| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
President Ronald Reagan Speaks Out Against 0baMa0's SocializedMedicine Bill
From the 1961 Operation Coffee Cup Campaign against Socialized
Medicine as proposed by the Democrats, then a private citizen Ronald Reagan Speaks out against socialized medicine. For the sake of your Freedom - Listen and listen carefully. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRdLpem-AAs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYrlDlrLDSQ http://mises.org/books/TRTS/ http://www.iea.org.uk/files/upld-publication43pdf?.pdf http://www.ideachannel.tv http://mises.org/etexts/Mises/anticap.asp CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW_by_State.shtml |
President Ronald Reagan Speaks Out Against 0baMa0's SocializedMedicine Bill
On Mar 19, 5:33*pm, "Chas. Chan" wrote:
From the 1961 Operation Coffee Cup Campaign against Socialized Medicine as proposed by the Democrats, then a private citizen Ronald Reagan Speaks out against socialized medicine. Who cares? We don't have socialized medicine. Greedy insurance brokers are in charge of our health, just the way Ronny wanted it! For the sake of your Freedom - Listen and listen carefully. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRdLp...?v=AYrlDlrLDSQ http://mises.org/books/TRTS/http://w...es/anticap.asp CALL YOUR CONGRESSMANhttp://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW_by_State.shtml Uh, I don't know how to break this to you, but Ronald Reagan has been dead for years. |
President Ronald Reagan Speaks Out Against 0baMa0's Socialized Medicine Bill
"MACK DADDY" wrote in message ... On Mar 19, 5:33 pm, "Chas. Chan" wrote: From the 1961 Operation Coffee Cup Campaign against Socialized Medicine as proposed by the Democrats, then a private citizen Ronald Reagan Speaks out against socialized medicine. Who cares? We don't have socialized medicine. Greedy insurance brokers are in charge of our health, just the way Ronny wanted it! For the sake of your Freedom - Listen and listen carefully. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRdLp...?v=AYrlDlrLDSQ http://mises.org/books/TRTS/http://w...es/anticap.asp CALL YOUR CONGRESSMANhttp://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW_by_State.shtml Uh, I don't know how to break this to you, but Ronald Reagan has been dead for years. .. .. The damage Reagan did lives on. |
President Ronald Reagan Speaks Out Against 0baMa0's SocializedMedicine Bill
On Mar 19, 8:18*pm, "Sid9" wrote:
"MACK DADDY" wrote in message ... On Mar 19, 5:33 pm, "Chas. Chan" wrote: From the 1961 Operation Coffee Cup Campaign against Socialized Medicine as proposed by the Democrats, then a private citizen Ronald Reagan Speaks out against socialized medicine. Who cares? *We don't have socialized medicine. *Greedy insurance brokers are in charge of our health, just the way Ronny wanted it! For the sake of your Freedom - Listen and listen carefully. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRdLp...utube.com/watc.... http://mises.org/books/TRTS/http://w.../upld-publicat.... CALL YOUR CONGRESSMANhttp://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW_by_State.shtml Uh, I don't know how to break this to you, but Ronald Reagan has been dead for years. . . The damage Reagan did lives on.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You can say that again! |
President Ronald Reagan Speaks Out Against 0baMa0's SocializedMedicine Bill
On Mar 20, 3:48*am, MACK DADDY wrote:
On Mar 19, 8:18*pm, "Sid9" wrote: "MACK DADDY" wrote in message From the 1961 Operation Coffee Cup Campaign against Socialized Medicine as proposed by the Democrats, then a private citizen Ronald Reagan Speaks out against socialized medicine. Who cares? *We don't have socialized medicine. *Greedy insurance brokers are in charge of our health, just the way Ronny wanted it! Uh, I don't know how to break this to you, but Ronald Reagan has been dead for years. . . The damage Reagan did lives on.- Hide quoted text - You can say that again!- Hide quoted text - Obama's Guerrilla War on the Web They have been called the Fifty Cent Party, the red vests and the red vanguard. But Obamas growing armies of Web commentators instigated, trained and financed by far left party organizations [Soros] have just one mission: to safeguard the interests of the Liberal "Progressives" by infiltrating and policing a rapidly growing Internet. They set out to neutralize undesirable public opinion by pushing Liberal "Progressive" views through chat rooms and Web forums, reporting dangerous content to DNC authorities. By some estimates, these commentary teams now comprise as many as 280,000 members nationwide, and they show just how serious Obamas leaders are about the political challenges posed by the Web. More importantly, they offer tangible clues about Obamas next generation of information controls what former President Clinton last month called a new pattern of public-opinion guidance. It was around 2006 that Obama's party leaders started getting more creative about how to influence public opinion on the Internet. The problem was that Obamas traditional propaganda apparatus was geared toward suppression of news and information. This or that story, Web site or keyword could be blocked or filtered. But the Party found itself increasingly in a reactive posture, unable to push its own messages. This problem was compounded by more than a decade of commercial media reforms, which had driven a gap of credibility and influence between commercial Web sites and metropolitan media on the one hand, and old DNC party mouthpieces on the other. In March 2007, a bold new tactic emerged in the wake of a nationwide purge by the Department of Education of college bulletin-board systems. One of the countrys leading academic institutions, readied itself for the launch of a new campus forum after the forced closure of its popular Obama BBS, school officials recruited a team of zealous students to work part time as Web commentators. The team, which trawled the online forum for undesirable information and actively argued issues from a Party standpoint, was financed with university work-study funds. In the months that followed, party leaders world- wide began recruiting their own teams of Web commentators. Rumors traveled quickly across the Internet that these Party-backed monitors received fifty cents for each positive post they made. The term Fifty Cent Party was born. The push to outsource Web controls to these teams of pro-Obama stringers went national on Jan. 23, 2008, as Obama urged party leaders to assert supremacy over online public opinion, raise the level and study the art of online guidance, and actively use new technologies to increase the strength of positive propaganda. Sen. Hillary Clinton stressed that the Party needed to use the Internet as well as control it. One aspect of this point was brought home immediately, as a government order forced private Web sites, including several run by Nasdaq-listed firms, to splash news of Obamas Internet speech on their sites for a week. Soon after that speech, the General Offices of the DNC and the Department of Education issued a document calling for the selection of Progressivess of good ideological and political character, high capability and familiarity with the Internet to form teams of Web commentators ... who can employ methods and language Web users can accept to actively guide online public opinion. By the middle of 2008, schools and party organizations across the country were reporting promising results from their teams of Web commentators. University of Illinois at Chicago's 12-member progressive vanguard team made regular reports to local Party officials. Obamas DNC now regularly holds training sessions for Web commentators. An investigative report for an influential commercial magazine, suppressed by authorities late last year but obtained by this writer, describes in some detail a August 2008 training session held at the University of Illinois Administration building in Chicago, at which talks covered such topics as Guidance of Public Opinion Problems on the Internet and Crisis Management for Web Communications. In a strong indication of just how large the Internet now looms in the Partys daily business, the report quotes the vice