Federal Gestapo Services ask good citizens to report any emails about health insurance reform that seem "fishy" to flag@whitehouse.gov

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I'm sure there's comfort in making those kind of assumptions - its just a way of reducing everything down to partisan ####### for tat.

As I said, expect a retraction in the coming days, especially as the media gets its hooks into it.

What gets me is how stupid this all is: yes, its a gaffe on the part of the New Media Director, yes it was "unfortunate" (to say the least) that he went with that strategy, but come on....

All this insane shrieking about dictatorships (cue comparisons to 1984 and the Nazis) is just ridiculous. Grow up people.

a retraction? heck the media will probably find some other trivial story about MJ to blow out of proportion in hopes this will go away.

Why? This is exactly the sort of sensational story that makes (and sustains) headlines.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Reading comprehension skills are needed. Disinformation or misinformation is not synonymous with opposing views. There are facts and there are opinions. They are only concerned about the factual representation of Obama's health care proposal, to address any deliberate misrepresentation of that proposal by first referencing that misrepresentation, nothing more. What a bunch of drama queens.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Its not a very useful way to go about it, IMO.

[natty bumppo 297]

I'm sure there's comfort in making those kind of assumptions - its just a way of reducing everything down to partisan ####### for tat.

As I said, expect a retraction in the coming days, especially as the media gets its hooks into it.

What gets me is how stupid this all is: yes, its a gaffe on the part of the New Media Director, yes it was "unfortunate" (to say the least) that he went with that strategy, but come on....

All this insane shrieking about dictatorships (cue comparisons to 1984 and the Nazis) is just ridiculous. Grow up people.

a retraction? heck the media will probably find some other trivial story about MJ to blow out of proportion in hopes this will go away.

Why? This is exactly the sort of sensational story that makes (and sustains) headlines.

not if you're trying to support the administration ....

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

And yet its in the news, with a new story posted within the last 24 hours.

Biden's pig flu scaremongering was stupid, but it got enough press that Obama had to step in.

[natty bumppo 297]

And yet its in the news, with a new story posted within the last 24 hours.

Biden's pig flu scaremongering was stupid, but it got enough press that Obama had to step in.

such extensive coverage from the major news outlets ... a story was posted within the last 24 hrs.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

One story that I found. I'm sure there are others.

Not that this would be front page material at the best of times.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Its not a very useful way to go about it, IMO.

Why not? Imagine if it were a corporation like Monsanto and people were going around distributing misinformation about one of their products...they'd take them to court in a heart beat. There's no intrusion whatsoever of any constitutional protections in the attempt to address deliberate misinformation that is being disseminated by political operatives. In the business world, this would be libelous.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Its not a very useful way to go about it, IMO.

Why not? Imagine if it were a corporation like Monsanto and people were going around distributing misinformation about one of their products...they'd take them to court in a heart beat. There's no intrusion whatsoever of any constitutional protections in the attempt to address deliberate misinformation that is being disseminated by political operatives. In the business world, this would be libelous.

Well for one, it makes an assumption that members of the public following the administration are actually fully informed on the issues to recognise misinformation in order to pass it on. That immediately calls into question how useful it is.

This is the first administration to fully utilise the internet in its campaign strategy - with great effect as far as campaign donations went; but I don't think that the PR wing of the WH should be in the business of having members of the public do its job for them.

Edited August 7, 2009 by Private Pike

[natty bumppo 297]

Its not a very useful way to go about it, IMO.

Why not? Imagine if it were a corporation like Monsanto and people were going around distributing misinformation about one of their products...they'd take them to court in a heart beat. There's no intrusion whatsoever of any constitutional protections in the attempt to address deliberate misinformation that is being disseminated by political operatives. In the business world, this would be libelous.

yea ... the owners of the gov't (the citizens) are gonna be taken to court for speaking out .

can't wait to see how this will play in peoria

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Its not a very useful way to go about it, IMO.

Why not? Imagine if it were a corporation like Monsanto and people were going around distributing misinformation about one of their products...they'd take them to court in a heart beat. There's no intrusion whatsoever of any constitutional protections in the attempt to address deliberate misinformation that is being disseminated by political operatives. In the business world, this would be libelous.

Well for one, it makes an assumption that members of the public following the administration are actually fully informed on the issues to recognise misinformation in order to pass it on. That immediately calls into question how useful it is.

This is the first administration to fully utilise the internet in its campaign strategy - with great effect as far as campaign donations went; but I don't think that the PR wing of the WH should be in the business of having members of the public do its job for them.

A government of the people, by the people and for the people...imagine that.

If you, a citizen, sends them the link to a site that you think if misrepresenting the facts regarding Obama's health care proposal, they will look at the site and then decide if there are indeed misrepresentations which they would address on their own web site. My God, there is absolutely nothing sinister about this. The Right Wingers are pretending to be outraged because they continue with their partisan hackery. It reminds of when Clinton was in office....to some, he could do nothing right, even when he was doing something they fundamentally were in favor of. Sore loseritis must be a genetic disorder among Right Wingers.

