Cash for Clunkers engine destruction procedure

Chuck Branscomb · **Posted:** Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:07 am

Bernie Baake wrote:

steve remchak wrote:

i wonder if this administration will brand people as Un-American for speaking against the current decision making process?

.

They already have branded the demonstrations and the folks who have asked "disruptive" questions at the scheduled town meetings on heath care as "un-american" Politics as usual.

Imagine turning the clock back 3 years and having the White House tell people to send any e-mails they receive that have "disinformation" about the Iraq war to a "flag" e-mail at Whitehouse.gov. The mass media, etc, in this country would EXPLODE with the arrogance of an administration who would be collecting personal information about citizens speaking out against the war.

Where is the uproar over the current administration telling people to send e-mails they don't like to the White House? I'm pretty sure it is illegal for them to be collecting such information, so perhaps this will be worked out in court shortly. Sigh...it's amazing...truly amazing.

David Teague · **Posted:** Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:18 am

Chuck Branscomb wrote:

Imagine turning the clock back 3 years and having the White House tell people to send any e-mails they receive that have "disinformation" about the Iraq war to a "flag" e-mail at Whitehouse.gov. The mass media, etc, in this country would EXPLODE with the arrogance of an administration who would be collecting personal information about citizens speaking out against the war.

Where is the uproar over the current administration telling people to send e-mails they don't like to the White House? I'm pretty sure it is illegal for them to be collecting such information, so perhaps this will be worked out in court shortly. Sigh...it's amazing...truly amazing.

I generally stay out of political discussions and keep my opinions to myself, however I find this move of setting up this e-mail address deeply disturbing in many ways, mainly the idea that the white house is encouraging Americans to report people who are spreading "dis-information" seems fundamentally wrong and exactly against what the founders of this country were against.

steve remchak · **Posted:** Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:42 am

McCarthyism anyone. :roll:

while it appears (via the mainstream Media) that the anti-health care plan groups are behind the protests, the rat-out your neighbor plan is a really stupid and bad idea.

Chuck Branscomb · **Posted:** Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:43 am

David Teague wrote:

I generally stay out of political discussions and keep my opinions to myself, however I find this move of setting up this e-mail address deeply disturbing in many ways, mainly the idea that the white house is encouraging Americans to report people who are spreading "dis-information" seems fundamentally wrong and exactly against what the founders of this country were against.

I don't see this as a political issue. I think it is fundamentally wrong for any President (regardless of party affiliation) to be requesting supporters to send in e-mails of citizens speaking out against the issues at hand, or for that matter to encourage any citizens of our country to "report" on other citizens by sending their e-mails to the White House. I hope I'm not alone in that belief since I don't see myself changing it any time soon. :shock:

David Teague · **Posted:** Mon Aug 10, 2009 10:07 am

steve remchak wrote:

i wonder if this administration will brand people as Un-American for speaking against the current decision making process?

They have now...

Pelosi, Hoyer call disruptions 'un-American'

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,4079175.story

Quote:

By Mark Silva
5:05 AM PDT, August 10, 2009
Reporting from Washington — House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, insisting at the start of a long and politically heated summer congressional recess that healthcare reform can be achieved this fall, today are calling the disruption of "town-hall'' meetings by vocal protesters "simply un-American.''

"We believe it is healthy for such a historic effort to be subject to so much scrutiny and debate,'' Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Hoyer (D-Md.) write in an Op-ed essay published by USA Today.

Also just so you know I though the whole un-american thing from the last administration was junk too, proteset, critizism and dissent are all very american. For instance I would loathe any one to burn the american flag, however I would fight too keep the right to burn the flag a part of free speech.

David Spratte · **Posted:** Mon Aug 10, 2009 11:01 am

Bernie Baake wrote:

They already have branded the demonstrations and the folks who have asked "disruptive" questions at the scheduled town meetings on heath care as "un-american" Politics as usual.

Are you referring to the people shouting stuff like: "I don't want government-run health care and don't touch my Medicare!" at these meetings?

I agree. Those people shouldn't be called "un-American."

They should be called "idiots."

David Teague wrote:

OK I have reported most of you to flag@whitehouse.gov for obvioulsy spreading mis-information about the C4C plan I know this is only to be used for Health Care mis-information... but I figuted why not...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts...ubborn-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."