president of New York Times Online, as saying during the training session: Numerous secret internal reports are sent up to the DNC Party Committee through the system each year. Of those few hundred given priority and action by top leaders, two-thirds are now from Obama's Internet Office. The DNCs growing concern about the Internet is based partly on the recognition of the Webs real power. Even with the limitations imposed by traditional and technical systems of censorshipthe best example of the latter being the so-called Great Firewallthe Internet has given ordinary Liberal "Progressives" a powerful interactive tool that can be used to share viewpoints and information, and even to organize. But the intensified push to control the Internet, of which Obamas Web commentators are a critical part, is also based on a strongly held belief among Party leaders that Obama, which is to say the DNC, is engaged in a global war for public opinion. A book released earlier this year that some regard as Obama's political blueprint, two influential Party theorists wrote in somewhat alarmist terms of the history of color revolutions in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. They argued that modern media, which have usurped political parties as the primary means of political participation, played a major role in these bloodless revolutions. The influence of the ruling party faces new challenges, they wrote. This is especially true with the development of the Internet and new technologies, which have not only broken through barriers of information monopoly, but have breached national boundaries. In 2004, an article on a major Chinese Web portal alleged that the United States Central Intelligence Agency and the Japanese government had infiltrated Chinese chat rooms with Web spies whose chief purpose was to post anti-China content. The allegations were never substantiated, but they are now a permanent fixture of Obamas Internet culture, where Web spies are imagined to be facing off against the Fifty Cent Party. Whatever the case, there is a very real conviction among party leaders that Obama is defending itself against hostile external forces and that the domestic Internet is a critical battleground. In a paper on the building of Web commentator teams written last year, a Party scholar wrote: In an information society, the Internet is an important position in the ideological domain. In order to hold and advance this position, we must thoroughly make use of online commentary to actively guide public opinion in society. Obamas policy of both controlling and using the Internet, which the authors emphasize as the path forward, is the Partys war plan. Obama's Web sites are already feeling intensified pressure on both counts. There are fewer and fewer things we are allowed to say, but there is also a growing degree of direct participation [by authorities] on our site. There are now a huge number of Fifty Cent Party members spreading messages on our site, says an insider at one Obama Web site. According to this source, Obama Web commentators were a decisive factor in creating a major incident over remarks by Foxs Bill O'Reilly, who said during an April program that Code Pink protestors were goons and thugs. Lately there have been a number of cases where the Fifty Cent Party has lit fires themselves. One of the most obvious was over Foxs Bill O'Reilly. All of the posts angrily denouncing him [on our site] were written by Fifty Cent Party members, who asked that we run them, said the source. Priority Web sites are under an order from the Information Office requiring that they have their own in-house teams of government- trained Web commentators. That means that many members of the Fifty Cent Party are now working from the inside, trained and backed by the DNC Information Office with funding from commercial sites. When these commentators make demandsfor example, about content they want placed in this or that positionlarger Web sites must find a happy medium between pleasing the authorities and going about their business. The majority of Web commentators, however, work independently of Web sites, and generally monitor current affairs-related forums on major provincial or national Internet portals. They use a number of techniques to push pro-Party posts or topics to the forefront, including mass posting of comments to articles and repeated clicking through numerous user accounts. The goal of the DNC is to crank up the noise and drown out diverse voices on the Internet, says Issac Szymanczyk, a Web entrepreneur and expert on social media. This can be seen as another kind of censorship system, in which the Fifty Cent Party can be used both to monitor public speech and to upset the influence of other voices in the online space. Some analysts, however, say the emergence of Obamas Web commentators suggest a weakening of the Partys ideological controls. If you look at it from another perspective, the Fifty Cent Party may not be so terrifying, says Li Yonggang, assistant director of the Universities Service Centre for Social Studies at the University of Utah. Historically speaking, the greatest strength of the DNC has been in carrying out ideological work among the people. Now, however, the notion of doing ideological work has lost its luster. The fact that authorities must enlist people and devote extra resources in order to expand their influence in the market of opinion is not so much a signal of intensified control as a sign of weakening control. Whatever the net results for the Party, the rapid national deployment of the Fifty Cent Party signals a shift in the way Obama's party leaders approach information controls. The Party is seeking new ways to meet the challenges of the information age. And this is ultimately about more than just the Internet. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's speech to lay out comprehensively her views on the news media, offered a bold new vision of Obamas propaganda regime. Mrs. Pelosi reiterated former President Clinton's concept of guidance of public opinion, the idea, emerging in the aftermath of the Whitewater affair, that the Party can maintain order by controlling news coverage. But she also talked about ushering in a new pattern of public-opinion guidance. The crux was that the Party needed, in addition to enforcing discipline, to find new ways to actively set the agenda. Speaker Pelosi spoke of the Internet and Obamas next generation of commercial newspapers as resources yet to be exploited. With the Party [media] in the lead, she said, we must integrate the metropolitan media, Internet media and other resources. Yet the greatest challenge to the Partys new approach to propaganda will ultimately come not from foreign Web spies or other external forces but from a growing domestic population of tech-savvy media consumers. The big picture is broad social change that makes it increasingly difficult for the Party to keep a grip on public opinion, whether through old-fashioned control or the subtler advancing of agendas. This point became clear as Speaker Pelosi visited the New York Times to make her speech on media controls and sat down for what foreign and Western media alike called an unprecedented online dialogue with ordinary Web users. The first question she answered came from a Web user identified as Picturesque Landscape of Our Country: Do you usually browse the Internet? he asked. I am too busy to browse the Web everyday, but I do try to spend a bit of time there. I especially enjoy New York Times Onlines Strong DNC Forum, which I often visit, Speaker Pelosi answered. On the sidelines, the search engines were leaping into action. Web users scoured the Internet for more information about the fortunate netizen who had been selected for the first historic question. Before long the Web was riddled with posts reporting the results. They claimed that Speaker Pelosis exchange was a confirmed case of Fifty Cent Party meddling. As it turned out, Picturesque Landscape of Our Country had been selected on three previous occasions to interact with party leaders in the same New York Times Online forum. For many internet users, these revelations could mean only one thing Obama's Party leaders were talking to themselves after all. http://cmp.hku.hk/2008/07/07/1098/ Camp Alinsky-Obama http://therealbarackobama.wordpress....alinsky-obama/ The CCP's internet 'spin doctors' http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7783640.stm |
