Did you get yours?

[Lou Cypher]

I got mine, I don't know how they new my e-mail address, I never provided it or e-mailed them in the past, am I on some sort of list that I don't know about?


What I'm talking about is, I got an e-mail fron non other than David Axelrod, streight from the White House.

Something sure smells fishy, and it may be illeagle.

Hmmmm, maybe I was turned in to the White House by someone who doesn't like my political views.


Lou :globe:

[NotSoFast]

What was the email about?

[Terry Penrod]

.

"Turned you in", Lou?

Who exactly would one call to do that and why in the world would David Axelrod send you an e-mail even if it was true? Wouldn't that just be providing you with hard evidence of an evil, shadowy government conspiracy to suppress people's right of free speech?

OR...

is this perhaps just one of the many standard e-mails that have been sent out to average Americans explaining the benefits of and asking support for health-care reform?

After all, the White House recently announced an e-mail campaign designed for that purpose, which has been posted as an AP story for the past 24 hours.

Cheers, Terry

[Lou Cypher]

Originally posted by NotSoFast
What was the email about?
I couldn't find an accual photo of it, but I did find a site that has the whole text, and I'll repeat, I have never provided my e-mail address to the White House or the Obama campaign.

http://briefingroom.thehill.com/2009/08/13/white-house-starts-healthcare-chain-email/

Lou :globe:

[Lou Cypher]

Originally posted by Terry Penrod
"Turned you in", Lou?
That was in jest :rolleyes:


Originally posted by Terry Penrod
Who exactly would one call to do that and why in the world would David Axelrod send you an e-mail even if it was true? Wouldn't that just be providing you with hard evidence of an evil, shadowy government conspiracy to suppress people's right of free speech?
Who would do that?, well the White House did want citizens to send in the names of people who are opposed to their Health care plan, and why would David Axelrod send me an e-mail?, I don’t know.
And why would you call me a liar?

OR...

Originally posted by Terry Penrod
is this perhaps just one of the many standard e-mails that have been sent out to average Americans explaining the benefits of and asking support for health-care reform?
Standard e-mail or not, I never gave them my e-mail address, and I rarely give out my personal e-mail address to anyone, So, where did the White House get it. And if I am on a list without giving them permission it just my be illegal.


Originally posted by Terry Penrod
After all, the White House recently announced an e-mail campaign designed for that purpose, which has been posted as an AP story for the past 24 hours.
Correct, they have, but that is to people who have already provided there e-mail addresses during the Presidential campaign.


Lou :globe:

[Terry Penrod]

.

The White House did NOT ask for names of people who are opposed to the health-care reform bill, Lou. It issued an open request for reports of false claims and outright lies being spread on the web.

That aside, I never called you a liar. I asked why Axelrod would be sending you an e-mail and others here have asked what it said.

Otherwise, I have no idea how your e-mail address ended up on a White House list. But given your oft-demonstrated willingensss to perpetuate some of the total BS being tossed around the Internet on this issue, you obviously need SOMEONE to set things straight for you.

On a larger scale, for every Sarah Palin or arch-conservative Fox News propaganda whore spreading these lies, there are a thousand people sucking in their despicably biased crap and regurgitating it all over the web. YOU are one of them, Lou and collectively it is impacting the opinions of millions more who are evidently too lazy or stupid to read what is actually in the proposed bill.

Cheers, Terry

P.S. It would do you a lot of good to reread that e-mail carefully without all the suspicion and take it to heart, Lou.

[Lou Cypher]

Originally posted by Terry Penrod
The White House did NOT ask for names of people who are opposed to the health-care reform bill, Lou. It issued an open request for reports of false claims and outright lies being spread on the web.
Sure they did, they didn’t need to ask fellow citizens what is out there in cyberspace.

Originally posted by Terry Penrod
That aside, I never called you a liar. I asked why Axelrod would be sending you an e-mail and others here have asked what it said.
You didn’t come out and say it but it sure was implied…

Who exactly would one call to do that and why in the world would David Axelrod send you an e-mail even if it was true? Wouldn't that just be providing you with hard evidence of an evil, shadowy government conspiracy to suppress people's right of free speech?