Like Teague I usually stay out of these things. Unlike Teague, I think the founding fathers would have been aghast at what passes for reportage. There is a sincere amount of bullshit being passed as "information" or "coverage" on the subject of health care. (People really believe that the government option is the script from Logan's Run? Really?)

I prefer the White House requesting information in place of doing illegal wire taps to "collect personal information." That's not saying I think going McCarthy and asking for emails is the right answer. I think simply pushing the new site on Health Care facts would have been the right answer. Perhaps they rethought it since the link posted was bad. Just going to the Blog lists the contact site if you have questions.

In my opinion, there's a lot of stuff broken here in the U.S. I think Health Care is a pretty a big one. Anybody who thinks it isn't broken has his head in the sand.

There's two easy examples of private versus public: FedEx and U.S. Postal Service. CNN versus PBS. Why do people assume that a public option in health insurance is any different?

It's going to require a lot of effort to overcome the inertia of the status quo and change our thinking. And lets face it, on average, we're all lazy.

Change is hard.

David Teague · **Posted:** Mon Aug 10, 2009 11:56 am

David Spratte wrote:

Unlike Teague, I think the founding fathers would have been aghast at what passes for reportage. There is a sincere amount of bullshit being passed as "information" or "coverage" on the subject of health care. (People really believe that the government option is the script from Logan's Run? Really?).

Hell I agree with you on that too, I think our "reporters" are doing everyone a diservice with what they report and how the report these days, every this has to be sensationalized one way or there other, and facts are spotty at best in most of the coverage.

While I do not like the whole flag@whitehouse.gov thing, I am not one to blame all of our problems on Obama, or for that matter Bush, I blame on the one constant that has been there for both of them... congress... all of the from both parties I can't find one that truly seems to serve the people any more.

RobLupella · **Posted:** Mon Aug 10, 2009 12:47 pm

David Spratte wrote:

Bernie Baake wrote:

They already have branded the demonstrations and the folks who have asked "disruptive" questions at the scheduled town meetings on heath care as "un-american" Politics as usual.

Are you referring to the people shouting stuff like: "I don't want government-run health care and don't touch my Medicare!" at these meetings?

I agree. Those people shouldn't be called "un-American."

They should be called "idiots."

David Teague wrote:

OK I have reported most of you to flag@whitehouse.gov for obvioulsy spreading mis-information about the C4C plan I know this is only to be used for Health Care mis-information... but I figuted why not...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts...ubborn-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."

Like Teague I usually stay out of these things. Unlike Teague, I think the founding fathers would have been aghast at what passes for reportage. There is a sincere amount of bullshit being passed as "information" or "coverage" on the subject of health care. (People really believe that the government option is the script from Logan's Run? Really?)

I prefer the White House requesting information in place of doing illegal wire taps to "collect personal information." That's not saying I think going McCarthy and asking for emails is the right answer. I think simply pushing the new site on Health Care facts would have been the right answer. Perhaps they rethought it since the link posted was bad. Just going to the Blog lists the contact site if you have questions.

In my opinion, there's a lot of stuff broken here in the U.S. I think Health Care is a pretty a big one. Anybody who thinks it isn't broken has his head in the sand.

There's two easy examples of private versus public: FedEx and U.S. Postal Service. CNN versus PBS. Why do people assume that a public option in health insurance is any different?

It's going to require a lot of effort to overcome the inertia of the status quo and change our thinking. And lets face it, on average, we're all lazy.

Change is hard.

MartynWheeler · **Joined:** Mon Jan 02, 2006 9:30 pm **Posts:** 303

Since this thread is clearly attempting to disprove Godwin's Law through means of reasonable discussion and intelligent argument, I feel a civic duty to correct that oversight and post this:

steve remchak wrote:

McCarthyism anyone.

I was thinking Hitler Youth.

:twisted:

MikeWhitney · **Joined:** Wed Aug 20, 2003 9:15 pm **Posts:** 4724

MartynWheeler wrote:

Since this thread is clearly attempting to disprove Godwin's Law through means of reasonable discussion and intelligent argument, I feel a civic duty to correct that oversight and post this:

steve remchak wrote:

McCarthyism anyone.

I was thinking Hitler Youth.

