AXELROD'S FISHY EMAIL

FOX News' Major Garrett sparred with Robert Gibbs over emails people are receiving about health care when they never signed up for them. White House adviser David Axelrod (picture to the left) is apparently behind this effort. See the Garrett/Gibbs video here.

The email from Axelrod is RIFE with misinformation about the proposed H.R. 3200 health care bill and its brothers and sisters in the House.

As you know, I have been emailing "fishy" statements about ObamaCare to flag@whitehouse.gov for the last week or so, so it would not surprise me to have received the email from there.

HOWEVER! Imagine my surprise when I got the email, not from the White House, but from my family physician as a forward.

I replied to my doctor with a scathing rebuke for his using his standing as a physician to promote an email that takes a political stand.

I have no objection to him taking a personal stand on either side of the issue, but this email was sent in bulk to his patients, each of whose email address appeared at the top of the one I got.

I am considering sending my reply to each of Dr. Elmer Toro's patients, but have not yet decided whether to do so. Do you think I should?

TODAY'S FEATURED flag@whitehouse.gove EMAIL:

Dear White House,

Yesterday I received an email purported to have been from David Axelrod and asking me to forward it on to others.

I find it hard to believe that a person with Axelrod's position does not know what is actually in HR3200, but seemingly he does not.

In the email, he denies that the administration favours rationing health care, that the new system will undermine health benefits offered to the over-65s.

This, of course, is very fishy disinformation.

I urge the White House to use its full influence to stop David Axelrod from spreading such disinformation, and especially to cease and desist from spreading false propaganda about HR
3200.

Sincerely,
Joe Scoggins
jscoggins1@juno.com
http://www.scogginsnoggin.blogspot.com/
www.scogginsnoggin2.blogspot.com

PLANT IS JUST ANOTHER OBAMA WEED

You may have seen this video and been told that there was some suspicion as to the authenticity of this young lady's claim to be a pediatric physician, in practice for four years.

Wonder no more.

She not only is not a pediatric physician, she is not a doctor of any kind but is a graduate student in social work and, just coincidentally, was a Texas delegate for Obama.

You can read the entire proof from her own emails at a blog called Patterico's Pontifications right here.

Let me clear that I do not know whether or not she was a "plant." Maybe she was, maybe she wasn't.

This I do know: she is representative of the mind-set of the typical liberal, IE., "I can say whatever I want, whenever I want, to whomever I want, whether it is actually true or not, because the truth is not what actually happened, it is how I feel about it and whether or not I said it.

"If I said it, it is true, simply because I said it and you can trust me on that."

Such is also the mind-set of President BO.

He is not trying to establish a "public option" in the health care bill, not because he is not trying to establish a "public option" in the health care bill, but because, faced with opposition to it, he SAID he was not trying to establish a "public option" in the health care bill, even though he has vowed to do so within ten to twenty years.

If a conservative makes a claim, he/she had better be ready to list at least a dozen documents backing up his claim or else the liberals will hit you right between the eyes with their most reasoned reaction, "You're so lame."

Not a single liberal who views the above video of the fake (I'm not a doctor but I play one at town hall meetings) pediatrician will take the time to research her claim to four years in the practice.

"She said it, she's an Obama supporter, therefore it must be true."

Let a conservative stand before a group and contest a statement made by a representative, and the liberal response is, "He/she is a conservative, not an Obama supporter, therefore he/she must be a plant, a liar or an idiot." This before any facts are checked...it is a knee-jerk, unreasoned reaction.

My question to liberals is, "Why is it so ingrained in your spirit to misrepresent yourselves through lies, innuendo and vile, blistering attacks?"

Liberals fancy themselves as more enlightened than the rest of us.

Why, then, must you play every issue as though it were a child's top, spinning and spinning until you get whatever you're referencing to fit your twisted world view?

In my previous post you saw Fox's Kelly ask Obama's Bill Burton whether the White House was keeping a list of those who reported "fishy" information to flag@whitehouse.com.

He could not bring himself to give her a straight answer, although he repeatedly said he was giving her an answer. He lied, he twisted, he deflected and he side-stepped, but he would not answer the question.