Originally posted by Terry Penrod
Otherwise, I have no idea how your e-mail address ended up on a White House list. But given your oft-demonstrated willingensss to perpetuate some of the total BS being tossed around the Internet on this issue, you obviously need SOMEONE to set things straight for you. You mean like the White House

Originally posted by Terry Penrod
On a larger scale, for every Sarah Palin or arch-conservative Fox News propaganda whore spreading these lies, there are a thousand people sucking in their despicably biased crap and regurgitating it all over the web. YOU are one of them, Lou and collectively it is impacting the opinions of millions more who are evidently too lazy or stupid to read what is actually in the proposed bill.Well whatever your personal feelings are, the people, Democrats, Independents and Republicans are reading this bill, and support for it is tanking.


Originally posted by Terry Penrod
P.S. It would do you a lot of good to reread that e-mail carefully without all the suspicion and take it to heart, Lou
You don’t quite get it Terry, I don’t care what was in the e-mail, what I care about is that my name and e-mail address is on some HDD at the White House, and I never gave it to them


Lou :globe:

[pcfreak]

I don't know what was in the email, but it should have information on how to opt out of further emails, and to have your email removed from their mailing database. I'm sure that in the UK it's illegal for a company or organisation to not include this in unsolicited emails. I would have thought you guys have similar laws?

I think it's quite funny that the US government has resorted to junk mail to put their points across. Seems kind of desperate to me:yes::joker: What next? Spamming website forums???

[Terry Penrod]

.

You might want to click on the link that Lou provided above, Stuart. The full text of the e-mail is there. It is a very reasonable, informative and truthful message that attempts to dispell exactly the kind of nonsense that people have been seeing all over the web.

My main point in this and related threads is that many people (like Lou) have been reading those outright lies and repeating them on forums, blogs, etc. This is the single biggest reason that recent polls show a slip in general support for the MUCH needed health-care reforms currently being debated in the U.S. Congress.

In a subsequent poll published this past week, the Washington Post discovered that the despicable lies being told by people like Sarah Palin have had a direct impact on people's opinions in very specific terms.

They went straight down the list of primary public objections for each individual issue before and after this disgraceful fearmongering campaign was started. ALL of them showed a drop in support based solely on the lies being spread around the Internet, through fanatically conservative protesters at various town meetings and reinforced by arch-conservative media shills like Fox News.

When told the actual truth about what the bill says on those exact same issues, most people realized they had fallen for a pack of lies. Unfortunately, the damage has been done and millions of gullible people in America now have these total lies firmly implanted in their minds.

With that as a basis for this discussion, it seems more than fair to call Lou and others out for doing the very same thing likeminded people have been doing across the web - perpetuating a series of complete and utter nonsense about this extremely important matter.

Cheers, Terry

[Lou Cypher]

Originally posted by pcfreak
I don't know what was in the email, but it should have information on how to opt out of further emails, and to have your email removed from their mailing database. I'm sure that in the UK it's illegal for a company or organisation to not include this in unsolicited emails. I would have thought you guys have similar laws?
It’s hard to opt out of a program when they deny it even excests(sp).
Well Stuart, they may have broken a law, during the Nixon years President Nixon had anti-war protesters photographed, the congress stepped in and made it illegal to do so, basically it was seen as putting a chill on free speech.
So what is worse, having a picture of someone, probably not knowing their name, or, actually having someone’s e-mail address and most likely there name.

I’ll see if I can find that specific law and post it here.


I just so anyone wants to see the e-mail I got I took screenshots of it…

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b91/lou11/letter1.jpg
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b91/lou11/letter2.jpg
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b91/lou11/letter3-1.jpg



Lou :globe:

[Mikell]

Lol! The White House is going to help us sort fact from fiction.
That's rich.:lol:

[pcfreak]

Regardless of whether the content of the email was worthy or not, it was still unsolicited email, which makes it junk mail. What makes it even worse, after reading it, is that it's an email that is nothing more than a political message. Us Brits often hear about Americans thinking we live in a Big Brother'esque nation, but we have never had unsolicited emails sent out en masse by our government. I find it worrying, and pretty desperate, that they are using email as a medium for political messages.

I also think Lou has every right to be concerned as to how they got his email address, and that unsolicited email has been sent to it. If there was some opt in mechanism for the emails, then fine. But as Lou said he never requested this email, and hasn't given his new one.

Every decent business I know will not use unsolicited email for their marketing purposes, as it cheapens the company and does make it look pretty desperate. It can also turn a potential customer against them pretty quick too. Targetted email yes, junk mail no. Seems the current US administration have missed the email etiquette 101.:yes:

[OldsterHolster]

I feel slighted! I didn't get that E-mail. What I have gotten are lots of E-mails promoting the falsehoods, such as "pulling the plug on Grandma," veterans losing their benefits, euthanasia squads, and all the other silly, negative, crap aimed at scaring me to death with little or no connection to the truth. It's not surprising, therefore, to hear that Obama's administration is trying to fight fire with fire and sending out factual E-mails of their own.