:twisted:

One thing to note about Hitler. The man wanted to control everything about people's lives but was generally OK with free enterprise. Many capitalist activites thrived in Hitler's reign, as long as they lived (and were the right race, etc) exactly like Hitler wanted. He was not a Communist. Now Stalin, he was was both a Communist AND a Fascist.

Compare some of these historical figures with recent politicians:

Where are all our options in the purple quadrant, that's all I want to know.

BriceJohnson · **Joined:** Thu Apr 13, 2006 7:33 am **Posts:** 2230

MikeWhitney wrote:

Where are all our options in the purple quadrant, that's all I want to know.

Ron Paul?

Then again, writing his name in in NC (in the election, not the primary) meant your vote was thrown away (and I don't mean b/c he wouldn't win, I mean they ACTUALLY wouldn't even count it in NC). Thats why I voted for wacko Bob Barr as just an anti "McBama" vote.

:roll:

steve remchak · **Posted:** Mon Aug 10, 2009 5:08 pm

that sure is a funny lookin' traction circle Mike. :lol:

Wes Eargle · **Joined:** Mon Oct 27, 2003 9:47 am **Posts:** 3683

Those two blue dots made me have to stifle a lol.

MikeWhitney · **Joined:** Wed Aug 20, 2003 9:15 pm **Posts:** 4724

BriceJohnson wrote:

MikeWhitney wrote:

Where are all our options in the purple quadrant, that's all I want to know.

Ron Paul?

Nope, Ron Paul is on record as a Constitutionalist* and wants to continue to ram his Moral agenda down our throats at a Federal level also.

* The "Constitution" party may not be what you think. They are committed to economic liberty but have a strong Christian agenda. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constituti ... _States%29

Richard Casto · **Posted:** Mon Aug 10, 2009 5:45 pm

Chuck Branscomb wrote:

Bernie Baake wrote:

steve remchak wrote:

i wonder if this administration will brand people as Un-American for speaking against the current decision making process?

.

They already have branded the demonstrations and the folks who have asked "disruptive" questions at the scheduled town meetings on heath care as "un-american" Politics as usual.

Imagine turning the clock back 3 years and having the White House tell people to send any e-mails they receive that have "disinformation" about the Iraq war to a "flag" e-mail at Whitehouse.gov. The mass media, etc, in this country would EXPLODE with the arrogance of an administration who would be collecting personal information about citizens speaking out against the war.

Where is the uproar over the current administration telling people to send e-mails they don't like to the White House? I'm pretty sure it is illegal for them to be collecting such information, so perhaps this will be worked out in court shortly. Sigh...it's amazing...truly amazing.

Ok, I will start out with my tongue-in-cheek reply... They didn't need the public to volunteer people's names 3 years ago. That was done directly by government agencies.

Now for my serious reply. Welcome to the digital age. In previous administrations (both democrat and republican), this would have been accomplished by White House staffers watching the media to see what was being said and then trying to put their own spin on this in the next news cycle. Ever hear of the term “spin doctor”? Every administration is going to have an agenda and they are stupid if they don't try to sell it to the public.

Today, classic media (TV and print) still are a huge factor, but blogs as well as those "the world is going to end if person X lets Y happen" emails that get passed around are a significant medium as well. The concept of a standard “news cycle” of what was shown on CNN, FOX, etc. yesterday needs to be spun today doesn’t work with internet based “buzz”. By the time it reaches something like CNN, FOX it is probably already well known by the target audience.

With the Obama administration, instead of letting something build momentum to the point that it appears on the nightly news, they are looking to battle back much earlier and get their version of truth out into the major media at about the same time. Frankly I think it’s a smart tactic if handled correctly.

I will say that one thing I feel really strongly about is the right to free speech and privacy. But the two are polar opposites of each other in a way. You have the right to say something, but if you put your name on it, then it pretty much stops being private. I pretty much go under the assumption that anything I write online and in electronic form is 100% out of my control (not that I want it that way) and is going to eventually see the light of day. So in this case, I am not sure how or why this would be illegal. I see it as being little different than someone mailing in a copy of their local newspaper or a copy of a notice someone has put on a community bulletin board.

Now what the government does with the list is a different thing. If they were to decide to punish you (put you in jail, etc.) as an individual based upon your free speech, then that is illegal.

THSCC Forums

Cash for Clunkers engine destruction procedure

Who is online