It was not until Kelly pointed out that a 1974 law required that the government keep correspondence with them that he finally acquiesced and admitted that the emails are kept.

As I said, I don't know whether the fake doctor was a plant, but I do know that President BO and his minions must be on some kind of weed.

Now I'd like you to enjoy this 50 year old cartoon:

TODAY'S flag@whitehouse.gov FEATURE EMAIL:

Dear White House,

President BO has said that he does not want people to think his town hall meetings are visited by plants.

There is strong video evidence that this is disinformation: LinktoVideo, as this shows people getting off the bus in New Hampshire.

I strongly recommend that you cease and desist from making statements that are untrue about who is attending these rallys in support of President BO.

The people are not nearly as stupid as you give them credit for.

Sincerely,
Joe Scoggins

OUR COMPASSIONATE LEADER

IN HIS OWN WORDS.



Translation: Under the current versions of the health care legislation, Jane Sturm's mother would have just been allowed to die.

Compassionate liberals at work.

Note: I much prefer writing my own posts, but I keep getting accused (by rank liberals, of course) of lying. While I really do research what I say, and am careful to put things into context, there are times when it is more direct to give the original source without comment. Thus the frequent videos and quotes lately.

LIKE THIS ONE ON THE "ENEMYS LIST" ISSUE



This left me wondering why BB worked so hard at pretending he was responding to Megyn's question when, in fact, he was doing his best to misdirect it and not answer it.

I think I will report him on flag@whitehouse.gov

TODAY'S FEATURED flag@whitehouse.gov EMAIL

Dear White House,

In an interview with Megyn Kelly about this email program, White House deputy secretary Bill Burton was asked whether or not the White House was keeping a list of the emails sent hereto.

Mr. Burton made every effort to avoid answering the question directly, but when pressed had to agree with Kelly about the law that prohibits you from deleting them from the record.

Please inform Mr. Burton that answering questions directly and honestly is the best way to keep us citizens (who are MUCH smarter than you think we are) from thinking he has something to hide.

Turns out, regardless of his spin on the issue, he was neither direct nor honest with his answer.

Sincerely,
Joe Scoggins

EMAILS I HAVE SENT TO THE SNITCH SITE

Dear White House,

Once again, I am informing on myself.

I believe that the national health care bill known as H.R. 3200: America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 is entirely in violation of my rights under the United States Constitution. I have publicly expressed this view in multiple public forums, most recently on my blog (see below).

However, if you could direct me to the Article or Amendment in the Constitution of the United States that provides the Federal government the authority to mandate health care choices for the citizens of this country, I will certainly reconsider my position and offer public apologies.

Otherwise, I must warn you that I will continue to speak out against the what I believe is the true intent of this in this proposed legislation.

This communication is sent with full awareness of the Privacy Act of 1974 (no federal agency shall compile a list of people who disagree with their actions) and with the knowledge that the White House cannot destroy any correspondence it receives.

Have fun with that conundrum, Snitch Patrol!

Sincerely,
Joe Scoggins
http://www.scogginsnoggin2.blogspot.com/


Dear White House,

DNC Executive Director Jen O'Malley Dillon posted the following piece of disinformation regarding those who protest the H.R. 3200 bill at town hall meetings:

These disruptions are being funded and organized by out-of-district special-interest groups and insurance companies who fear that health insurance reform could help Americans, but hurt their bottom line.

Turns out that almost none of them are there as part of an effort organized by any corporations or special interest groups.

Sincerely,
Joe Scoggins
http://www.scogginsnoggin2.blogspot.com/


Dear White House,

DNC Executive Director Jen O'Malley Dillon is posting the following misinformation about the protests at town hall meetings about health care:

People are scared because they are being fed frightening lies.

As you know, more and more people are showing up at these meetings with copies of H.R. 3200 in their hands and are reading straight from it, followed by a question about what they read.

Turns out it is the bill itself which is frightening people, not the citizens doing the protesting.