While unsolicited E-mail is a minor irritation, it is a fact of life, and, no matter how careful you are, you can bet your address is in various data bases all over the place. One itty-bitty click of the mouse on the "delete," or "report spam" box takes care of the problem, however, so I don't consider it any more of an invasion of my privacy than the constant barrage of pap on the TV.

We all knew this would happen. The overwhelming majority of little people are desperate for change in our great country that is obviously on the down slide, but the status quo of the rich and powerful is fighting tooth and nail to protect their own interests, and they know most people are just sheep who will believe whatever they are told, true or not. This "sore loser" mentality, and "business as usual" tactics are quite sad to me, and I sometimes wonder if there is any hope at all for real change for the better. The big boys making all the money and wielding all the power are a formidable force, and they will not go down easily.

Personally, I've never been able to afford health insurance my whole life, so I'm all for change that might improve the state of tens of millions of other nobodys like me, but I'm not holding my breath. Most likely, the rich will get richer as they take credit for saving Grandma, and I'll remained uninsured. It's a hellava state of affairs! Edward.

[Terry Penrod]

.

Lol! The White House is going to help us sort fact from fiction. That's rich.:lol:

What's rich is the fact that millions of Americans have bought into a pack of lies about what's in the bill and you haven't posted one word of objection about it. Why haven't you, Mikell?

Did you actually read the full e-mail text that Lou linked in a previous reply and compare it item by item to the actual reform bill?

If so, did you find any factual discrepencies?

If you didn't, how would you know if it is factual or not?

Cheers, Terry

[Terry Penrod]

.

Regardless of whether the content of the email was worthy or not, it was still unsolicited email, which makes it junk mail. What makes it even worse, after reading it, is that it's an email that is nothing more than a political message. Us Brits often hear about Americans thinking we live in a Big Brother'esque nation, but we have never had unsolicited emails sent out en masse by our government. I find it worrying, and pretty desperate, that they are using email as a medium for political messages.

I also think Lou has every right to be concerned as to how they got his email address, and that unsolicited email has been sent to it. If there was some opt in mechanism for the emails, then fine. But as Lou said he never requested this email, and hasn't given his new one.

Every decent business I know will not use unsolicited email for their marketing purposes, as it cheapens the company and does make it look pretty desperate. It can also turn a potential customer against them pretty quick too. Targetted email yes, junk mail no. Seems the current US administration have missed the email etiquette 101.:yes:

It's anyone's guess how Lou's e-mail address got on the list, Stuart. But in the course of this past presidential election campaign, Obama used the web very effectively and his team no doubt culled a huge list of potential supporters. I assume they also identified all the groups, publications and associations that opposed him. So Lou's address could have come from any number of sources.

More recently, the White House also made an open request for reports on people spreading false information about the health-care reform bill currently being considered in Congress. Lou is one of those people and their actions are the main reason this e-mail was written in the first place. So in effect, Lou helped create the need for this kind of aggressive response.

The reasons aside, there are good-sized Unsubscribe and Privacy Policy links at the bottom of that e-mail. It also has a prominent e-mail link for direct replies. So if Lou wants to be taken off the list and/or lodge a complaint, there's nothing stopping him.

Cheers, Terry

[pcfreak]

Unsolicited email is more than just a minor irritation to someone like myself though Edward, and many other people too. I have seven different email addresses, which I check daily. I recieve anywhere from 100 to 300 emails on each account daily. I would say that around 75-90% of them are unsolicited and unwated junk mail. So that means that I have to physically check a lot of those mails to see if it is actually a wanted email. I have a spam filter which catches the obvious spam, but it won't stop all unwanted mail. I still have to check my junk mail folder daily too, to make sure there is nothing in there that shouldn't be. It's time consuming and an annoyance, that's why I find it shocking that the US government has decided to use unsolicited email to get their point across.

[pcfreak]

.



It's anyone's guess how Lou's e-mail address got on the list, Stuart. But in the course of this past presidential election campaign, Obama used the web very effectively and his team no doubt culled a huge list of potential supporters. I assume they also identified all the groups, publications and associations that opposed him. So Lou's address could have come from any number of sources.

More recently, the White House also made an open request for reports on people spreading false information about the health-care reform bill currently being considered in Congress. Lou is one of those people and their actions are the main reason this e-mail was written in the first place. So in effect, Lou helped create the need for this kind of aggressive response.

