Posted on 08/04/2009 3:45:39 PM PDT by Cindy
REMINDER:
YES WE CAN READ THIS BILL — H.R. 3200:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-3200
YES WE CAN FOLLOW THIS BILL — H.R. 3200:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-3200
http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/aarp/index?tab=articles
#
http://michellemalkin.com/2009/08/11/wild-misrepresentation-watch-obama-lies-about-aarp-endorsement/
“Wild Misrepresentation Watch: Obama lies about AARP endorsement”
By Michelle Malkin
August 11, 2009 05:30 PM
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=StevenCrowder&view=videos
#
So, what do “angry mobs” look like? Steven Crowder takes a humorous look at the “issue”:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LeaRJfvJokU
“ANGRY MOB MAULS CROWDER!!”
(Added August 10, 2009)
#
Note: The following text is a quote:
http://www.house.gov/green/news_center/events.shtml
Events
Town hall meetings are one of my favorite ways to communicate with constituents. I have held hundreds during my years of service in Congress and always welcomed everyone to attend. Unfortunately, due to a coordinated effort to disrupt our town hall meetings, we will be restricting further attendance to residents of the 29th Congressional District and verifying residency by requiring photo identification. Whether individuals agree or disagree, we must maintain order to have a civil discussion of the issues. While I regret this restriction, it is necessary for the safety and consideration of our constituents. Those who do not reside in the 29th Congressional should contact their Member of Congress to voice any concerns that they may have on issues before Congress. Click Here to determine your Member of Congress.
August 03, 2009 - Town Hall Meeting - Melrose Park
August 04, 2009 - Town Hall Meeting - Holiday Forest
August 05, 2009 - Senior Citizens’ Issues Forum
August 05, 2009 - Town Hall Meeting - Gulf Freeway
August 18, 2009 - Town Hall Meeting - Manchester
August 19, 2009 - Town Hall Meeting - Baytown
August 20, 2009 - Town Hall Meeting - Meadowcreek Village
August 22, 2009 - 14th Annual Immunization Day
September 01, 2009 - Town Hall Meeting - Pasadena
Note: Read the whole article.
http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=52302
“White House Denies Collecting Names of Opponents of Health Legislation”
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
By Fred Lucas, Staff Writer
(CNSNews.com) –
SNIPPET: ““There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care,” wrote Macon Phillips, director of New Media for the White House in a blog posting.
“These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain e-mails 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 e-mail or see something on the Web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov.”
Phillips also wrote, “Scary chain e-mails and videos are starting to percolate on the Internet, breathlessly claiming, for example, to ‘uncover’ the truth about the presidents health insurance reform position.”
The White House request for flagging opposition to the health care plan was alarming to Cornyn who wrote to President Obama asking him to “cease this program immediately.”
“By requesting that citizens send ‘fishy’ e-mails to the White House, it is inevitable that the names, e-mail addresses, IP addresses and private speech of U.S. citizens will be reported to the White House,” Cornyn’s letter said. “You should not be surprised that these actions taken by your White House staff raise the specter of a data collection program. As Congress debates health care reform and other critical policy matters, citizen engagement must not be chilled by fear of government monitoring the exercise of free speech rights.”
Comments by Obama have circulated through the Internet. In a 2003 speech posted on the Internet, Obama said, “I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer universal health care plan.”
“But as all of you know, we may not get there immediately, because first we’ve got to take back the White House, and we’ve got take back the Senate, and we’ve got to take back the House,” Obama said.
Cornyn wanted to know how restating what the president said six years ago, when he was an Illinois state legislator, was disinformation. He also asked the White House to explain how they “intend to use the names, e-mail addresses, IP addresses, and identities of citizens reported to have engaged in ‘fishy’ speech?””
Note; The following text is a quote:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/On-Cookies/
THE BLOG
TUESDAY, AUGUST 11TH, 2009 AT 4:17 PM
On Cookies
Posted by Vivek Kundra and Michael Fitzpatrick
Over the past two weeks, during the public comment period on OMB’s cookie policy, we have received significant feedback and suggested revisions to the current policy. These comments reflect individual opinions on all sides of the issue.
Our main goal in revisiting the ban on using persistent cookies on Federal websites is to bring the federal government into the 21st century. Consistent with this Administration’s commitment to making government more open and participatory, we want federal agencies to be able to provide the same user- friendly, dynamic, and citizen-centric websites that people have grown accustomed to using when they shop or get news online or communicate through social media networks, while also protecting people’s privacy.