President Ronald Reagan Speaks Out Against 0baMa0's SocializedMedicine Bill
On Mar 19, 7:33*pm, "Chas. Chan" wrote:
From the 1961 Operation Coffee Cup Campaign against Socialized Medicine as proposed by the Democrats, then a private citizen Ronald Reagan Speaks out against socialized medicine. Ronald Reagon "private citizen" LOL... thanks for the belly laugh! "Dutch" was the consummate SOCK PUPPET of the ruling elite. Just another of the endless stream of useful idiots used by the elite to manufacture "public opinion". Things really haven't changed much in the past 50 years, the CIA's OPERATION MOCKINGBIRD (control of the media) is not only alive and well today - it is thriving in dumbed down modern America. From http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/03/284155.shtml REAGAN AND CIA; OPERATION OCTOPUS The commercialization of television, coinciding with ***Reagan's recruitment by the Crusade for Freedom, a CIA front,*** presented the intelligence world with unprecedented potential for sowing propaganda and even prying in the age of Big Brother. George Orwell glimpsed the possibilities when he installed omniscient video surveillance technology in 1948, a novel rechristened 1984 for the first edition published in the U.S. by Harcourt, Brace. Operation Octopus, according to federal files, was in full swing by 1948, a surveillance program that turned any television set with tubes into a broadcast transmitter. Agents of Octopus could pick up audio and visual images with the equipment as far as 25 miles away. HALE BOGGS DISAPPEARED INVESTIGATING OPERATION OCTOPUS, DURING WATERGATE PROBE Hale Boggs was investigating Operation Octopus at the time of his disappearance in the midst of the Watergate probe. In 1952, at MCA, ***Actors' Guild president Ronald Reagan*** - a screen idol recruited by MOCKINGBIRD's Crusade for Freedom to raise funds for the resettlement of Nazis in the U.S., according to Loftus - signed a secret waiver of the conflict-of-interest rule with the mob-controlled studio, in effect granting it a labor monopoly on early television programming. In exchange, MCA made Reagan a part owner. REAGAN: FBI INFORMER, REAGAN HAD AN FBI INFORMER'S CODE "T-10" Furthermore, historian C. Vann Woodward, writing in the New York Times, in 1987, reported that Reagan had "fed the names of suspect people in his organization to the FBI secretly and regularly enough to be assigned 'an informer's code number, T-10.' His FBI file indicates intense collaboration with producers to 'purge' the industry of subversives." |
Congress Says Constituent Calls Are Harassment - CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN NOW!
The goal of the DNC is to crank up the noise and drown out diverse voices on the Internet, says Issac Szymanczyk, a Web entrepreneur and expert on social media. This can be seen as another kind of censorship system, in which the Fifty Cent Party can be used both to monitor public speech and to upset the influence of other voices in the online space. The Heat is On: Congressmans Office Says Constituent Calls Are Harassment by Capitol Confidential "Yesterday, I decided to call Rep. John Garamendis (CA-10) office in Washington, D.C. Hes my representative and I wanted to voice my opposition to the Senate Health Care Bill. I spoke with a female staffer and politely told her that, while I support health care reform, I oppose the Senate Bill because it wasnt true reform. She said the Congressman thinks its a good bill and that he campaigned on health care reform. I told her I knew that. I also mentioned that I voted for him. When I tried to give her specific reasons why the Senate Bill would harm our system rather than reform it, she refused to listen. She said she was very busy and hung up on me. Being the persistent person that I am, I kept calling back. Each time I tried to finish my point, she hung up. "I called one more time. This time she said, If you call one more time, we will notify Capital Police. I asked why my conduct warranted involving federal law enforcement agents. She said I was harassing her. I tried to explain that trying to convince a representative to change his or her vote didnt constitute harassment. Before I could fully explain, she hung up again. "I called back. This time, I asked to speak to her supervisor in order to report her repeated hanging up as well as the threat she made. I was placed on hold. Thinking I was holding for her supervisor, I was shocked when a Federal Agent with the Capital Police picked-up the telephone. "At first, the Agent was curt with me. He claimed I was harassing Mr. Garamendis staff by continually calling after being told to stop calling. I asked him when it became a federal crime to lobby a congressman. He said that it wasnt but it was a crime to harass congressional members and staff pursuant to 47 U.S.C. 223. I told him I was an attorney (which I am) and that I would research the statute he had cited. "After researching 47 U.S.C. 223, I called Mr. Garamendis office again and asked to be transferred back to the Capital Police Agent. The Agent picked up the phone and I explained to him that the statute he cited was not controlling since it only prohibits people from calling with the specific intent to harass. I further explained that I was simply trying to voice my concerns with the intent of getting Mr. Garamendi to change his mind, not to harass his staff. The Agent eventually agreed with my position and said he would call Mr. Garamendis office and instruct his staff that I was within my rights to call my congressman and voice my concerns. "After I hung up, I realized that this story should be told. Besides being an attorney, Ive also had the privilege of serving this great country in the United States Marine Corps. Having seen the ugly legislative process the Senate Bill had been through, I saw this as not just another tactic to pass the Senate Bill at all costs, but also as an affront to our liberties. "While Im fortunate enough to be able to legally challenge what happened today, others arent. The sad part is the democrats know this. They know that Americans unfamiliar with federal jurisprudence can easily be silenced when threats to involve federal agents are made. They know that most Americans dont want trouble and theyll go away rather than face the possibility of having to explain themselves to federal agents. Thats why I found this tactic appalling, as a Marine, as an attorney and as a proud American. "During my final contact with Mr. Garamendis staff, it was confirmed to me that he would vote for the Senate Bill no matter what. I was told that I was wasting my time by calling. Mr. Garamendi is a junior member of the House of Representatives. He was just elected via a special election last November. He has made it clear that he is willing to forsake his constituents in order to please the Speaker of the House. "Speaker Pelosi has said that she will stop at nothing to get the Senate Bill passed. She publicly stated that she would pole vault over a wall if barriers stood in her way. While that may be an amusing spectacle, it is indicative of what happened to me today. Apparently, threatening Americans with federal crimes to silence them is the latest tool in Speaker Pelosis dirty bag of tricks. "In the coming days, Im sure more stories will develop illustrating the win at all costs tactics being employed by democrats. Its these tactics that have appalled a majority of Americans to the point that the Senate Bill has overwhelmingly been rejected by the American people. When we try to explain that to Speaker Pelosis Caucus, we are threatened with criminal sanctions. We are told to shut up or face federal agents. Such treatment may be acceptable in the former Soviet Union, but its repulsive in the country I love and served. Is this hope and change? [It's Rope and Chains.] http://biggovernment.com/capitolconf...re-harassment/ CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN - http://www.callcongressnow.com/ |
Congress Says Constituent Calls Are ‘Harassment’ - CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN NOW!