The reasons aside, there are good-sized Unsubscribe and Privacy Policy links at the bottom of that e-mail. It also has a prominent e-mail link for direct replies. So if Lou wants to be taken off the list and/or lodge a complaint, there's nothing stopping him.

Cheers, Terry

If Lou didn't suscribe into email communications with his new email address, then he shouldn't be receiving them in the first place though Terry. You cannot justify the use of unsolicited email just because you personally agree with it's content. There is obviously a breach of trust here somewhere down the line. That is the issue, and not the content of the email.

By the sounds of what you said in your last post, the government is acting a little paranoid to be honest. Every other administration has faced criticism, but how many have made open requests to tittle tattlers to spill the beans on those who don't like them or are telling stories? I thought stuff like that only happened in the playground? It's quite silly to be honest.

EDIT: And I do wonder if you would have been so forgiving if Bush had been sending junk mail out banging the political drums or asking for people to inform on those who disagreed with and spoke out against their policies? I highly suspect not.

[Terry Penrod]

.

If Lou didn't suscribe into email communications with his new email address, then he shouldn't be receiving them in the first place though Terry. You cannot justify the use of unsolicited email just because you personally agree with it's content. There is obviously a breach of trust here somewhere down the line. That is the issue, and not the content of the email.

By the sounds of what you said in your last post, the government is acting a little paranoid to be honest. Every other administration has faced criticism, but how many have made open requests to tittle tattlers to spill the beans on those who don't like them or are telling stories? I thought stuff like that only happened in the playground? It's quite silly to be honest.

EDIT: And I do wonder if you would have been so forgiving if Bush had been sending junk mail out banging the political drums or asking for people to inform on those who disagreed with and spoke out against their policies? I highly suspect not.

We aren't talking about simple disagreements on policy, Stuart. We are talking about a very aggressive, malicious campaign of lies aimed at playing on the fears of gullible Americans. So yes, I would most definitely have defended Bush (who I voted for twice) if his proposals had been attacked the same way.

Matter of fact I vigorously defended several if his major policies including his decision to the oust the Taliban in Afghanistan, his attempt to protect the U.S. steel industry and his proposed immigration reforms. I also expressed my strong opposition to his rush to war in Iraq based on what was IMO at the time, very questionable intel. What I did NOT do is conduct a smear campaign based on total BS and lies.

There is an extremely important difference here and I intend to keep pointing it out every time someone like Lou posts something that's either completely false or just plain hypocritical. I will also question his motives for posting threads like this when they coincide with his many harsh and untruthful comments about directly related issues.

Lou does not get a free ride from me because someone added his e-mail address to a list and sent him one (perfectly truthful) message concerning a crucial issue that he himself has been perpetuating lies about.

Cheers, Terry

[OldsterHolster]

I have seven different email addresses, which I check daily. I recieve anywhere from 100 to 300 emails on each account daily.

Damn, Stuart, you just have to cut down on those porn sites! Heh, heh, heh. It sounds like you are a slave to E-mail, so I can understand your view towards spam. You are right about it looking bad when the government does it, but I don't think they have much choice but to retaliate, in kind, to the attack they are under. Make no mistake about it, this whole health-care reform business is is a huge, ugly, battle between the status-quo and the chance for change.

Both sides agree that the present system is badly broken and just bypasses almost fifty million people, but when somebody, anybody, not just Obama, tries to actually make changes for the better, the opposition rears up in a heartbeat. Well-funded, organized, and unrestrained by truth, the people benefitting by the way it is are efficient and brutal. They throw smoke by stirring up the facts and opposing everything, and people get confused and skeptical, so that simple, logical, and good, changes get lost in the cosmic shuffle of bulls**t. It would seem that we can never agree on anything, ever, but I think Obama's election got the attention of the powers that be, and they are not pulling any punches, so neither can he.

I agree with Lou, it's a minor intrusion into his space that wasn't asked for.

I agree with Stuart, also, and I admit it's pushing the limit as to whether it was intended as informative or just political.

I even agree with Mikell. Skepticism is healthy, but there's always hope, and you don't want to let generalized skepticism blind you to the real deal, if it ever comes along.

And, I agree with Terry, for the most part. I, too, am terribly frustrated by the constant negative pressure to any forward motion on this, and other, issues. After watching things go to hell over the last decade, and longer, the time for serious change is here, and, if we don't learn how to cull the crap and agree on a course of action, then this great country will pick up speed on the downside of the hill. Edward.