It is clear that protecting the privacy of citizens who visit government websites must be one of the top considerations in any new policy. This is why we’ve taken such a cautious approach going forward and why we felt it so important to get feedback and hear from people on this. While we wanted to get people’s ideas for improving our policy, we also needed to hear any concerns so that we could understand better where potential pitfalls might lie.
This privacy issue has recently received some attention in the media. We want to make it clear that the current policy on Federal agencies’ use of cookies has not changed. Moreover, the policy won’t change until we’ve read the public comments that have been submitted to ensure that we’re considering all sides of the issue and are addressing privacy concerns appropriately.
We would also like to take this opportunity to address a potential misperception. Some articles have hinted that the government is creating special exemptions for third-parties from existing privacy rules, with the result that there wouldn’t be adequate protection of people’s personal information. This is not true. The current policy in place on persistent cookies continues to apply to all Federal agencies and to those agencies’ use of third-party applications, whenever personal information is collected on the agency’s behalf.
Once again, we appreciate everyone’s contribution to this topic and are grateful for the time and energy devoted by those who provided such useful insight on this issue.
Michael Fitzpatrick is Associate Administrator, OMB Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. Vivek Kundra is Federal CIO.
Note: The following text is a quote:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/privacy/
OUR ONLINE PRIVACY POLICY
We at WhiteHouse.gov are committed to protecting the privacy and security of your visits to this website. Outlined below is our online privacy policy. If you have questions about this policy, please let us know.
Collection and disclosure of information: To ensure we are able to communicate effectively with visitors to our web site, we collect some information that can be directly associated with a specific person. We call this “Personal Information,” and it includes, by way of illustration, names, addresses, telephone numbers and e-mail addresses.
We collect Personal Information from eligible individuals who affirmatively request to receive e-mail or other services from us. We collect this Personal Information in order to provide these eligible individuals with timely information via e-mail regarding events, resources and issues.
It is our general policy not to make Personal Information available to anyone other than our employees, staff, and agents.
Online Comments and Personal Information: We treat your name, city, state, and any comments you provide as public information. We may, for example, provide compilations of your comments to national leaders and other individuals participating in our efforts, without disclosing email addresses. We may also make comments along with your city and state available to the press and public online.
Opting out and modifying information: Subscribers to our e-mail list may terminate their subscriptions via a link at the bottom of each email sent from Whitehouse.gov.
Browser information collected on the web site: We log IP addresses, which are the locations of computers or networks on the Internet, and analyze them in order to improve the value of our site. We also collect aggregate numbers of page hits in order to track the popularity of certain pages and improve the value of our site. We do not gather, request, record, require, collect or track any Internet users’ Personal Information through these processes.
Cookies: A cookie is a tiny piece of data stored by a user’s browser that helps a web site or service recognize that user’s unique computer. You can remove or block cookies by changing the settings of your browser.
Session specific cookies may be used on WhiteHouse.gov to improve the user experience and for basic web metrics. These cookies expire in a very short time frame or when a browser window closes and are permitted by current federal guidelines.
The federal government has guidelines for the use of persistent cookies. The goals of the guidelines are to enable the useful functioning of federal websites while protecting individual privacy.
For videos that are visible on WhiteHouse.gov, a ‘persistent cookie’ is set by third party providers when you click to play a video. (We may experience some engineering difficulties as the new Whitehouse.gov is posted and reviewed. We intend, however, to fully enforce the above provisions as soon as possible. If you are experiencing any difficulties, please contact us.)
This persistent cookie is used by some third party providers to help maintain the integrity of video statistics. A waiver has been issued by the White House Counsel’s office to allow for the use of this persistent cookie.
If you would like to view a video without the use of persistent cookies, a link to download the video file is typically provided just below the video.
Privacy of our email lists: As noted above, we maintain e-mail lists to keep interested, eligible individuals informed about important topics, and individuals must affirmatively request to join them. We configure our list server software to refuse to divulge the email addresses of our list subscribers to anyone other than those whom we authorize. However, we are not the author of this software, and are not responsible for any failures in the software to preserve subscriber anonymity.
Children’s privacy: Because we care about the safety and privacy of children online, we comply with the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998 (COPPA). COPPA and its accompanying FTC regulation establish United States federal law that protects the privacy of children using the Internet. We do not knowingly contact or collect personal information from children under 13. Our site is not intended to solicit information of any kind from children under 13.