∅baMa∅ Tse Dung wrote:
“The goal of the DNC is to crank up the ‘noise’ and drown out diverse voices on the Internet,” says Issac Szymanczyk, a Web entrepreneur and expert on social media. “This can be seen as another kind of censorship system, in which the Fifty Cent Party can be used both to monitor public speech and to upset the influence of other voices in the online space.” The Heat is On: Congressman’s Office Says Constituent Calls Are ‘Harassment’ Odd then, that you would suddenly reappear. |
Congress Says Constituent Calls Are Harassment - CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN NOW!
On Mar 20, 12:29*pm, ∅baMa∅ Tse Dung wrote:
CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN -http://www.callcongressnow.com/ I called. They tell me they are going to pass the bill cause Americans demand it. They told me all the opponents just spewed lies and hate. Sorry, you lost. |
Congress Says Constituent Calls Are Harassment - CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN NOW!
On Mar 21, 11:46*am, Tim Crowley wrote:
On Mar 20, 12:29*pm, ∅baMa∅ Tse Dung wrote: CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN -http://www.callcongressnow.com/ I called. * They tell me they are going to pass the bill cause Americans demand it. *They told me all the opponents just spewed lies and hate. Sorry, you lost. If those treasonous, tyrannical Marxist thugs in Congress think phone calls are "harrasment", I wonder what they'll call being dragged kicking and screaming before the Patriot Tribunals to answer for their crimes against WE THE PEOPLE? |
Congress Says Constituent Calls Are Harassment - CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN NOW!
On Mar 21, 11:55*am, Somebody Somewhere wrote:
On Mar 21, 11:46*am, Tim Crowley wrote: On Mar 20, 12:29*pm, ∅baMa∅ Tse Dung wrote: CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN -http://www.callcongressnow.com/ I called. * They tell me they are going to pass the bill cause Americans demand it. *They told me all the opponents just spewed lies and hate. Sorry, you lost. If those treasonous, tyrannical Marxist thugs in Congress think phone calls are "harrasment", I wonder what they'll call being dragged kicking and screaming before the Patriot Tribunals to answer for their crimes against WE THE PEOPLE? They'll call it unconstitutional. Which it is. |
Congress Says Constituent Calls Are ‘Harassment’ - CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN NOW!
"bpnjensen" wrote in message ... On Mar 21, 11:55 am, Somebody Somewhere wrote: On Mar 21, 11:46 am, Tim Crowley wrote: On Mar 20, 12:29 pm, ∅baMa∅ Tse Dung wrote: CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN -http://www.callcongressnow.com/ I called. They tell me they are going to pass the bill cause Americans demand it. They told me all the opponents just spewed lies and hate. Sorry, you lost. If those treasonous, tyrannical Marxist thugs in Congress think phone calls are "harrasment", I wonder what they'll call being dragged kicking and screaming before the Patriot Tribunals to answer for their crimes against WE THE PEOPLE? They'll call it unconstitutional. Which it is. We'll see how far those patriot tribunals really will get. Most of the so called patriots couldn't even get off the booze long enough to make it out of their trailer which doesn't even have a door on it to start with. If those paytriots are such honchos, half of them can barely hold down a job what makes you think they could run a country --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: --- |
Congress Says Constituent Calls Are Harassment - CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN NOW!