[pcfreak]

Thats the pitfall of having public email addresses. I sometimes wish that ISP's would introduce fees per email, as we would see the death of spam pretty much overnight. I would be willing to pay for the use of email if we could abolish spam.

I remember reading somewhere that spam accounts for a vast majority of the world's emails every day. I'm sure it was in the 90%+ region. On my personal email account, which isn't public, I hardly get any spam, and only get one or two real emails a day. It's my various business and web domain emails that get hammered. I used to use email cloaking on the websites, but that doesn't do any good anymore. I would dread to think about the lost hours in the workforce that spam causes.

[shizakapayou]

I remember reading somewhere that spam accounts for a vast majority of the world's emails every day. I'm sure it was in the 90%+ region. On my personal email account, which isn't public, I hardly get any spam, and only get one or two real emails a day. It's my various business and web domain emails that get hammered. I used to use email cloaking on the websites, but that doesn't do any good anymore. I would dread to think about the lost hours in the workforce that spam causes.

It's honestly insane what work places deal with. At my last job, we had ~300 users, each with e-mail. TONS of spam. We finally bought a Barracuda device, which cut down on it a lot. It wasn't long before it had blocked over 1 million spam messages - a couple weeks at most. I had no idea so much crap was coming in.

[Terry Penrod]

.

There's no doubt that spam is a real problem. I get lots of it too. But with a standard spam filter, it takes me all of 30 seconds a day to skim through to make sure nothing legit gets lost.

But you know what? Of all the spam I've ever gotten, a message from the White House aimed at setting the record straight about an issue so vital to America's future would have to be one of the few times it doesn't bother me in the slightest.

The central issue here is health insurance for millions of citizens like Edward that don't have it and a comprehensive set of reforms geared to help those of us who are lucky enough to have it, keep it.

The list of disgraceful lies being spread about this bill is very long and very, very dirty. Obama has an obligation to do eveything in his power to counter those lies with the facts - including using the web to reach millions of truly misguided individuals like Lou.

Cheers, Terry

[Lou Cypher]

Originally posted by Terry Penrod
It's anyone's guess how Lou's e-mail address got on the list, Stuart. But in the course of this past presidential election campaign, Obama used the web very effectively and his team no doubt culled a huge list of potential supporters. I assume they also identified all the groups, publications and associations that opposed him. So Lou's address could have come from any number of sources.
Your correct Terry, Obama used the internet like a ninja using a Katana to as in your words “culled a huge list of potential supporters”, have I ever been a Obama supporter?, no, so that explanation goes out the window. Then you add “ assume they also identified all the groups, publications and associations that opposed him”, but like I said before, I have never joined any political group that opposed him, so that explanation also goes out the window.
Let me make myself perfectly clear, I…..don’t….give…out…my…e-mail….to…anyone!, except close family, and among them there are no Obama supporters.


Originally posted by Terry Penrod
More recently, the White House also made an open request for reports on people spreading false information about the health-care reform bill currently being considered in Congress. Lou is one of those people and their actions are the main reason this e-mail was written in the first place. So in effect, Lou helped create the need for this kind of aggressive response.
And as you point out, the White House requested Americans to ”report” on people for exercising there first amendment rights, do you realize how scary that sounds?
And then you say in the next breath that people like me and countless others, who have a constitutional right to question our government, made the White House send out the request to Americans to turn in the names of people who disagree with them.
And by them doing this they may have broken the Law, specifically the Privacy Act of 1974, which generally prohibits any federal agency from maintaining records on individuals exercising their right to free speech, it came about from the Nixon administration keeping records on people for political purposes.
http://www.usdoj.gov/opcl/privstat.htm

Originally posted by Terry Penrod
The reasons aside, there are good-sized Unsubscribe and Privacy Policy links at the bottom of that e-mail. It also has a prominent e-mail link for direct replies. So if Lou wants to be taken off the list and/or lodge a complaint, there's nothing stopping him.
Even if they wanted to or could, they can’t “unsubscribe”, it’s against the law for the White House to delete or destroy any lists that they may posses (sp), so any name that was sent in by anyone must be preserved by law.


Lou :globe:

[Terry Penrod]

.

Poor poor Lou, innocent victim of an evil government plot to set the record straight...

because Lou has been helping spread lies about the very same health-care reform bill.

What goes around comes around, pal.

Cheers, Terry

[Mikell]

.