And for the record, they are not true Conservatives. They like to pretend they are, but they are the same neo-cons that put Bush in the WH. The traditional conservative position would be to stay with the what has been tried and true....like Social Security and Medicare. The liberal position is to continuously look for different solutions and the conservative approach is to be resistant to those changes. Reagan was against Medicare, but now you won't find a Republican saying they want to end Medicare. You know why? Because they know that it works. That's all true conservatives want...is the tried and true.

[HAL 9000 96]

Reading comprehension skills are needed. Disinformation or misinformation is not synonymous with opposing views. There are facts and there are opinions. They are only concerned about the factual representation of Obama's health care proposal, to address any deliberate misrepresentation of that proposal by first referencing that misrepresentation, nothing more. What a bunch of drama queens.

It is pretty weird but unsurprising how misinformation is being taken as gospel by the sour grapes whinemakers. Should they dedicate some of those grapes for this year's fall whine fairs? I hope so. We wouldn't want that turning into vinegar too soon.

On another beat I recently came across a pilot study to study mental disorders using fMRI technology. Something like 85% of cases of depression have been successfully diagnosed (matched to clinical diagnoses)! There may yet be a case to help classify some of the more gullible to false information along coupling lines to the various mental disorders some appear to display (here and elsewhere I presume).

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Its not a very useful way to go about it, IMO.

Why not? Imagine if it were a corporation like Monsanto and people were going around distributing misinformation about one of their products...they'd take them to court in a heart beat. There's no intrusion whatsoever of any constitutional protections in the attempt to address deliberate misinformation that is being disseminated by political operatives. In the business world, this would be libelous.

yea ... the owners of the gov't (the citizens) are gonna be taken to court for speaking out .

can't wait to see how this will play in peoria

Go start your own blog site making libelous allegations against say Blue Cross and Blue Shield and see how long that lasts before you are hit with a lawsuit. Nobody is suing anyone in this. This is more like BC/BS countering your libelous allegations about them on their own website. You get to still post your stupid sh!t, but they'll answer back on their own site. Everybody wins...except the sore losers who don't like to fight fair. Pieces of sh!t.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Its not a very useful way to go about it, IMO.

Why not? Imagine if it were a corporation like Monsanto and people were going around distributing misinformation about one of their products...they'd take them to court in a heart beat. There's no intrusion whatsoever of any constitutional protections in the attempt to address deliberate misinformation that is being disseminated by political operatives. In the business world, this would be libelous.

Well for one, it makes an assumption that members of the public following the administration are actually fully informed on the issues to recognise misinformation in order to pass it on. That immediately calls into question how useful it is.

This is the first administration to fully utilise the internet in its campaign strategy - with great effect as far as campaign donations went; but I don't think that the PR wing of the WH should be in the business of having members of the public do its job for them.

A government of the people, by the people and for the people...imagine that.

If you, a citizen, sends them the link to a site that you think if misrepresenting the facts regarding Obama's health care proposal, they will look at the site and then decide if there are indeed misrepresentations which they would address on their own web site. My God, there is absolutely nothing sinister about this. The Right Wingers are pretending to be outraged because they continue with their partisan hackery. It reminds of when Clinton was in office....to some, he could do nothing right, even when he was doing something they fundamentally were in favor of. Sore loseritis must be a genetic disorder among Right Wingers.

And for the record, they are not true Conservatives. They like to pretend they are, but they are the same neo-cons that put Bush in the WH. The traditional conservative position would be to stay with the what has been tried and true....like Social Security and Medicare. The liberal position is to continuously look for different solutions and the conservative approach is to be resistant to those changes. Reagan was against Medicare, but now you won't find a Republican saying they want to end Medicare. You know why? Because they know that it works. That's all true conservatives want...is the tried and true.

I don't think its sinister - I do think its silly and needlessly divisive.

[HAL 9000 96]

Its not a very useful way to go about it, IMO.

Why not? Imagine if it were a corporation like Monsanto and people were going around distributing misinformation about one of their products...they'd take them to court in a heart beat. There's no intrusion whatsoever of any constitutional protections in the attempt to address deliberate misinformation that is being disseminated by political operatives. In the business world, this would be libelous.

yea ... the owners of the gov't (the citizens) are gonna be taken to court for speaking out .

can't wait to see how this will play in peoria

Go start your own blog site making libelous allegations against say Blue Cross and Blue Shield and see how long that lasts before you are hit with a lawsuit. Nobody is suing anyone in this. This is more like BC/BS countering your libelous allegations about them on their own website. You get to still post your stupid sh!t, but they'll answer back on their own site. Everybody wins...except the sore losers who don't like to fight fair. Pieces of sh!t.

Steven... back away from the keyboard. No need to get angry like some of these liars. (That is what they are... liars).