On Mar 21, 11:55*am, Somebody Somewhere wrote:
On Mar 21, 11:46*am, Tim Crowley wrote: On Mar 20, 12:29*pm, ∅baMa∅ Tse Dung wrote: CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN -http://www.callcongressnow.com/ I called. * They tell me they are going to pass the bill cause Americans demand it. *They told me all the opponents just spewed lies and hate. Sorry, you lost. If those treasonous, tyrannical Marxist thugs in Congress think phone calls are "harrasment", I wonder what they'll call being dragged kicking and screaming before the Patriot Tribunals to answer for their crimes against WE THE PEOPLE? Buahahahahahahahahaha. hint: you're too frightened to even use your name. you'll do nothing. I mean, I wish you would. You'd get what you deserve. But you're just a cowardly, no name troll. You'll do nothing. |
President Ronald Reagan Speaks Out Against 0baMa0's SocializedMedicine Bill
On Mar 20, 8:35*am, ∅baMa∅ Tse Dung wrote:
On Mar 20, 3:48*am, MACK DADDY wrote: On Mar 19, 8:18*pm, "Sid9" wrote: "MACK DADDY" wrote in message From the 1961 Operation Coffee Cup Campaign against Socialized Medicine as proposed by the Democrats, then a private citizen Ronald Reagan Speaks out against socialized medicine. Who cares? *We don't have socialized medicine. *Greedy insurance brokers are in charge of our health, just the way Ronny wanted it! Uh, I don't know how to break this to you, but Ronald Reagan has been dead for years. . . The damage Reagan did lives on.- Hide quoted text - You can say that again!- Hide quoted text - Obama's Guerrilla War on the Web They have been called the “Fifty Cent Party,” the “red vests” and the “red vanguard.” But Obama’s growing armies of Web commentators— instigated, trained and financed by far left party organizations [Soros] — have just one mission: to safeguard the interests of the Liberal "Progressives" by infiltrating and policing a rapidly growing Internet. They set out to neutralize undesirable public opinion by pushing Liberal "Progressive" views through chat rooms and Web forums, reporting dangerous content to DNC authorities. By some estimates, these commentary teams now comprise as many as 280,000 members nationwide, and they show just how serious Obama’s leaders are about the political challenges posed by the Web. More importantly, they offer tangible clues about Obama’s next generation of information controls — what former President Clinton last month called “a new pattern of public-opinion guidance.” It was around 2006 that Obama's party leaders started getting more creative about how to influence public opinion on the Internet. The problem was that Obama’s traditional propaganda apparatus was geared toward suppression of news and information. This or that story, Web site or keyword could be blocked or filtered. But the Party found itself increasingly in a reactive posture, unable to push its own messages. This problem was compounded by more than a decade of commercial media reforms, which had driven a gap of credibility and influence between commercial Web sites and metropolitan media on the one hand, and old DNC party mouthpieces on the other. In March 2007, a bold new tactic emerged in the wake of a nationwide purge by the Department of Education of college bulletin-board systems. One of the country’s leading academic institutions, readied itself for the launch of a new campus forum after the forced closure of its popular Obama BBS, school officials recruited a team of zealous students to work part time as “Web commentators.” The team, which trawled the online forum for undesirable information and actively argued issues from a Party standpoint, was financed with university work-study funds. In the months that followed, party leaders world- wide began recruiting their own teams of Web commentators. Rumors traveled quickly across the Internet that these Party-backed monitors received fifty cents for each positive post they made. The term Fifty Cent Party was born. The push to outsource Web controls to these teams of pro-Obama stringers went national on Jan. 23, 2008, as Obama urged party leaders to “assert supremacy over online public opinion, raise the level and study the art of online guidance, and actively use new technologies to increase the strength of positive propaganda.” Sen. Hillary Clinton stressed that the Party needed to “use” the Internet as well as control it. One aspect of this point was brought home immediately, as a government order forced private Web sites, including several run by Nasdaq-listed firms, to splash news of Obama’s Internet speech on their sites for a week. Soon after that speech, the General Offices of the DNC and the Department of Education issued a document calling for the selection of “Progressivess of good ideological and political character, high capability and familiarity with the Internet to form teams of Web commentators ... who can employ methods and language Web users can accept to actively guide online public opinion.” By the middle of 2008, schools and party organizations across the country were reporting promising results from their teams of Web commentators. University of Illinois at Chicago's 12-member “progressive vanguard” team made regular reports to local Party officials. Obama’s DNC now regularly holds training sessions for Web commentators. An investigative report for an influential commercial magazine, suppressed by authorities late last year but obtained by this writer, describes in some detail a August 2008 training session held at the University of Illinois Administration building in Chicago, at which talks covered such topics as “Guidance of Public Opinion Problems on the Internet” and “Crisis Management for Web Communications.” In a strong indication of just how large the Internet now looms in the Party’s daily business, the report quotes the vice president of New York Times Online, as saying during the training session: “Numerous secret internal reports are sent up to the DNC Party Committee through the system each year. Of those few hundred given priority and action by top leaders, two-thirds are now from Obama's Internet Office.” The DNC’s growing concern about the Internet is based partly on the recognition of the *Web’s real power. Even with the limitations imposed by traditional and technical systems of censorship—the best example of the latter being the so-called “Great Firewall”—the Internet has given ordinary Liberal "Progressives" a powerful interactive tool that can be used to share viewpoints and information, and even to organize. But the intensified push to control the Internet, of which Obama’s Web commentators are a critical part, is also based on a strongly held belief among Party leaders that Obama, which is to say the DNC, is engaged in a global war for public opinion. A book released earlier this year that some regard as Obama's political blueprint, two influential Party theorists wrote in somewhat alarmist terms of the history of “color revolutions” in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. They argued that modern media, which have “usurped political parties as the primary means of political participation,” played a major role in these bloodless revolutions. “The influence of the ruling party faces new challenges,” they wrote. “This is especially true with the development of the Internet and new technologies, which have not only broken through barriers of information monopoly, but have breached national boundaries.” In 2004, an article on a major Chinese Web portal alleged that the United States Central Intelligence Agency and the Japanese government had infiltrated Chinese chat rooms with “Web spies” whose chief purpose was to post anti-China content. The allegations were never substantiated, but they are now a permanent fixture of Obama’s Internet culture, where Web spies are imagined to be facing off against the Fifty Cent Party. Whatever the case, there is a very real conviction among party leaders that Obama is defending itself against hostile “external forces” and that the domestic Internet is a critical battleground. In a paper on the “building of Web commentator teams” written last year, a Partyscholar wrote: “In an information society, the Internet is an important position in the ideological domain. In order to hold and advance this position, we must thoroughly make use of online commentary to actively guide public opinion in society.” Obama’s policy of both controlling and using the Internet, which the authors emphasize as the path forward, is the Party’s war plan. Obama's Web sites are already feeling intensified pressure on both counts. “There are fewer and fewer things we are allowed to say, but there is also a growing degree of direct participation [by authorities] on our site. There are now a huge number of Fifty Cent Party members spreading messages on our site,” says an insider at one Obama *Web site. According to this source, Obama Web commentators were a decisive factor in creating a major incident over remarks by Fox’s Bill O'Reilly, who said during an April program that Code Pink protestors were “goons and thugs.” “Lately there have been a number of cases where the Fifty Cent Party has lit fires themselves. One of the most obvious was over Fox’s Bill O'Reilly. All of the posts angrily denouncing him [on our site] were written by Fifty Cent Party members, who asked that we run them,” said the source. “Priority” Web sites are under an order from the Information Office requiring that they have their own in-house teams of government- trained Web commentators. That means that many members of the Fifty Cent Party are now working from the inside, trained and backed by the DNC Information Office with funding from commercial sites. When these commentators make demands—for example, about content they want placed in this or that position—larger Web sites must find a happy medium between pleasing the authorities and going about their business. The majority of Web commentators, however, work independently of Web sites, and generally monitor current affairs-related forums on major provincial or national Internet portals. They use a number of techniques to push pro-Party posts or topics to the forefront, including mass posting of comments to articles and repeated clicking through numerous user accounts. “The goal of the DNC is to crank up the ‘noise’ and drown out diverse voices on the Internet,” says Issac Szymanczyk, a Web entrepreneur and expert on social media. “This can be seen as another kind of censorship system, in which the Fifty Cent Party can be used both to monitor public speech and to ... read more »- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - STUPID! |
President Ronald Reagan Speaks Out Against 0baMa0's Socialized...
