Had Enough? Citizen Uprising Takes Hold!

reply to post by maybereal11


Well for some one is not a fan of Pelosi, you seem to have great understanding of her logic.

Again, her astroturf comment is a knee jerk defensive comment.

This movement is not comprised of "idiots" as you call them!

Americans who are fed up with the giant ponzi scheme we call the Federal Reserve, NAFTA, The IMF, The World Bank, The NAU, are not idiots! We are patriots! And we will not be silenced by simpleton name calling.

“Manufactured Protests” Myth Starts To Crack

The media created myth that the town hall protests raging across the country are artificially manufactured is starting to crack, as the public takes the press to task for parroting the erroneous talking point that the demonstrations are the work of lobbyists and Republican organizations, and that they are fostered by underlying racism.

A caller to C-Span’s Washington Journal show perfectly clarified the issues we have been highlighting all along, that the protesters are not just Republican “right-wingers,” they aren’t being prodded into action by lobbyists, and the anger is not just directed against Obamacare, but against the entire agenda, and especially against Congress passing legislation thousands of pages long without even reading it.

www.infowars.com...

Originally posted by burntheships
reply to post by maybereal11

Local Fox Reporter Attends Town Hall And Finds ‘Some Attendees Admit They Don’t Live In The District’
How did they get there? Geraldino noted “an internet campaign” by far right activists urging their allies to attend and heckle Democratic Representatives.
thinkprogress.org...

marketplace.publicradio.org...

And if they were, the public may never know who paid for it. Laws require professional lobbyists to disclose the companies that hire them. But...

TARA MALLOY: At the moment, for better or for worse, the lobbying disclosure act does not cover attempts to create demonstrations.

Tara Malloy at the Campaign Legal Center says a huge part of Washington's influence industry operates out of sight. Firms can fly operatives across the country and even pay protestors directly, and they are not required to tell Congress or the public what they are up to.

MALLOY: And really it can be the biggest industries hiring the most sophisticated firms out there and the public will know very, very little about these efforts. And indeed these type of flash mobs or these types of protests, they can have a huge impact on the course of legislation. And nonetheless the lobbying law, as currently drafted, is not going to cover that and it will not provide disclosure to the public.

[edit on 10-8-2009 by maybereal11]

Originally posted by burntheships
reply to post by maybereal11

 

Well for some one is not a fan of Pelosi, you seem to have great understanding of her logic.

Again, her astroturf comment is a knee jerk defensive comment.

This movement is not comprised of "idiots" as you call them!

No...they are not, nor did I say so.

IMO Those that are attending town hall meetings for the specific purpose of disruption are in my opinion idiots...and they hurt the cause of those that are genuinely opposed to the Healthcare bill and want their questions answered.

[edit on 10-8-2009 by maybereal11]

Originally posted by consciousdrum
Finally...i guess american idol is over ??...people are finally waking up??..only we are missing the real root of evil,The Fed,...anyone and everyone should be protesting that...but this is a start

Yeah, but the problem is football is getting ready to start, so people will go back to sleep.

reply to post by maybereal11


Again, you started you initial mild defense of Pelosi with a blanket laid over 1 picutre of one protester carrying a "no" swastika sign.

Now...you are arguing that these protesters are in a district that is not thier own. Is that what really bothers you?

You know maybe they were older people who can see the the Healthcare bill contains useless wastefull garbage llike Mandatory End of Life Planning? abovetopsecret.com

What side of the issue are you on really?

If your concern is really about the disengenuous participation of protesters, why are you not calling foul on this far more egregious
crime of the SEIU union members hired to threaten all peaceful protests with the unprovoked start of violence shown to intimidate voices of dissent?

Email from eye witness and attorney confirms that SEIU-logo’d thugs attacked and beat a black man for distributing Gadsen flags following a Town Hall in St. Louis County on Thursday. Race was a factor in the beating.

stlouisteaparty.com...