What's rich is the fact that millions of Americans have bought into a pack of lies about what's in the bill and you haven't posted one word of objection about it. Why haven't you, Mikell?

Did you actually read the full e-mail text that Lou linked in a previous reply and compare it item by item to the actual reform bill?

If so, did you find any factual discrepencies?

If you didn't, how would you know if it is factual or not?

Cheers, Terry

How would the President or Congress know if it's factual or not? I doubt they have read the 1,000 plus pages either. They didn't read the bailout bill.
I didn't say it wasn't factual, I'm saying the government spreads more lies than any grass roots organizations ever could. Just ask Colin Powell.
The Democrats would have us believe that all those pissed off people at the town hall meetings are Republican "plants" The government doesn't care what is factual unless it hurts their image.
That's what's rich.

[pcfreak]

.

There's no doubt that spam is a real problem. I get lots of it too. But with a standard spam filter, it takes me all of 30 seconds a day to skim through to make sure nothing legit gets lost.

But you know what? Of all the spam I've ever gotten, a message from the White House aimed at setting the record straight about an issue so vital to America's future would have to be one of the few times it doesn't bother me in the slightest.

The central issue here is health insurance for millions of citizens like Edward that don't have it and a comprehensive set of reforms geared to help those of us who are lucky enough to have it, keep it.

The list of disgraceful lies being spread about this bill is very long and very, very dirty. Obama has an obligation to do eveything in his power to counter those lies with the facts - including using the web to reach millions of truly misguided individuals like Lou.

Cheers, Terry

Again, you can't justify the use of spam as a political medium just because you agree with the email's content. You say that the government is fighting fire with fire, but I would put it this way - they are stooping to a new low.

[Terry Penrod]

.

How would the President or Congress know if it's factual or not? I doubt they have read the 1,000 plus pages either. They didn't read the bailout bill.

I didn't say it wasn't factual, I'm saying the government spreads more lies than any grass roots organizations ever could. Just ask Colin Powell.

The Democrats would have us believe that all those pissed off people at the town hall meetings are Republican "plants" The government doesn't care what is factual unless it hurts their image.

That's what's rich.

How would they know what's actually in the bill you ask?

BECAUSE THEY WROTE IT, EINSTEIN.

Again, did you even bother to read that e-mail?

Have you even bothered to look at the overview of the bill itself?

Have you delved into the text of the bill and read the specific sections that are directly related to these outrageous claims, these total lies being spread all over the web, the airwaves and elsewhere?

Well I have done all those things and more. I've read several additional sections of the main bill being debated by the U.S. Congress that would impact me personally and so far, I have not found one word that comes close to "socialism" or "single-payer systems" or "death panels" or "loss of choice".

What I have found is a very detailed document that adds a number of crucial new consumer protections and benefits and NOTHING ELSE.

My ONLY concern with this bill is the optional public insurance program that would be run by the government and even then, it would be paid for by the policy premiums NOT tax dollars.

As for the total morons that have been loudly disrupting the townhall meetings and spreading lies on the Internet, they don't WANT an honest debate on the facts. They're just a bunch of ignorant, paranoid tools for even bigger morons like Sarah Palin and those disgusting con-artist shills at Fox News who are conducting a desperate campaign of fear.

Cheers, Terry

.

[Terry Penrod]

.

Again, you can't justify the use of spam as a political medium just because you agree with the email's content. You say that the government is fighting fire with fire, but I would put it this way - they are stooping to a new low.

I didn't say they were "fighting fire with fire", Edward did.

Otherwise, that e-mail isn't stooping to anything, Stuart. It is a 100% justified, necessary and FACTUAL response to people who ARE stooping to new lows.

THEY are the ones you should be focusing on and the worst offender we have on this forum is that poor, innocent "victim" named Lou.

Lastly, for the record and for the umpteenth time, I do NOT agree with everything being proposed in the health-care reform bill. I strongly disagree with one of its primary components and have issues with several other details. But the point is, those things are still being hammered out by people who are dealing with what is actually in the bill, NOT a bunch of filthy lies and scare tactics.

Cheers, Terry

[pcfreak]

.



How would they know what's actually in the bill you ask?

BECAUSE THEY WROTE IT, EINSTEIN.

Again, did you even bother to read that e-mail?

Have you even bothered to look at the overview of the bill itself?

Have you delved into the text of the bill and read the specific sections that are directly related to these outrageous claims, these total lies being spread all over the web, the airwaves and elsewhere?