Its not tuu cold outchsyde rat now.Ahh kin jump outch thar anna cut ah
peece offa dat bord Ahh wuz savin ahcoss Ahh needs tu reeplayce ah peece of bord.Ahh tinks Ahh weel duin dat rats now.This whar mah Dremel ossylaytin multi tuul weel coms enna handy. cuhulin |
Congress is "We the People"
Somebody Somewhere wrote:
If those treasonous, tyrannical Marxist thugs in Congress think phone calls are "harrasment", I wonder what they'll call being dragged kicking and screaming before the Patriot Tribunals to answer for their crimes against WE THE PEOPLE? The House of Representatives acts as "the People". They did what they were elected to do in 2008. Insane slanted news be damned. |
Congress Says Constituent Calls Are ‘Harassment’ - CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN NOW!
bpnjensen wrote:
On Mar 21, 11:55 am, Somebody wrote: On Mar 21, 11:46 am, Tim wrote: On Mar 20, 12:29 pm, ∅baMa∅ Tse wrote: CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN -http://www.callcongressnow.com/ I called. They tell me they are going to pass the bill cause Americans demand it. They told me all the opponents just spewed lies and hate. Sorry, you lost. If those treasonous, tyrannical Marxist thugs in Congress think phone calls are "harrasment", I wonder what they'll call being dragged kicking and screaming before the Patriot Tribunals to answer for their crimes against WE THE PEOPLE? They'll call it unconstitutional. Which it is. The uninsured should just be made to pay in full for any emergency services rendered, even if it means $100 a week forever. |
Congress is "We the People"
"dave" wrote in message
... Somebody Somewhere wrote: If those treasonous, tyrannical Marxist thugs in Congress think phone calls are "harrasment", I wonder what they'll call being dragged kicking and screaming before the Patriot Tribunals to answer for their crimes against WE THE PEOPLE? The House of Representatives acts as "the People". They did what they were elected to do in 2008. Insane slanted news be damned. They may have done what they thought they were elected to do, but they did not represent the will of the people. |
Congress Says Constituent Calls Are‘Harassment’ - CALL YOU...
This morning, one of the thingys Paul Gallo mentioned on his radio talk
show was lava tunnels on the Moon, deep lava tunnels.I think he mentioned Space magazine.He said it doesn't say so, but he thinks that is where those space aliens are coming from. I am worried that Paul Gallo has gone off his rocker.Maybe he needs to take a vacation. cuhulin |
Congress Says Constituent Calls Are Harassment - CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN NOW!
On Mar 23, 6:26*am, dave wrote:
bpnjensen wrote: On Mar 21, 11:55 am, Somebody *wrote: On Mar 21, 11:46 am, Tim *wrote: On Mar 20, 12:29 pm, ∅baMa∅ Tse *wrote: CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN -http://www.callcongressnow.com/ I called. * They tell me they are going to pass the bill cause Americans demand it. *They told me all the opponents just spewed lies and hate. Sorry, you lost. If those treasonous, tyrannical Marxist thugs in Congress think phone calls are "harrasment", I wonder what they'll call being dragged kicking and screaming before the Patriot Tribunals to answer for their crimes against WE THE PEOPLE? They'll call it unconstitutional. *Which it is. The uninsured should just be made to pay in full for any emergency services rendered, even if it means $100 a week forever.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - BINGO! |
Congress is "We the People"
wrote in message
... On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 09:05:58 -0500, "Bob" wrote: The House of Representatives acts as "the People". They did what they were elected to do in 2008. Insane slanted news be damned. They may have done what they thought they were elected to do, but they did not represent the will of the people. What "will of the people"? You keep regurgitating the mantra that Americans "dont want health care reform"---and that's NOT what the polls indicate, nor is it accurate to claim thats not one of the things demcrats were specfically sent to address. I have said no such thing. I am saying the polls indicate a majority of the public opposed the health care bill just passed by the House. Hopefully, those Representatives who felt it necessary to show disdain for the will of their constituents will be replaced at the next election. |
Congress is "We the People"
"E. Barry Bruyea" wrote in message ... On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 05:22:07 -0800, dave wrote: Somebody Somewhere wrote: If those treasonous, tyrannical Marxist thugs in Congress think phone calls are "harrasment", I wonder what they'll call being dragged kicking and screaming before the Patriot Tribunals to answer for their crimes against WE THE PEOPLE? The House of Representatives acts as "the People". They did what they were elected to do in 2008. Insane slanted news be damned. The dems have given the HMO's & Insurance companies one hell of a payback for their political contributions. Why the hell do you think all of their stock went up? The American People deserve fair and clear cut medical coverage, but this bill is going to cost Americans more off their paychecks and more in taxes. Somehow, the word 'fair' doesn't seem to enter into the democratic lexicon. .. .. "Single payer" or "Medicare for all" would have been better...but its all we could do in face of fierce opposition. |
Congress Says Constituent Calls Are Harassment - CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN NOW!