And...the letter from Kenneth's Attorney:

August 7, 2009

Dear Mr. Hennessy:

I am Kenneth Gladney’s attorney. Kenneth was attacked on the evening of August 6, 2009 at Rep. Russ Carnahan’s town hall meeting in South St. Louis County. I was at the town hall meeting as well and witnessed the events leading up to the attack of Kenneth. Kenneth was approached by an SEIU representative as Kenneth was handing out “Don’t Tread on Me” flags to other conservatives. The SEIU representative demanded to know why a black man was handing out these flags. The SEIU member used a racial slur against Kenneth, then punched him in the face. Kenneth fell to the ground. Another SEIU member yelled racial epithets at Kenneth as he kicked him in the head and back. Kenneth was also brutally attacked by one other male SEIU member and an unidentified woman. The three men were clearly SEIU members, as they were wearing T-shirts with the SEIU logo.....

.......Kenneth supports conservative ideals, although he subscribes to no particular political party. We are calling on the SEIU, Representative Carnahan, and President Obama to condemn the racist actions of these union thugs. In the days to come, we will be investigating whether these thugs are working at the behest of Representative Carnahan and how strong their alliances to various organizations–such as ACORN–may be.

We hope the St. Louis Tea Party and tea party organizations around the country will protest Representative Carnahan’s offices and also protest SEIU offices in every major city across the U.S. These Democratic strong-arm tactics must end now.

Regards,

Attorney David B. Brown

url




[edit on 10-8-2009 by burntheships]

Originally posted by burntheships
reply to post by maybereal11

 

Again, you started you initial mild defense of Pelosi with a blanket laid over 1 picutre of one protester carrying a "no" swastika sign.

I showed one picture, linked to another...could also site Limbaughs "Nazi" language with regards to the debate etc. etc. I believe my argument that some of these protesters have used "Nazi" rhetoric has validity.

[Now...you are arguing that these protesters are in a district that is not thier own. Is that what really bothers you?

I don't think it is productive or useful to bus in protesters for a LOCAL town hall meeting to repeat rhetoric that they can express to their own representitive for their district. They drown out the voices of people looking to have a discussion with their ACTUAL representitive

[You know maybe they were older people who can see the the Healthcare bill contains useless wastefull garbage llike Mandatory End of Life Planning? abovetopsecret.com

This is bunk. See Media Matters website. Media Matters takes both parties to task for falsehoods. They are genuinely independent.
mediamatters.org...

On July 16, Betsy McCaughey falsely claimed that the House health care reform bill would "absolutely require" end-of-life counseling for seniors "that will tell them how to end their life sooner." Since then, numerous media figures have echoed McCaughey's claim -- even after the falsehood was debunked and McCaughey herself backtracked.

What side of the issue are you on really?

I am on the side of truth...Would you rather I choose a camp and repeat whatever BS they feed me?

I don't personally like Pelosi, I also think she is not a great politician...but she did not say that the protesters were Nazi's.

[edit on 10-8-2009 by maybereal11]

reply to post by maybereal11


You conveniently ignored the question I asked about the Union thugs being paid to beat a patriot. Why?

Yet you repeated your objection to a few older folks being in a district that was not thier own. Why?

reply to post by burntheships


Why? Bandwidth and time. The discussion with you is moving. I have yet to look into the "union thug" thing so will reserve comment until I do.

As far as just a "few older folks" being bused in...I am not convinced that is accurate by any stretch, but in fairness will look into that as well.

did you have a chance to read the Media Matters link?

[edit on 10-8-2009 by maybereal11]

reply to post by maybereal11


Yes...though I have also read for myself, and that is key...
the bill. It is a proposed behemoth of wasteful government resources. I disagree completely with the concept of health care provided by thegovernment in any way, shape or form.

Originally posted by burntheships
reply to post by maybereal11

 

Yes...though I have also read for myself, and that is key...

OK...If you have read the bill yourself, then why would you be propigating the false claim about Mandatory End of Life Counseling?

I don't mind those opposed to Healthcare reform...I do mind those willing to spread falsehoods to achieve their goal.

reply to post by maybereal11


I would like to see the proof where these people are getting bussed around.

I keep hearing that in different threads, I was wondering when they managed to get as well organized as ACORN.

Heck, ACORN even gives there people shirts to wear at the events!!!

So cute with the fuzzy baby oak trees on them...

Originally posted by maybereal11

Originally posted by burntheships
reply to post by maybereal11

 

Yes...though I have also read for myself, and that is key...