It is possible that by fraud or deception we may receive information pertaining to children under 13. If we are notified of this, as soon as we verify the information, we will immediately obtain parental consent or otherwise delete the information from our servers. If you want to notify us of our receipt of information by children under 13, please do so by emailing us at Comments@WhiteHouse.gov.
Security: We maintain a variety of physical, electronic and procedural safeguards to protect your personal information. For example, we use commercially reasonable tools and techniques to protect against unauthorized access to our systems. Also, we restrict access to Personal Information to those who need such access in the course of their duties for us. Your own efforts to protect against unauthorized access play an important role in protecting the security of your personal information. You should be sure to sign off when finished using a shared computer, and always log out of any site when viewing personal information. We may have links to other, outside web sites that we do not control. We are not responsible for the content or privacy policies of these sites, and users should check those policies on such sites.
Changes to this policy: We will revise or update this policy if our practices change, or as we develop better ways to keep you informed about them. You should refer back to this page often for the latest information and the effective date of any changes. If we decide to change this policy, we will post a new policy on our site and change the date at the bottom. Changes to the policy shall not apply retroactively.
If you have any questions or concerns, please contact us.
FWIW: Well old Nan (Pelosi), here’s the first swastika “news” report I have seen online where there is an actual swastika-resembling image.
#
http://a.abcnews.com/images/US/ap_swastika_090811_mn.jpg
PHOTO CAPTION: “A vandalized sign outside the office of Rep. David Scott, D-Ga., is shown Aug. 11, 2009 in Smyrna,...
(John Bazemore/AP Photo)”
#
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=8302639
“Swastika Painted at Georgia Congressman’s Office
Swastika painted on sign outside office of congressman who had contentious health care debate”
By BEN EVANS Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON August 11, 2009 (AP) The Associated Press
SNIPPET: “A swastika was found Tuesday painted on a sign outside Rep. David Scott’s district office, an act the Georgia Democrat said reflects an increasingly hateful and racist debate over health care and should serve as a reminder for people to tone down their rhetoric.
Scott’s staff arrived at his Smyrna, Ga., office Tuesday morning to find the Nazi graffiti emblazoned on a sign bearing the lawmaker’s name. The vandalism occurred roughly a week after Scott was involved in a contentious argument over health care at a community meeting.
Scott, who is black, said he also has received mail in recent days that used N-word references to him, and that characterized President Barack Obama as a Marxist.”
Video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RKvEllKpbc
“Portland Wu Town Hall Freedom v Slavery”
(Added August 11, 2009)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2313486/posts
“EXCLUSIVE VIDEO: NH Teaparty Coalition Arrives in Portsmouth to Greet President Obama “
GraniteGrok ^ | Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Posted on August 11, 2009 10:05:53 AM PDT by kristinn
#
http://granitegrok.com/blog/2009/08/live_blogging_from_portsmouth_nh_at_the.html
“LIVE BLOGGING! From Portsmouth, NH at the site of Obama’s Healthcare Town Hall”
(August 11, 2009)
#
Video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgOISqMdQ4Y
“NHTEAPartyCoalitionArriving”
(Added August 11, 2009)
Note: Watch this very brief video and pay attention to the ending.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FElipqE_Dl4
“Ezra Klein: The Deceptive Strategy Underlying ObamaCare”
(Added June 25, 2009)
Video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-L3FnWNkIzU
“Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee talks on the phone as a woman asks a question at a town hall event”
Video Description - Quote:
August 12, 2009
Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee talks on the phone as a woman asks a question at a town hall event
Category: News & Politics
Tags: Sheila Jackson Lee healthcare Health care Phone Town Hall Obama Democrat representation
http://www.classicalideals.com/
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/what-the-health-care-bill-actually-says
#
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2314844/posts
“RUSH: A Duke Professor Explains WHAT THE HEALTH CARE BILL ACTUALLY SAYS”
www.rushlimbaugh.com ^ | Wednesday, August 12, 2009 | Rush Limbaugh
Posted on August 13, 2009 1:33:23 AM PDT by Yosemitest
Note: Read the whole article please. -Cindy
#
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/52429
“Obama in 2003: ‘I Happen to be a Proponent of a Single-Payer Universal Health Care Plan;’ Obama in 2009: ‘I Have Not Said That I Was a Single-Payer Supporter’”
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
By Fred Lucas, Staff Writer
Music Break:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-nuEY6fQgzk
“The Marvelettes Please Mr. Postman - Original version”
#
President Obama Speaks:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5SGo8MiuAo
“Obama on Health Care being Like Post Office, Private Insurance like UPS and FedEx”
(Added August 12, 2009)
#
This blogger says: “Please Mr. Postman (ObamaCareRemix)”
http://jimtreacher.com/archives/002109.html
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2315409/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2315409/posts?page=6#6
#
cpusa.org
cpusa.org/link/category/21/
www.moveon.org
www.moveon.org/augustrecess/town_hall_materials.html
#
“MoveOn.org is Trying to Mobilize Activists to Attend Town Hall Meetings to Push for ‘Public Option’ Health Care”
Thursday, August 13, 2009
By Penny Starr, Senior Staff Writer
SNIPPET: “(CNSNews.com) - While President Obama has focused attention on “special interests” that are mobilizing to try to defeat his health-care plan, the liberal group MoveOn.org is trying to mobilize people to attend congressional town hall meetings to push for the plan, and especially to push for a government-run “public option” insurance program.
