruths about the health Care Plan?

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052970204313604574330442429438938.html

 

"Taken together, the data shows that at this point voters are pretty evenly divided. Last week’s polling showed that 47% at least somewhat favored the plan while 49% are somewhat opposed.

Though voters are torn about reform, there is intensity among the opposition. Just 25% strongly favor the reform effort, while 41% are strongly opposed. And that gets back to the very first point: 68% currently have good or excellent coverage. It’s going to be hard to generate passionate support for change among this group of voters. "

Edited by pqr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly what law is it against to let the President know of any rumors and such about health care. Seeing as there have been numerous un-truths, I again see no problem with dispelling un-truths.

 

I'm not an attorney, but I would think there may be some legal consequences for asking e-mails to be forwarded to the White House so they can "dispel" the untruths. Just sounds big-brotherish to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One could argue that those against health care reform are biased and naive as well since many, not all, of those against healthcare reform have believed the mis-information put out there by conservative talk radio entertainers, private health insurance companies, and other powerful vested interests;).

 

As far as agendas, the only reason the health care reform is a so-called "agenda" at all is because of the millions of Americans, businesses, and state and local governments who are suffering due to the onerous health insurance premiums. I think the fact that as many as 71% of Americans want health care reform is the reason that it is an agenda and not for any sinister reasons at all.

 

We are all fellow Americans and all love our country:). Democrats may have different ideas than Republicans, but that does not make us the bad guys.

 

Priscilla, could you please provide a link to support the claim that 71% of Americans want health care reform that Obama is talking about with a system that will lead everyone to a one payer system?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The White House government web site is non-partisan web site. President Obama serves us all, both Republican and Democrat and third party.

 

I do not see a problem with the White House dispelling the un-truths regarding health care since they have been numerous and over the top.

 

The White House is non-partisan? What about this?

 

Top White House aides gave Senate Democrats a recess battle plan on Thursday, arming the lawmakers with tips for avoiding disastrous town hall meetings while showing them polling on popular aspects of the reform effort.

 

Senior White House adviser David Axelrod and deputy chief of staff Jim Messina told senators to focus on the insured and how they would benefit from “consumer protections" in the overhaul, such as ending the practice of denying insurance based on preexisting conditions and ensuring the continuity of coverage between jobs.

 

They showed video clips of the confrontational town halls that have dominated the media coverage, and told senators to do more prep work than usual for their public meetings by making sure their own supporters turn out, senators and aides said.

 

And they screened TV ads and reviewed the various campaigns by critics of the Democratic plan.

 

“If you get hit, we will punch back twice as hard,†Messina said, according to an official who attended the meeting.

 

 

 

Yes, President Obama is suppose to serve each and every one of us. Is he with health care? I don't think so. He's told people 'I want them to get out of the way so we can clean up the mess'. Hmmm, I'm thinking the THEM means Republicans, and the WE means Democrats. When it comes to health care I think he is not acting as the President but as a Democrat. If you really believe he's being non-partisan about this issue you are either not listening to him and what's coming out of the White House, or you so biased about this President that you are unable to see what is really going on.

Melissa

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly what law is it against to let the President know of any rumors and such about health care. Seeing as there have been numerous un-truths, I again see no problem with dispelling un-truths.

 

Oo! I know this one, but not exactly. It was made law in the early to mid 1970s I remember reading it somewhere. I just can't put my finger on it right now. It is against the law for any government office to ask Americans to report on one another. It is the law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to 5 U.S.C. § 552a, United States agencies, including the Executive Office of the President shall, “maintain no record describing how any individual exercises rights guaranteed by the First Amendment unless expressly authorized by statute or by the individual about whom the record is maintained or unless pertinent to and within the scope of an authorized law enforcement activity.â€

 

 

The White House web site is not asking for names of individuals or the like. The web site states, "Tell us what myths we should address next." When you click on the link, it asks for your comments and your name only. The President is entitled to his free speech as well and has a right to dispel any misinformation out there and he would be foolish not to IMHO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oo! I know this one, but not exactly. It was made law in the early to mid 1970s I remember reading it somewhere. I just can't put my finger on it right now. It is against the law for any government office to ask Americans to report on one another. It is the law.

 

The White House is not asking for Americans to report to one another. They are only asking for any myths that should be addressed. You can check it out for your self on the link I provided earlier which is an allowed government web site per the rules of this board.

 

I also recommend googling the non-partisan web site factcheck.org.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Democrats could have already pushed this through without Republican support if they wanted to.

 

No they couldn't, they didn't have enough Democrat votes to pass this. If they did they would have passed it before the recess to avoid any conversation about this issue! Thank god for the Blue Dog Democrats! They stood firm against this, I hope they have the courage to keep standing firm.

Melissa

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to 5 U.S.C. § 552a, United States agencies, including the Executive Office of the President shall, “maintain no record describing how any individual exercises rights guaranteed by the First Amendment unless expressly authorized by statute or by the individual about whom the record is maintained or unless pertinent to and within the scope of an authorized law enforcement activity.â€

 

 

Thank you dangerdad. I knew I heard about this law somewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The White House web site is not asking for names of individuals or the like. The web site states, "Tell us what myths we should address next." When you click on the link, it asks for your comments and your name only. The President is entitled to his free speech as well and has a right to dispel any misinformation out there and he would be foolish not to IMHO.

 

 

No.... the White House release said

 

"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."

 

Now this would indicate that they are asking for web sites, blogs etc.

 

You really must stop spreading, how did you put it....oh yes "the un-truths regarding health care"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the fact that as many as 71% of Americans want health care reform is the reason that it is an agenda and not for any sinister reasons at all.

 

 

Talk about taking things out of context. I think if you asked about reform here you would find most of us are in favor of health care reform. I would be part of that 71%. BUT, I do not want a government option. I want tort reform to be #1 on the reforms. Of course to many Lawyers make to many donations to campaigns for that to ever happen (and that's on both sides of the aisle). I want reform, but no government plan!

Melissa

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...