Sincerely,
Joe Scoggins
http://www.scogginsnoggin2.blogspot.com/


Dear White House,

DNC Executive Director Jen O'Malley Dillon, refering to health care town hall meetings where citizens are expressing concern over H.R. 3200, has said the following:

Their actions are getting more extreme.

It turns out that, in fact, more and more people are simply asking their representatives simple questions about the bill after which the representative either changes the subject, refuses to answer the specific question or engages in finger pointing and yelling at the crowd.

Sincerely,
Joe Scoggins
http://www.scogginsnoggin2.blogspot.com/


Dear White House,

DNC Executive Director Jen O'Malley Dillon has posted the following on his website concerning the questions being asked about H.R. 3200 at town hall meetings:

Their goal is to disrupt and shut down legitimate conversation.

Turns out that their goal is actually to get honest answers from their representatives concerning pending health care legislation.

Sincerely,
Joe Scoggins
http://www.scogginsnoggin2.blogspot.com/


Dear White House,

DNC Executive Director Jen O'Malley Dillon has posted the following on his website concerning the questions being asked about H.R. 3200 at town hall meetings:

Republican leadership is irresponsibly cheering on the thuggish crowds.

Turns out that the only thugs at the meetings have been members of SEIU, who have actually beaten citizens and have directed local police to move protesters from some locations while allowing supporters to stay.

It also turns out that not a single Republican leader has encouraged thuggish behavior.

I trust that the White House will use its considerable influence to direct DNC Director Dillon to cease and desist from spreading this misinformation.
Sincerely,
Joe Scoggins
http://www.scogginsnoggin2.blogspot.com/


Dear White House,

I have been made aware of the following misinformation about the health care town hall meetings:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi penned a column that questioned the patriotism of those disrupting town hall meetings to air their complaints.

Pelosi and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer claimed such behavior is "simply un-American."

As you no doubt remember, it was now Secretary of State Hilary Clinton who in 2003 shreeked: "I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration somehow you're not patriotic. We should stand up and say we are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration."

I implore you to use the full pressure of the White House to demand that Nancy Pelosi not only retract her statement, but to apologize to the American people for ever having made it.

Sincerely,
Joe Scoggins
www.scogginsnoggin2.blogspot.com/


Dear White House,

At his New Hampshire meeting, President Obama, trying to bolster support for the H.R. 3200 health care bill, said, "UPS and FedEx are doing just fine. ... It's the Post Office that's always having problems."

May I suggest that you send some SEIU members to his office to explain to him that comparing the Post Office to UPS and FedEx is more of an argument AGAINST the government's ability to run programs, not for it.

Sincerely,
Joe Scoggins
http://www.scogginsnoggin2.blogspot.com/


Dear White House,

Since there has been so much misinformation about H.R. 3200, I thought you might like a link to it so that you can actually read it and will therefore know what's actually in it.

This will help you when trying to determine what is disinformation and what is not.

Here is the link: LinktoHR3200
Sincerely,
Joe Scoggins
http://www.scogginsnoggin2.blogspot.com/


If you find a piece of misinformation about H.R. 3200 being put out by liberals, on blogs or in government, I recommend that you report it to flag@whitehouse.gov.

When they claim that there is no "end-of-life" provision, no abortion payment, no rationing of health care and the like, that is misinformation. Copy it and send it to the snitch site.

THEY EITHER ARE TOO STUPID TO REMEMBER OR THEY ARE LIARS?

WARNING (for the benefit of recent government school graduates who don't know how or don't like to read): LONG POST AHEAD

The media - even so-called "balanced" media (WE inform, YOU decide) - liberal Democrats, Blue Dog Democrats, conservative Democrats, RINOS, moderate Republicans and conservative Republicans want you not to remember this information.

It is as though it never happened...a figment of our imaginations.

But it DID happen, and it's why we're where we are today.

The 1977 Community Reinvestment Act (or CRA, Pub.L. 95-128, title VIII, 91 Stat. 1147, 12 U.S.C. § 2901 et seq.) is a United States federal law designed to encourage commercial banks and savings associations to meet the needs of borrowers in all segments of their communities, including low and moderate income neighborhoods.