MoveOn.org is even suggesting brief statements people can make in favor of a “public option” health care plan if they attend a town hall, and gives people the opportunity to download signs indicating their approval of the “public option” that they can print and carry into the meetings.
The lead article on MoveOn.org’s Web site yesterday and this morning is headlined, “It’s Getting Ugly.””
#
Video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-94Y5CqEU8Q
“FOX’s Major Garrett vs White House Press Secretary Over Emails”
Video Description - Quote:
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs vs FOX’s Major Garrett Over David Axelrod Emails - 08/13/09
Category: News & Politics
Tags: White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs vs FOX Major Garrett Over Emails 08/13/09 David Axelrod
www.barackobama.com/index.php
my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/obamaforamerica/gGMPmC
healthcareforamericanow.org/site/content/who_we_are/
#
www.thenation.com/blogs/edcut/461719/organizing_for_a_public_option_
“Organizing For A Public Option?”
posted by KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL on 08/12/2009 @ 12:50pm
ADDING URL to post no. 136:
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/52470
“MoveOn.org is Trying to Mobilize Activists to Attend Town Hall Meetings to Push for ‘Public Option’ Health Care”
Thursday, August 13, 2009
By Penny Starr, Senior Staff Writer
http://www.facebook.com/notes.php?id=24718773587
#
Note: The following text is a quote:
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=116979483434
Sarah Palin: Troubling Questions Remain About Obama’s Health Care Plan
Sarah Palin’s Notes
Troubling Questions Remain About Obama’s Health Care Plan
Today at 10:11pm
I join millions of Americans in expressing appreciation for the Senate Finance Committee’s decision to remove the provision in the pending health care bill that authorizes end-of-life consultations (Section 1233 of HR 3200). It’s gratifying that the voice of the people is getting through to Congress; however, that provision was not the only disturbing detail in this legislation; it was just one of the more obvious ones.
As I noted in my statement last week, nationalized health care inevitably leads to rationing. There is simply no way to cover everyone and hold down the costs at the same time. The rationing system proposed by one of President Obama’s key health care advisors is particularly disturbing. I’m speaking of the “Complete Lives System” advocated by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of the president’s chief of staff. President Obama has not yet stated any opposition to the “Complete Lives System,” a system which, if enacted, would refuse to allocate medical resources to the elderly, the infirm, and the disabled who have less economic potential. [1] Why the silence from the president on this aspect of his nationalization of health care? Does he agree with the “Complete Lives System”? If not, then why is Dr. Emanuel his policy advisor? What is he advising the president on? I just learned that Dr. Emanuel is now distancing himself from his own work and claiming that his “thinking has evolved” on the question of rationing care to benefit the strong and deny the weak. [2] How convenient that he disavowed his own work only after the nature of his scholarship was revealed to the public at large.
The president is busy assuring us that we can keep our private insurance plans, but common sense (and basic economics) tells us otherwise. The public option in the Democratic health care plan will crowd out private insurers, and that’s what it’s intended to do. A single payer health care plan has been President Obama’s agenda all along, though he is now claiming otherwise. Don’t take my word for it. Here’s what he said back in 2003:
“I happen to be a proponent of a single payer universal health care plan.... A single payer health care plan – universal health care plan – that’s what I would like to see.” [3]
A single-payer health care plan might be what Obama would like to see, but is it what the rest of us would like to see? What does a single payer health care plan look like? We need look no further than other countries who have adopted such a plan. The picture isn’t pretty. [4] The only way they can control costs is to ration care. As I noted in my earlier statement quoting Thomas Sowell, government run health care won’t reduce the price of medical care; it will simply refuse to pay the price. The expensive innovative procedures that people from all over the world come to the United States for will not be available under a government plan that seeks to cover everyone by capping costs.
