58 Comments

1. Dave S:

We should all respond to flag.whitehouse.org with respectful comments, maybe even suggestions. Maybe they could actually try a bipartisan approach to a bill that reforms health insurance. How about tort reform and vouchers for cheap catastrophic policies for the unemployed and the poor. Get the people covered with some kind of safety net, cut cost thru fewer lawsuits. It could work. I know they ain’t havin’ any of it but if we responded to them with ideas and respectful comment they couldn’t just call us the party of NO. I’ve sent two emails to them already. I plan to do a few more in the next few days. If they got 10 million emails calling for dropping the public option do you think they might try a different approach? They have to know this boondoggle they have going now is DOA.

Aug 5, 2009 - 8:25 pm 2. Barry Dauphin:

Anyone who disagrees with the administration is the de facto party of “no” according to them. Respectful would be great, but these are Chicago politicians. They respect an a** whoopin’ and nothing else. They expect those who disagree to play clean while they play dirty.

Aug 5, 2009 - 8:47 pm 3. Charlie (Colorado):

Well, I sent an email off reporting myself this evening.

Aug 5, 2009 - 8:55 pm 4. Terrye:

Nancy Pelosi said these people who showed up at these meetings were astroturfing and wearing swastikas. She actually said swastikas. There is a classic case of projection for you.

Aug 6, 2009 - 3:47 am 5. Arthur:

I also turned myself in for thought crimes, and revealed the names of friends and accomplices for eventual re-education.

Aug 6, 2009 - 5:55 am 6. DWPittelli:

I remember when, 10 months after 9/11, President Bush wanted to enlist truck drivers and meter readers to call a toll-free hotline to report suspicious activity they might see on the job. This was no more a violation of the 4th Amendment than the current White House plan is a violation of the 1st Amendment, and Bush’s plan was in the pursuit of public safety, not a Bush legislative initiative, but there was an uproar, it was fit to the emerging “Bush fascist” “big brother” “Orwellian” template, and the plan was canceled under fire.

Can any honest person really see that Bush plan to protect us from terrorism as dangerous, but be OK with Obama’s plant to protect us from “fishy claims” about his health care plans?

Aug 6, 2009 - 5:56 am 7. LogicalSC:

I have not turn myself in yet but I have turned in Barack Obama and last night I sent them a link to a video of some extremist loon, Nancy Pelosi, claiming that American senior citizens were wearing swastikas to townhall meetings.

I suggest that people send this mailbox notices of Obama’s minions lying about this proposal so that they get the message than nobody is buying their propaganda.

Aug 6, 2009 - 6:01 am 8. Greg:

I’ve sent several emails to the flag address pointing out the fishy smell coming from the vicinity of the white house and congress. But no response yet. Will keep sending emails and hoping for some response.

Aug 6, 2009 - 6:01 am 9. Matt:

DWPittelli:

So you are equating Bush’s asking individuals to be on the lookout for suspicious terrorist activity after the deadliest single terrorist act in this countries history with Obama asking people to report “fishy” emails in opposition of his healthcare proposal? One is a plea for people to help prevent an attack (that we all believed might be coming) while another is a plea to save a political agenda that a large percentage of the public is opposed to…. and you see these as the same thing? Seriously?

Aug 6, 2009 - 6:03 am 10. Patrick Carroll:

My US Representative, Hank Johnson, is having a health care reform town hall meeting this coming Monday, 10 August. Details are at his website (google him to find it).

Anyway, if you object to this monstrosity, please show up to complain.

Aug 6, 2009 - 6:20 am 11. Banjo:

Matt, I think you should re-read DWPattelli’s post. I think he agrees with you. As for Obama’s nascent internal security expansion, I wonder if next children will be asked to monitor their parents’ opinions and encouraged to report them to the proper authorities.

Aug 6, 2009 - 6:22 am 12. Tony:

I think what he meant was that Bush got slammed for doing something that was actually to protect the public safety while Obambi is getting a pass for essentially asking for the same thing, except on an issue that is much more political.

Aug 6, 2009 - 6:23 am 13. European News Review:

If everyone sends some notice of fishy, the fish program may go away.

But use an special email address because everything is required by law to become part of the Government’s records

Aug 6, 2009 - 6:25 am 14. ronnor:

DWPittelli

How can you be for something that costs Trillions, gives less, is socialist/marxist, creates a huge data base for the government and no one has read. You buy bridges also, got one in Brooklyn cheap. If the bill is to big to read, to convoluted to understand, costs more than we can afford and is being pushed by a marxist, what is the benefit? The Democrats have lost their minds with Obama, first throwing $738 billion down the toilet and now this; you actually think that this is good government?