Well I have done all those things and more. I've read several additional sections of the main bill being debated by the U.S. Congress that would impact me personally and so far, I have not found one word that comes close to "socialism" or "single-payer systems" or "death panels" or "loss of choice".

What I have found is a very detailed document that adds a number of crucial new consumer protections and benefits and NOTHING ELSE.

My ONLY concern with this bill is the optional public insurance program that would be run by the government and even then, it would be paid for by the policy premiums NOT tax dollars.

As for the total morons that have been loudly disrupting the townhall meetings and spreading lies on the Internet, they don't WANT an honest debate on the facts. They're just a bunch of ignorant, paranoid tools for even bigger morons like Sarah Palin and those disgusting con-artist shills at Fox News who are conducting a desperate campaign of fear.

Cheers, Terry

.

^^^Someones got their knickers in a twist^^^


:scared::scared::lol::lol:

Come on Terry, lighten up a little. I am sure that if the bill is a solid proposal and there are no real problems with it, it will be passed. Your strong defense of the bill here isn't going to change anything, neither is what anyone thinks here in reality.

[pcfreak]

.



I didn't say they were "fighting fire with fire", Edward did.

Otherwise, that e-mail isn't stooping to anything, Stuart. It is a 100% justified, necessary and FACTUAL response to people who ARE stooping to new lows.

THEY are the ones you should be focusing on and the worst offender we have on this forum is that poor, innocent "victim" named Lou.

Lastly, for the record and for the umpteenth time, I do NOT agree with everything being proposed in the health-care reform bill. I strongly disagree with one of its primary components and have issues with several other details. But the point is, those things are still being hammered out by people who are dealing with what is actually in the bill, NOT a bunch of filthy lies and scare tactics.

Cheers, Terry

Terry, just because it's the government that's sending the unsolicited email doesn't mean that this is acceptable. You seem to be trying to gloss over the fact that the email is spam, and as such is not something the government should be doing. As I said it's a new low for the government, who have been actively pursuing spammers I might add, strange how they are now bed mates with them??!!

Now what was that age old saying I grew up hearing so often? Ah yes - two wrongs don't make a right! Just because opposers to the bill are fighting dirty, it doesn't give the US government the right to do so in response.

[Terry Penrod]

.

^^^Someones got their knickers in a twist^^^

:scared::scared::lol::lol:

Come on Terry, lighten up a little. I am sure that if the bill is a solid proposal and there are no real problems with it, it will be passed. Your strong defense of the bill here isn't going to change anything, neither is what anyone thinks here in reality.

I couldn't disagree more, Stuart.

What the American members of this forum think very much does matter and right now, the polls show a direct link between public opnion and the disgusting, malicious lies being spread about what's actually in that health-care bill.

In turn, those opinion polls are impacting the debate in Congress and retarding the process of passing a badly needed set of reforms.

In the meantime, over 50 million legal American citizens like Edward have no health insurance at all and millions more are being dropped or they are having their already sky-high premiums raised.

Look, you can poke fun of me personally. I really don't care. But please don't make light of the situation itself. Of all the people on this forum, you should understand how vital access to decent health care is.

It is a time sensitive issue for millions of human beings and many of them have already run out of time. They will die very soon without care and that I take very, very seriously.

Cheers, Terry

[Terry Penrod]

.

Terry, just because it's the government that's sending the unsolicited email doesn't mean that this is acceptable. You seem to be trying to gloss over the fact that the email is spam, and as such is not something the government should be doing. As I said it's a new low for the government, who have been actively pursuing spammers I might add, strange how they are now bed mates with them??!!

Now what was that age old saying I grew up hearing so often? Ah yes - two wrongs don't make a right! Just because opposers to the bill are fighting dirty, it doesn't give the US government the right to do so in response.

I'm not glossing over anything Stuart. I am putting things into proper perspective.

I could not possibly care less that Lou got one e-mail he didn't want - epsecially when HE himself helped create the need for that e-mail.

His posting this thread to whine about it is nothing more than a sheepish attempt to draw attention away from the total lies he has been perpetuating in another thread right here on this forum, which I called him on.

Well, Lou doesn't want to keep debating those points because he knows damned well he is wrong. So he has chosen to start a new thread to garner sympathy as a poor innocent "victim". Victim my ass. Lou is one of the people that's helped escalate all this fear and confusion over the health-care reform bill being waylaid in Congress while millions continue to go without any access to basic care.