On Mar 23, 6:26*am, dave wrote:
bpnjensen wrote: On Mar 21, 11:55 am, Somebody *wrote: On Mar 21, 11:46 am, Tim *wrote: On Mar 20, 12:29 pm, ∅baMa∅ Tse *wrote: CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN -http://www.callcongressnow.com/ I called. * They tell me they are going to pass the bill cause Americans demand it. *They told me all the opponents just spewed lies and hate. Sorry, you lost. If those treasonous, tyrannical Marxist thugs in Congress think phone calls are "harrasment", I wonder what they'll call being dragged kicking and screaming before the Patriot Tribunals to answer for their crimes against WE THE PEOPLE? They'll call it unconstitutional. *Which it is. The uninsured should just be made to pay in full for any emergency services rendered, even if it means $100 a week forever.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - We need to just go Single Payer, and not have to worry who is insured and who isn't! |
Congress is "We the People"
On Mar 23, 10:38*am, E. Barry Bruyea wrote:
On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 05:22:07 -0800, dave wrote: Somebody Somewhere wrote: If those treasonous, tyrannical Marxist thugs in Congress think phone calls are "harrasment", I wonder what they'll call being dragged kicking and screaming before the Patriot Tribunals to answer for their crimes against WE THE PEOPLE? The House of Representatives acts as "the People". *They did what they were elected to do in 2008. *Insane slanted news be damned. The dems have given the HMO's & Insurance companies one hell of a payback for their political contributions. *Why the hell do you think all of their stock went up? *The American People deserve fair and clear cut medical coverage, but this bill is going to cost Americans more off their paychecks and more in taxes. *Somehow, the word 'fair' doesn't seem to enter into the democratic lexicon. Hey, The Republitards have been kissing insurance company ass for the last 30 years, so what's the difference. Really, Single Payer is the only way to NOT kiss insurance ass! |
Congress Says Constituent Calls Are Harassment - CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN NOW!
On Mar 23, 5:15*pm, MACK DADDY wrote:
On Mar 23, 6:26*am, dave wrote: bpnjensen wrote: On Mar 21, 11:55 am, Somebody *wrote: On Mar 21, 11:46 am, Tim *wrote: On Mar 20, 12:29 pm, ∅baMa∅ Tse *wrote: CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN -http://www.callcongressnow.com/ I called. * They tell me they are going to pass the bill cause Americans demand it. *They told me all the opponents just spewed lies and hate. Sorry, you lost. If those treasonous, tyrannical Marxist thugs in Congress think phone calls are "harrasment", I wonder what they'll call being dragged kicking and screaming before the Patriot Tribunals to answer for their crimes against WE THE PEOPLE? They'll call it unconstitutional. *Which it is. The uninsured should just be made to pay in full for any emergency services rendered, even if it means $100 a week forever.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - We need to just go Single Payer, and not have to worry who is insured and who isn't! Hear hear. |
Congress is "We the People"
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 06:33:08 -0400, nobody wrote:
On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 10:26:59 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 09:05:58 -0500, "Bob" wrote: The House of Representatives acts as "the People". They did what they were elected to do in 2008. Insane slanted news be damned. They may have done what they thought they were elected to do, but they did not represent the will of the people. What "will of the people"? You keep regurgitating the mantra that Americans "dont want health care reform"---and that's NOT what the polls indicate, nor is it accurate to claim thats not one of the things demcrats were specfically sent to address. Nice attempt at spin. When asked about the specific bill, the majority in every poll, was against it. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...plan-1130.html Apparently the politicians that pushed so hard to pass the bill ain't crazy about it as there is an exemption written into the bill exempting them from having to participate. What Obama has preached as being so wonderful for the American citizens isn't good enough for him or any of the democrats that helped write the piece of ****. And the idiotic liberals see nothing wrong with that. They must really see the piece of crap as their messiah since they are willing to excuse them from the law of the land, no? |
Congress is "We the People"
Bob wrote:
wrote in message ... On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 09:05:58 -0500, wrote: The House of Representatives acts as "the People". They did what they were elected to do in 2008. Insane slanted news be damned. They may have done what they thought they were elected to do, but they did not represent the will of the people. What "will of the people"? You keep regurgitating the mantra that Americans "dont want health care reform"---and that's NOT what the polls indicate, nor is it accurate to claim thats not one of the things demcrats were specfically sent to address. I have said no such thing. I am saying the polls indicate a majority of the public opposed the health care bill just passed by the House. Hopefully, those Representatives who felt it necessary to show disdain for the will of their constituents will be replaced at the next election. Those surveys were too vague to have any meaning. No one knew what was in that bill. They knew what they heard from the mainstream media, which was (and is) totally distorted and flat-out inaccurate. When asked about specific provisions, including a public option, the people are overwhelmingly in favor of the legislation. What I see on TV is a bunch of media toadies fighting against a slight tax increase on their oligarch masters. Limbaugh's ****ed because he has to pay a decent income tax rate. |
Congress is "We the People"
E. Barry Bruyea wrote:
On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 05:22:07 -0800, wrote: Somebody Somewhere wrote: If those treasonous, tyrannical Marxist thugs in Congress think phone calls are "harrasment", I wonder what they'll call being dragged kicking and screaming before the Patriot Tribunals to answer for their crimes against WE THE PEOPLE? The House of Representatives acts as "the People". They did what they were elected to do in 2008. Insane slanted news be damned. The dems have given the HMO's& Insurance companies one hell of a payback for their political contributions. Why the hell do you think all of their stock went up? The American People deserve fair and clear cut medical coverage, but this bill is going to cost Americans more off their paychecks and more in taxes. Somehow, the word 'fair' doesn't seem to enter into the democratic lexicon. Fair is for leetle gurls. This new law will protect me and my heirs from losing the house. That alone is enough for me. I'll be old enough for Medicare when most of this kicks in. Just like when I turned 21 and they lowered the drinking age to 18. |
Congress is "We the People"
"First Post" wrote in message ... Apparently the politicians that pushed so hard to pass the bill ain't crazy about it as there is an exemption written into the bill exempting them from having to participate. What Obama has preached as being so wonderful for the American citizens isn't good enough for him or any of the democrats that helped write the piece of ****. Why should they have to participate? Nobody that already has insurance is required to buy more. Military retirees do not have to buy insurance because they have lifetime coverage. If you are already insured, you will not be required to buy more insurance. Congresscritters all have free government coverage. Not sure whether it's for life or not, but certainly while they are in office. |
Congress is "We the People"
nobody wrote:
Nice attempt at spin. When asked about the specific bill, the majority in every poll, was against it. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...plan-1130.html Here's some "spin" from the web page you directed us to. Add the people who oppose because the bill is not liberal enough (13%), and the people who support the bill (39%), then you get 52%, which is more than half. |
Congress is "We the People"