OK...If you have read the bill yourself, then why would you be propigating the false claim about Mandatory End of Life Counseling?

I don't mind those opposed to Healthcare reform...I do mind those willing to spread falsehoods to achieve their goal.

Are you sure you are not working for the Healthcare Promoters?

My claim is not false.

SEC. 123. HEALTH BENEFITS ADVISORY COMMITTEE. 12 (a) ESTABLISHMENT.— 13 (1) IN GENERAL.—There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be a panel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.

(b) DUTIES.—
(1) RECOMMENDATIONS ON BENEFIT STANDARDS.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall recommend to the Secretary of Health and Human Services (in this subtitle referred to as the ‘‘Secretary’’) benefit standards (as defined in paragraph (4)), and periodic updates to such standards. In developing such recommendations, the Committee shall take into account innovation in health care and consider how such standards could reduce health disparities.

(4) BENEFIT STANDARDS DEFINED.—In this subtitle, the term ‘‘benefit standards’’ means standards respecting—
(A) the essential benefits package described in section 122, including categories of covered treatments, items and services within benefit classes, and cost-sharing; and
(B) the cost-sharing levels for enhanced plans and premium plans (as provided under section 203(c)) consistent with paragraph (5).

Advance Care Planning Consultation (hhh)(1) Subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), the term ‘advance care planning consultation’ means a consultation between the individual and a practitioner described in paragraph (2) regarding advance care planning, if, subject to paragraph (3), the individual involved has not had such a consultation within the last 5 years.

‘‘(B) The level of treatment indicated under subparagraph (A)(ii) may range from an indication for full treatment to an indication to limit some or all or specified interventions. Such indicated levels of treatment may in 8clude indications respecting, among other items— 9 ‘‘(i) the intensity of medical intervention if the 10 patient is pulse less, apneic, or has serious cardiac 11 or pulmonary problems; 12 ‘‘(ii) the individual’s desire regarding transfer 13 to a hospital or remaining at the current care set 14ting; 15 ‘‘(iii) the use of antibiotics; and 16 ‘‘(iv) the use of artificially administered nutri 17tion and hydration.’’.

The mandatory end of life planning consultation is discussed in more detail here ATS

Everything is strategically happening just the way the ptb planned it all.

We can talk and talk and talk....

True awakening is brought to life through actions...



when are all of us ATS'ers going to create our own council and meet in secrecy for the means of a better way of life...

To find a collapsing point within this Infrastructure, and take this system machine down and all of it's mechanical laws that apply.

If anything to make a small differance

I just want to state I am not a theorist although theorists are just fine.

I am an activist, although theorists are too.....

I am extremely happy to see a place where people are so ready, for change.

I would just like to put out in the open to Other ATS'ers

Serious members only:

I am an Independent Wealthy Individual, I would be willing to finance such a meeting of minds to meet up in person, to become friends and to establish our so called "Club" and put a new Agenda in motion.

If there are other ATS'ers who share a similar interest in what I've stated above. Weathy or not! It matters not! Please contact me and give me your thoughts.

There's is a way through my Organization that any exspenses Incured on my part are a tax write off... as well as yours too.

It's time to take a stand!

Power in numbers!

Originally posted by burntheships
reply to post by maybereal11

 

It is a proposed behemoth of wasteful government resources. I disagree completely with the concept of health care provided by thegovernment in any way, shape or form.

As long as we are stating positions...I am a passionate believer in capitalism, a degreed economist, a moderate democrat, more like a republican of old...the party that Abe Lincoln founded

...and I don't believe that Healcare can be provided to a society in the context of a profit motive. The drive for profit and genuine healthcare for all of a nations populace are diametrically opposed paradigms.

When the profit motive is the catalyst, then healthcare becomes like the car you drive or the house you own.....those things are a product of inheritence or hard work...ok, I am fine with that correlation.

But the child who gets cancer or is struck down by a fatal genetic disorder should not recieve a level of care dependant on how much money he/she or his parents have....I am not OK with that correlation.

Disease does not care how wealthy you are...but (in our current system) the doctors who treat you do. Disease and the neccessary resultant care do not fit within the profit driven, capitalisitic paradigm. Working harder does not make you less likely to get cancer.