Our senior citizens are right to be wary of this health care bill. Medical care at the end of life accounts for 80 percent of all health care. When care is rationed, that is naturally where the cuts will be felt first. The “end-of-life” consultations authorized in Section 1233 of HR 3200 were an obvious and heavy handed attempt at pressuring people to reduce the financial burden on the system by minimizing their own care. Worst still, it actually provided a financial incentive to doctors to initiate these consultations. People are right to point out that such a provision doesn’t sound “purely voluntary.”
In an article I noted yesterday, Charles Lane wrote:
“Ideally, the delicate decisions about how to manage life’s end would be made in a setting that is neutral in both appearance and fact. Yes, it’s good to have a doctor’s perspective. But Section 1233 goes beyond facilitating doctor input to preferring it. Indeed, the measure would have an interested party — the government — recruit doctors to sell the elderly on living wills, hospice care and their associated providers, professions and organizations. You don’t have to be a right-wing wacko to question that approach.” [5]
I agree. Last year, I issued a proclamation for “Healthcare Decisions Day.” [6] The proclamation sought to increase the public’s knowledge about creating living wills and establishing powers of attorney. There was no incentive to choose one option over another. There was certainly no financial incentive for physicians to push anything. In fact, the proclamation explicitly called on medical professionals and lawyers “to volunteer their time and efforts” to provide information to the public.
Comparing the “Healthcare Decisions Day” proclamation to Section 1233 of HR 3200 is ridiculous. The two are like apples and oranges. The attempt to link the two shows how desperate the proponents of nationalized health care are to shift the debate away from the disturbing details of their bill.
There is one aspect of this bill which I have not addressed yet, but it’s a very obvious one. It’s the simple fact that we can’t afford it. But don’t take my word for it. Take the word of Doug Elmendorf, the director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. He told the Senate Budget Committee last month:
“In the legislation that has been reported we do not see the sort of fundamental changes that would be necessary to reduce the trajectory of federal health spending by a significant amount. And on the contrary, the legislation significantly expands the federal responsibility for health care costs.” [7]
Dr. Elmendorf went on to note that this health care legislation would increase spending at an unsustainable rate.
Our nation is already $11.5 trillion in debt. Where will the money come from? Taxes, of course. And will a burdensome new tax help our economy recover? Of course not. The best way to encourage more health care coverage is to foster a strong economy where people can afford to purchase their own coverage if they choose to do so. The current administration’s economic policies have done nothing to help in this regard.
Health care is without a doubt a complex and contentious issue, but health care reform should be a market oriented solution. There are many ways we can reform the system and lower costs without nationalizing it.
The economist Arthur Laffer has taken the lead in pushing for a patient-center health care reform policy. He noted in a Wall Street Journal article earlier this month:
“A patient-centered health-care reform begins with individual ownership of insurance policies and leverages Health Savings Accounts, a low-premium, high-deductible alternative to traditional insurance that includes a tax-advantaged savings account. It allows people to purchase insurance policies across state lines and reduces the number of mandated benefits insurers are required to cover. It reallocates the majority of Medicaid spending into a simple voucher for low-income individuals to purchase their own insurance. And it reduces the cost of medical procedures by reforming tort liability laws.” [8]
Those are real reforms that we can live with and afford. Once again, I warn my fellow Americans that if we go down the path of nationalized health care, there will be no turning back. We must stop and think or we may find ourselves losing even more of our freedoms.
- Sarah Palin
[1] See http://www.scribd.com/doc/18280675/Principles-for-Allocation-of-Scarce-Medical-Interventions
[2] See http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/aug/14/white-house-adviser-backs-off-rationing/
[3]See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hsqzSKuC44
[4] See http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=N2M0ODk0OTNkZjkwNGM4OGMyYTEwYWY3ODUzMzFiOTc=
[5] See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/07/AR2009080703043.html
[6] See http://www.gov.state.ak.us/archive.php?id=1094&type=6
[7] See http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/07/cbo-sees-no-federal-cost-savings-in-dem-health-plans.html
[8] See http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204619004574324361508092006.html
Written 28 minutes ago
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