Aug 6, 2009 - 6:27 am 15. gdb in central Texas:

I reported something fishy a couple of days ago. I sent them a PDF of HR 3200. The House bill is the thing that reeks.

Aug 6, 2009 - 6:34 am 16. Win:

Fishy: The first substantive provision in H.R. 3200, under the section title “SEC. 102. PROTECTING THE CHOICE TO KEEP CURRENT COVERAGE,” actually prohibits individuals from purchasing a new private health insurance policy. The self employed will have their current plan or the “public option” as their only options. The newly self employed will be stuck with choice of the “public option” or going uninsured and paying fines. Is this intended to “keep the insurance companies honest” or put them out of business?

SEC. 102. PROTECTING THE CHOICE TO KEEP CURRENT COVERAGE.
(a) Grandfathered Health Insurance Coverage Defined- Subject to the succeeding provisions of this section, for purposes of establishing acceptable coverage under this division, the term `grandfathered health insurance coverage’ means individual health insurance coverage that is offered and in force and effect before the first day of Y1 if the following conditions are met:
(1) LIMITATION ON NEW ENROLLMENT-
(A) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of Y1.

Aug 6, 2009 - 6:40 am 17. Lbphilly:

Actually, I sent the URL for Linda Douglass’s YouTube video to flag@whitehouse.gov . You can do it too — just follow the “laugh line” link in Roger’s post and grab the URL.

Aug 6, 2009 - 6:41 am 18. tysmwest:

Loved the comment to Steny Hoyer yesterday.

“It took Obama 6 months to pick a dog for his kids…but we get health care reform in 4 weeks

Aug 6, 2009 - 6:42 am 19. Optimus Primed:

Um, people, read DWPittelli again a little more closely….

Aug 6, 2009 - 6:42 am 20. Win:

Fishy: The first substantive provision in H.R. 3200, under the title “SEC. 102. PROTECTING THE CHOICE TO KEEP CURRENT COVERAGE,” actually prohibits individuals from purchasing a new private health insurance policy. The self employed, for example, will have their current plan or the “public option” as their only options. The newly self employed will be stuck with choice of the “public option” or going uninsured and paying fines. Is this intended to “keep the insurance companies honest” or put them out of business?

SEC. 102. PROTECTING THE CHOICE TO KEEP CURRENT COVERAGE.
(a) Grandfathered Health Insurance Coverage Defined- Subject to the succeeding provisions of this section, for purposes of establishing acceptable coverage under this division, the term `grandfathered health insurance coverage’ means individual health insurance coverage that is offered and in force and effect before the first day of Y1 if the following conditions are met:
(1) LIMITATION ON NEW ENROLLMENT-
(A) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of Y1.

Aug 6, 2009 - 6:58 am 21. Dorothy Jane:

Thanks, Dave – I am following your suggestion. I sent a polite email to the fishy address asking them why they need to go so fast and why do they feel the need to attack us as a ‘mob.’ You are right – we should flood them with well thought out emails, showing we are intelligent, well meaning, earnest citizens…

Aug 6, 2009 - 7:05 am 22. Meezle:

Matt and ronner –

You may want to re-read DWPittelli’s comment (with slightly better care than you did the first time around). I think your reactions are a bit misplaced.

Aug 6, 2009 - 7:05 am 23. Peg C.:

We should all forward all our blog comments to flag@whitehouse.gov. Seriously. Break their servers but good.

Meanwhile, they absolutely are trying to incite violence between groups of Americans. The folks who worry about detention camps in this country are starting to seem just slightly less crazy to me. Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they not out to get you.

Aug 6, 2009 - 7:20 am 24. whittle:

Sent to
flag@whitehouse.gov

This sounds fishy to me………….

http://my.barackobama.com/page/s/commitaugust

……….best check it out.

Regards,

Aug 6, 2009 - 7:28 am 25. Emilio:

Matt & Ronner;

Are you guys reading a different post by DWPittelli than the rest of us? Because what he wrote is exactly what you’re saying — that it’s outrageous for Obama’s administration to be asking citizens to be on the hunt for “fishy” commentary when the same group howled to the moon when Bush, for much more noble reasons, asked Americans to be on the lookout for suspicious activities.

Aug 6, 2009 - 7:33 am 26. C:

I think we should start a campaign to submit every lie that they and the media promote.

Flag every article that says health care costs will lower. Flag every article that says you’ll get to keep your own doctor. Flag every article critical of the protesters.

Aug 6, 2009 - 7:38 am 27. Vinny:

Jack Uldrich, a futurist asked a mathemetitian to help him explain a million, billion and trillion to his audiences. The professor called him later and said to imagine seconds backward as a measure to help his audience understand the concepts.

He said:

a million seconds ago was 12 days ago

a billion seconds ago was 30 years ago

a trillion seconds ago was 30,000 BC

and our govt is spending how much of our childrens $$$ ?