The Community Reinvestment Act mandates that all banking institutions that receive FDIC insurance, be evaluated by Federal banking agencies to determine if the bank offers credit (in a manner consistent with safe and sound operations) in all communities in which the bank takes deposits.

In 1994 a class action lawsuit was filed as follows:

United States District Court
Northern District of Illinois - CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.0 (Chicago)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:94-cv-04094
Buycks-Roberson, et al v. Citibank Fed Svg Bk
Assigned to: Hon. Ruben Castillo
Demand: $0
Cause: 42:1981 Job Discrimination (Race)
Date Filed: 07/06/1994

You can see the whole thing here.

One of the signatories to this lawsuit (the fourth one down in the right hand column) was Barack H. Obama...remember him?

Here is a Case Summary: Plaintiffs filed their class action lawsuit on July 6, 1994, alleging that Citibank had engaged in redlining practices in the Chicago metropolitan area in violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), 15 U.S.C. 1691; the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. 3601-3619; the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; and 42 U.S.C. 1981, 1982.

Plaintiffs alleged that the Defendant-bank rejected loan applications of minority applicants while approving loan applications filed by white applicants with similar financial characteristics and credit histories. Plaintiffs sought injunctive relief, actual damages, and punitive damages.

U.S. District Court Judge Ruben Castillo certified the Plaintiffs’ suit as a class action on June 30, 1995. Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 162 F.R.D. 322 (N.D. Ill. 1995).

Also on June 30, Judge Castillo granted Plaintiffs’ motion to compel discovery of a sample of Defendant-bank’s loan application files. Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 162 F.R.D. 338 (N.D. Ill. 1995).

On September 30, 1999, the New York Times had this to say: "Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980’s."

In October of 2008 there was this : "Radical groups like ACORN (the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) to abuse the law by forcing banks to make hundreds of millions of dollars in “subprime” loans to often uncreditworthy poor and minority customers.

Any bank that wants to expand or merge with another has to show it has complied with CRA - and approval can be held up by complaints filed by groups like ACORN.

In fact, intimidation tactics, public charges of racism and threats to use CRA to block business expansion have enabled ACORN to extract hundreds of millions of dollars in loans and contributions from America’s financial institutions."

Yesterday I read this by Los Angeles Times writer, Joseph J. Ellis: "...In the ongoing banking crisis...the removal of government regulations permitted major banks to assume unconscionable amounts of debt, much of it in the form of toxic investments that still remain on the books.

It has been obvious that the banks needed to be temporarily nationalized to force them to purge bad debts from their portfolios."

"Temporarily nationalized?" Isn't "nationalization" something President BO has denied doing?

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were early casualties of this boondoggle, although the most exceedingly honorable Maxine Waters, Barney Frank and others claimed nothing was wrong.



You've been told that part of the problem was the lack of federal regulation and oversight on the part of congress.

In fact, in 2008, the Bush Administration proposed an extensive overhaul of how the federal government regulated the banking system. The Democrat congress refused to go along, so regulations were not put in place.

Remember...this was because Democrats in congress did not want regulations on lending institutions!

Here is a chart showing the sequence of events:


















So here we are, about to trust our health care to the same gaggle of goons who gave us the housing bubble, the bursting of the housing bubble, economic crisis, massive bailouts for insurance companies, banks and the auto industry, cash for clunkers, and a myriad of other fiscal insanities.

I cannot understand why you would trust them with health care.

What on earth makes you think they can get this one right when they got all of the others wrong?

JUST CLICK ON THE LINK-THIS IS GOOD STUFF

'Fishy'

LET FREEDOM RING? HOW FAR OUT OF HAND WILL WE LET THIS GET?

This is interesting...the original video I had here was "disabled." When I went to the original site, the video there had been "disabled," too.

I found this one, though. It's not the same event, but it is where SEIU thugs beat up a black man. He ended up in the hopital. Maybe it will stay up.

The original video had SEIU members telling folks where they could and could not stand on a public sidewalk and talk with each other. They then started telling the poilice to tell people where they could and could not stand to talk.