downwardspiral 0 #51 October 23, 2009 QuoteI jumped on the tingly leg Obama train for about two months when he was running against Clinton. After he beat Clinton I suddenly got this feeling he was crooked and extremely untrustworthy. I hoped to god I was wrong but so far it seems my gut was right. Here's a list of confirmations in no particular order off the top of my head. - "I won" - Mad dogged the White House correspondits when he went to meet them for the first time and they ignored his request for no questions. - Attempted to break his own law by firing an IG without giving Congress a reason. - Spoke out against Rush Limbaugh. Inappropriate - Spoke out against Foxnews. Inappropriate. - Where's the transparency? - Attempted to pass a monumental bill in 3 weeks. - Without being there or knowing all the facts he said the cops acted stupidly and implied race was an issue. - Attempted to collect data on those opposing and spreading misinformation about the health bill. - Selects a tax evader to run the treasury. - Selecting lobbyists for his Administration after promising he wouldn't. - "Don't think we're not keeping score, brother." Wanted to add a new one. - Attempted to exclude Fox News from Pay Czar interview. Why no comment on my post Darius?www.FourWheelerHB.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #52 October 23, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteYes, it is. I'll add one - a WHITE HOUSE 'tip line' where people can report 'fishy statements about healthcare' ??? WTF?? For the purpose of putting to rest incorrect information, such as what you write. http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/white-house-fact-checking/ From your 'source': QuoteThe White House, according to its official blog, is encouraging people to send along any health care rumors or claims, mainly of the "scary" chain e-mail variety, that seem "fishy." Seems to be exactly what I said...thanks for the support. Right, for the purposes of straightening out the false rumors, not as some consiracy to complie a list of people against them, as you claim. You can't logically take a statement liek: The White House, according to its official blog, is encouraging people to send along any health care rumors or claims, mainly of the "scary" chain e-mail variety, that seem "fishy." And then attach a sinnister motive and expect us all to buy it. But of course you are Mikey, so you will try. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darius11 12 #53 October 23, 2009 Quote Why no comment on my post Darius? Its because i hate tan people J/k No bro. Your post was right on. You didn't post a single Bull shit complaint they are valid and true. So I understand and agree with what you don't like. Specially the transparency. However that’s not enough reason for me to write him of yet. The fox news thing I agree with you in philosophy, but I can also understand not wanting to talk to people who seem to have predetermined to not like whatever you do.I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #54 October 23, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteYes, it is. I'll add one - a WHITE HOUSE 'tip line' where people can report 'fishy statements about healthcare' ??? WTF?? For the purpose of putting to rest incorrect information, such as what you write. http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/white-house-fact-checking/ From your 'source': QuoteThe White House, according to its official blog, is encouraging people to send along any health care rumors or claims, mainly of the "scary" chain e-mail variety, that seem "fishy." Seems to be exactly what I said...thanks for the support. Why should it be considered bad for the White House to address false scaremongering rhetoric regarding healthcare?Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
downwardspiral 0 #55 October 23, 2009 Quote No bro. Your post was right on. You didn't post a single Bull shit complaint they are valid and true. So I understand and agree with what you don't like. Specially the transparency. Thanks dude. I figured such was the case. But damn it I wanted some attention. Quote The fox news thing I agree with you in philosophy, but I can also understand not wanting to talk to people who seem to have predetermined to not like whatever you do. I would understand that from folks like you or me or even PETA. But you have to question the reasoning behind such a move when it comes to the White House. They are showing a tendency to attempt to silence opponents. The White House is on the attack. They're even attacking one of their own. Coincidently, Cass Sunstein, the new Regulatory Czar, wrote a book this year titled On Rumors: How Falsehoods Spread, Why We Believe Them, What Can Be Done in which he proposed mandatory fines for spreading false rumors. There are already libel laws but this takes it a step further. The irony is that Sunstein feels the internet has become antidemocratic because we can filter out information we disagree with.www.FourWheelerHB.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #56 October 24, 2009 Quote Why should it be considered bad for the White House to address false scaremongering rhetoric regarding healthcare? Nice - of COURSE anything that isn't fully in line with Dear Leader's healthcare plan is "false scaremongering rhetoric" by definition, isn't it? Given the track record of this administration concerning organizations that disagree with it? Oh, I'm certain NOTHING could go wrong, there...Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