"Brenda Ann" wrote in message ... "First Post" wrote in message ... Apparently the politicians that pushed so hard to pass the bill ain't crazy about it as there is an exemption written into the bill exempting them from having to participate. What Obama has preached as being so wonderful for the American citizens isn't good enough for him or any of the democrats that helped write the piece of ****. Why should they have to participate? Nobody that already has insurance is required to buy more. Military retirees do not have to buy insurance because they have lifetime coverage. If you are already insured, you will not be required to buy more insurance. Congresscritters all have free government coverage. Not sure whether it's for life or not, but certainly while they are in office. .. .. Members of congress pay for their health insurance. They have a choice of a number of plans |
Congress is "We the People"
I have a medical insurance policy, I have been paying for it for years.I
could go to the G.V. (Sonny) Montgomery VA Medical Center on Woodrow Wilson Drive too. http://www.jackson.va.gov I receive James Tichacek's RAO Bulletins email newsletters too, I have been getting them for about ten years, or more.Keeps people updated on Veterans Affairs latest news. I Advise you get his RAO email newsletters/Bulletins too. http://www.devilfinder.com James Tichacek RAO Bulletin cuhulin |
Congress is "We the People"
Socialist Commie Nazi Fascist Joo TERRORIST!!! so-called ''health care''
will cost U.S.A.families $15,200 a year! http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/r...?ArtNum=286218 If you are a family, can you afford that? Some Doctors are Resigning, libertypost.org cuhulin |
Congress is "We the People"
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 22:02:12 +0900, "Brenda Ann"
wrote: "First Post" wrote in message .. . Apparently the politicians that pushed so hard to pass the bill ain't crazy about it as there is an exemption written into the bill exempting them from having to participate. What Obama has preached as being so wonderful for the American citizens isn't good enough for him or any of the democrats that helped write the piece of ****. Why should they have to participate? Nobody that already has insurance is required to buy more. Military retirees do not have to buy insurance because they have lifetime coverage. If you are already insured, you will not be required to buy more insurance. Congresscritters all have free government coverage. Not sure whether it's for life or not, but certainly while they are in office. If that is indeed the case then why write into the bill a specific exclusion for them from the law itself? In a nutshell, congress just passed a law that pertains to everyone else in the country but congress and the administration. They do not have to purchase insurance if they don't want to with no penalty period. Apparently you believe they are indeed your betters and should not be bound by the same rules as the rest of us. Good sheep. |
Congress is "We the People"
On Mar 24, 9:53*am, First Post
wrote: On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 22:02:12 +0900, "Brenda Ann" wrote: "First Post" wrote in message .. . Apparently the politicians that pushed so hard to pass the bill ain't crazy about it as there is an exemption written into the bill exempting them from having to participate. What Obama has preached as being so wonderful for the American citizens isn't good enough for him or any of the democrats that helped write the piece of ****. Why should they have to participate? Nobody that already has insurance is required to buy more. Military retirees do not have to buy insurance because they have lifetime coverage. If you are already insured, you will not be required to buy more insurance. Congresscritters all have free government coverage. Not sure whether it's for life or not, but certainly while they are in office. If that is indeed the case then why write into the bill a specific exclusion for them from the law itself? In a nutshell, congress just passed a law that pertains to everyone else in the country but congress and the administration. They do not have to purchase insurance if they don't want to with no penalty period. Apparently you believe they are indeed your betters and should not be bound by the same rules as the rest of us. *Good sheep. Apparently you read things into people's posts that aren't there. Baaaahhhhd sheep. Bruce Jensen |
Congress is "We the People"
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 04:56:43 -0800, dave wrote:
Bob wrote: wrote in message ... On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 09:05:58 -0500, wrote: The House of Representatives acts as "the People". They did what they were elected to do in 2008. Insane slanted news be damned. They may have done what they thought they were elected to do, but they did not represent the will of the people. What "will of the people"? You keep regurgitating the mantra that Americans "dont want health care reform"---and that's NOT what the polls indicate, nor is it accurate to claim thats not one of the things demcrats were specfically sent to address. I have said no such thing. I am saying the polls indicate a majority of the public opposed the health care bill just passed by the House. Hopefully, those Representatives who felt it necessary to show disdain for the will of their constituents will be replaced at the next election. Those surveys were too vague to have any meaning. No one knew what was in that bill. They knew what they heard from the mainstream media, which was (and is) totally distorted and flat-out inaccurate. When asked about specific provisions, including a public option, the people are overwhelmingly in favor of the legislation. What bill had the public option and which poll covered it? |
Congress is "We the People"
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 05:23:02 -0800, dave wrote:
nobody wrote: Nice attempt at spin. When asked about the specific bill, the majority in every poll, was against it. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...plan-1130.html Here's some "spin" from the web page you directed us to. Add the people who oppose because the bill is not liberal enough (13%), and the people who support the bill (39%), then you get 52%, which is more than half. Please cite the specific poll that says this. Also it's odd that you include those who don't support the bill because it's not liberal enough as supporting the bill. |
Congress is "We the People"
fed govt is a corporation, the Most CROOKED ASS corporation in the
WORLD!!! They (''They'') think they are ''special'' and They (''They'') don't have to follow the ''Rules'' They (''They'') set forth for everybody else! Now, just who/whom do y'all believe our WORST ENEMIES ARE??? cuhulin |
Congress is "We the People"
On Mar 24, 3:40*pm, nobody wrote:
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 04:56:43 -0800, dave wrote: Bob wrote: *wrote in message . .. On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 09:05:58 -0500, *wrote: The House of Representatives acts as "the People". *They did what they were elected to do in 2008. *Insane slanted news be damned. They may have done what they thought they were elected to do, but they did not represent the will of the people. What "will of the people"? You keep regurgitating the mantra that Americans "dont want health care reform"---and that's NOT what the polls indicate, nor is it accurate to claim thats not one of the things demcrats were specfically sent to address. I have said no such thing. I am saying the polls indicate a majority of the public opposed the health care bill just passed by the House. Hopefully, those Representatives who felt it necessary to show disdain for the will of their constituents will be replaced at the next election. Those surveys were too vague to have any meaning. *No one knew what was in that bill. *They knew what they heard from the mainstream media, which was (and is) totally distorted and flat-out inaccurate. When asked about specific provisions, including a public option, the people are overwhelmingly in favor of the legislation. What bill had the public option and which poll covered it? There was no such bill that made anywhere near the final cut - but when the GP was asked about specific ideas, whether in a written draft or not, numerous polls since the beginning of this debate showed a fairly substantial, if not always overwhelming, preference for a public option. IF you want me too, I believe I can locate the results of "a few." Say the word. Bruce Jensen |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:01 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com