Cheers, Terry

[pcfreak]

I wasnt trying to poke fun at you Terry, I was trying to lighten this conversation up a little. At the end of the day, what's the point of getting into a heated argument on here. We are all supposed to be fellow members and get along, but you just cant let some things go sometimes Terry. I have been guilty of this in the past myself, so I can recognise when others are doing it.

As for healthcare, I do take the matter seriously, and I don't think you should be bringing my personal problems, here in the UK, into this conversation Terry. I don't think you having a slanging match with Lou on this forum is going to change the US populations ideas though Terry, because that is all it is.

[Terry Penrod]

.

I wasnt trying to poke fun at you Terry, I was trying to lighten this conversation up a little. At the end of the day, what's the point of getting into a heated argument on here. We are all supposed to be fellow members and get along, but you just cant let some things go sometimes Terry. I have been guilty of this in the past myself, so I can recognise when others are doing it.

As for healthcare, I do take the matter seriously, and I don't think you should be bringing my personal problems, here in the UK, into this conversation Terry. I don't think you having a slanging match with Lou on this forum is going to change the US populations ideas though Terry, because that is all it is.

Stuart, I assume you would be taking this VERY seriously if millions of UK citizens did not have access to health care right now and we were debating the exact same issue relative to your country. I also assume you would find it extremely objectionable if someone started posting total lies on this forum about a proposed solution being debated in Parliament.

Given those two very reasonable assumptions, how would you feel if I told you to "lighten up" because your attempts to set the record straight didn't matter?

Cheers, Terry

P.S. I just now received some key info needed to finish a series of case studies by Monday, so I will be away from the forum most if this weekend.

.

[pcfreak]

Terry, everyone has heard your opinion now on the matter many times, and keeping stating it isn't going to coonvince anyone any more or less now. To be honest, I don't care about the reform bill one little bit. I have problems closer to home that demand my attention. Where I did get involved was with regards to whether the government should be sending out junk mail. As I have pointed out, I don't agree with any government using these tactics. This was the OP's original topic after all. You have turned it into yet another argument over the reform bill, and you alone.

You are trying to draw me into an argument about the bill, something I know very little about and have just as much interest in. You are keeping this argument going like a dog who refuses to let go of a bone. Your tone within nearly every post has been very aggressive and sometimes abusive, there really is no need.

[OldsterHolster]

Someones got their knickers in a twist

I love this forum. I learn something every day. Over here, Stuart, we say, "Don't get your panties in a wad." Heh, heh.

I like these heated discussions, especially when the rest of the forum is slow, but I don't care for the petty squabbling and personal insults that they seem to invariably lead to. Nothing good ever comes of it, and bad feelings of any kind do not nurture the special atmosphere we enjoy here on our forum.

Personally, I almost always can find something to respect about anybody's opinions and beliefs, even when I might strongly disagree, and if things get personal, I simply shut up or try to change the subject. Maybe I'm thick-skinned, or maybe I'm just a wuss that doesn't like word-fighting, but either way, this hostility between Lou and Terry is sometimes troubling.

I enjoy hearing what Terry has to say because his input is usually well-researched and factual, but the fire in his soul is sometimes too close to the surface and easily boils over. Lou's intelligence and strength of conviction is unquestionable, but he knows Terry's soft spots, and he sometimes can't resist poking with a sharp stick. Once the poking begins, any substantive content flies right out the window, and I get bored; so you guys knock it off before I call the Thought-Police and have you both arrested for criminal Truespeak. Heh, heh.

So, have a great weekend and beware of the Spam Flu. Catching it may lead to a terminally bad attitude, and the cure is not covered by anybody's health care plan. Edward.

[Terry Penrod]

.

Edward and Stuart, with all due and genuine respect for both of you, this is after all the heated discussion forum and it naturally attracts impassioned posts on the most serious, pressing and contentious topics in the world today.

If I did not feel strongly enough about these crucial subjects to engage in extended often brutal debates, I would never even bother posting in this section. As demonstrated by his equally deep commitment, I trust that Lou feels the same way and in that regard, I have a great deal of respect for him too. He is a tenacious debater and yes, he does know how to push my buttons.

But that comes with the territory and while I'm sorry that you sometimes find it boring, irrelevant or upsetting, I do not plan on suppressing my passions, opinions, tone or expressive style.

Cheers, Terry

[OldsterHolster]

Yep, I knew that; and it's OK. I'll go back in the Lounge, have a few cocktails, and mind my own business. When y'all finish slugging it out, come on over and tell me who won; and I'll buy you all a drink, and we can all shout "Cheers!" Edward.