As long as we are stating positions..

This happened courtesy of some "liberal individuals" at a town hall as well.

Maybe while there bussing in old folks they should bus in some security as well.







[edit on 10-8-2009 by hotrodturbo7]

reply to post by burntheships



Did you notice the terms "advisory" and "recommend" where did you get Mandatory?

I will try to remain civil and assume you aren't intentionally repeating known falsehoods, but I provided you with a link...the woman who first claimed this bit has since backtracked. It is propaganda.
mediamatters.org...

Ditto with Republican politicians...even those working to defeat the bill. They aren't saying this anymore. The only ones that are still repeating it are those looking to profit from controversy or with agenda...the talking heads.

mediamatters.org...

House bill does not make end-of-life-counseling mandatory
Advance care planning is not mandatory in the House health care bill. The House health care reform bill provides coverage for counseling as a service through Medicare and is not mandatory. Section 1233 of America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 amends the Social Security Act to ensure that advance care planning will be covered if a patient requests it from a qualified care provider [America's Affordable Health Choices Act, Sec. 1233]. According to an analysis of the bill produced by the three relevant House committees, the provision "[p]rovides coverage for consultation between enrollees and practitioners to discuss orders for life-sustaining treatment. Instructs CMS to modify 'Medicare & You' handbook to incorporate information on end-of-life planning resources and to incorporate measures on advance care planning into the physician's quality reporting initiative."

Originally posted by hotrodturbo7
This happened courtesy of some "liberal individuals" at a town hall as well.

Maybe while there bussing in old folks they should bus in some security as well.

[edit on 10-8-2009 by hotrodturbo7]

That happened courtessy of the police which he got into a shoving match with while trying to shove his way into the meeting after the firemarshall had said capacity was met.

AS SEEN in this video here at the one minute mark.

Does the BS ever stop?

reply to post by maybereal11


Wrong.

He is already sitting in the corner with the shirt torn half off at the beginning of the video with the cop in the door.

reply to post by maybereal11

Advance Care Planning Consultation (hhh)
(1) Subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), the term ‘advance care planning consultation’ means a consultation between the individual and a practitioner described in paragraph (2) regarding advance care planning, if, subject to paragraph
(3), the individual involved has not had such a consultation within the last 5 years. Such consultation shall include the following:
(A) An explanation by the practitioner of advance care planning, including key questions and considerations, important steps, and suggested people to talk to. (B) An explanation by the practitioner of advance directives, including living wills and durable powers of attorney, and their uses.
(C) An explanation by the practitioner of the role and responsibilities of a health care proxy....

The Secretary shall limit the requirement for explanations under clause (i) to consultations furnished in a State—
‘‘(I) in which all legal barriers have been addressed for enabling orders for life sustaining treatment to constitute a set of medical orders respected across all care settings; and
‘‘(II) that has in effect a program for orders for life sustaining treatment described in
clause (iii).
‘‘(iii) A program for orders for life sustaining treatment for a States described in this clause is a program that—
‘‘(I) ensures such orders are standardized and uniquely identifiable throughout the State;
‘‘(II) distributes or makes accessible such orders to physicians and other health professionals that (acting within the scope of the professional’s authority under State law) may sign orders for life sustaining treatment;....

I was under the impression that when the Federal government REQUIRES you to do something it is MANDATORY that you do it. Perhaps I have the definition of Requirement wrong. Although it does look like state law over rides the requirement.

reply to post by crimvelvet







White House recruits citizens to report healthcare opposition

If you speak out against healthcare reform, you may find yourself being reported to the White House. A recent blog on the White House website, written by Director of New Media Macon Phillips, asked the public to report any “fishy” emails opposed to healthcare reform.....

....The only healthcare reform plan presented clearly so far is the House version. After reading much of the 1,018 pages (unlike our lawmakers) it is clear plenty of our rights will be lost. The protesters and opposition to the proposed healthcare reform is widespread, and is not constrained by party lines. But the Administration seems convinced that any circulating information about the dangers of a “public option” are simply rumors, and should be reported to them for investigation. (Can you imagine the outrage if Bush had asked for people to report opposition to his policies?)

www.examiner.com... position