Aug 6, 2009 - 7:39 am 28. Brian:

I would like to believe it would do some good to send emails – but really all they are going to do is tally the number of emails that arrive and extrapolate that all the emails were legitimate complaints about emails that were falsely making claims about the “perfect” health care legislation. No one is going to read them.

We’ll hear at a press conference “over 10 million emails were sent to us, proving that there are at least 10 million fishy emails trying to derail us.” This PROVES there is a conspiracy against us!

Aug 6, 2009 - 7:47 am 29. Jim WH:

I think it would be fun to send flag@whitehouse.gov quotations from the bill itself, with the claim that they are ‘fishy’ Republican misrepresentations. We might get some embarrassing moments from the schoolmarm type they have running their enemies list.

Aug 6, 2009 - 7:59 am 30. Dan:

I suggest the following “Legislative Responsibility Oath” for all elective officials of good faith. Lets start a movement!

I (name of representative/senator) do hereby pledge to my constituents that I will

1) Make an honest effort to read and understand the implications of all bills before voting on them
2) Vote NO (or abstain) on any bill where I have not had time to read and understand its impact on the public.
3) Never use “ignorance of the law” as an excuse for unintended consequences.

Aug 6, 2009 - 8:07 am 31. Tournefort:

Good comment from a reader at Instapundit RE request from the White House:

“Doesn’t this mean that all support for Obamacare is now the product of a top-down mandate for activism? And doesn’t that delegitimize any support for health care “reform?”

Or, instead, is it legitimate, nay inspiring, when Democratic bigwigs organize support for liberal policy objectives, but illegitimate, even sickening, when Republican bigwigs organize opposition to such objectives?”

Dems, hypocrisy is thy name.

Aug 6, 2009 - 8:28 am 32. Episcopa:

HCAN’s action plan to disrupt Town Hall meetings sounds suspiciously traitorous to me.
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/documents/2009/08/hcan-playbook-for-thwarting-town-hall-protesters.php?page=1

Aug 6, 2009 - 8:31 am 33. Douglas Fletcher:

I turned in President Obama.

Aug 6, 2009 - 8:54 am 34. JAL:

I’ve reported a couple of sites — including this particular one here– to the fishline at WH.gov over the past couple days.

Today I also sent them:
http://tinyurl.com/HCANplaybook

and included this fishy line, (one among many):

“Isn’t it true that this bill would guarantee a choice of public health insurance option that would lower the cost overall in the system?” (To be asked to one’s MOC to give him the chance to lie and placate the ignorant masses.)

On re-consideration I believe that statement is true, if one considers that the public health insurance option(s) available which
“would lower the cost overall” might include a couple lousy choices. (And nothing like what Michelle and the girls would be getting, not to mention the MOC who is answering.)

Keep sending chum up the fishline. It’ll bring out the sharks for all to see. (They’ll have to appoint another czar to manage it all. Ministry of Information, anyone?)

Aug 6, 2009 - 9:05 am 35. Fantom:

I have already self reported.

Yes the obama regime is looking more EL Duce like by the minute. Thier fascist mindset is being revealed to the world.. will it make any difference? I hope so.

One thing we could do is a little obama-alinsky-pliven on them.

“Make the enemy live up to their (sic) own book of rules,”
And overwhelm the system.

If our fascist obama wants us to help him identify the fishy stuff I say maybe we should do our Patriotic duty and comply with Dear Leader.

To which we all should report this. http://www.healthreform.gov/ It sure seems fishy to me. If you want to join me in this effort

Here is where to send it flag@whitehouse.gov

Aug 6, 2009 - 9:24 am 36. GBS:

Speaking of comedy, does anyone else get the feeling that the administration is acting out a classic Stooges skit. Curly’s response to get rid of the water in their foundering craft is to drill another hole in the bottom of the boat. This is not unlike the administration’s (and the congress) attempt to contain future deficits by creating another entitlement program. Way to go Barack ‘Curly’ Obama. Be patient. Congress will hand you the drill soon enough.

Aug 6, 2009 - 9:25 am 37. abdi abdoh:

and again, this administration reinforces the notion that resistance to obamamania is unpatriotic, idiotic, and treasonous.

this homogeneity that is being forced down our throats will be the death of this country, eh comrade?

Aug 6, 2009 - 10:08 am 38. btenney:

Snitch on your neighbor . Get in peoples faces. This is hilarious, the idea of a bunch of metrosexual Obamabots getting in the face of people who would like nothing more than to kick their asses is laughable.
A while back I was convinced that one day we would have to break out the pitchforks or call a national strike to deal with this nonsensical Administration
Not to worry, this Administration will wither and die from the laughter just as soon as they finish trying to out shout the Citizens.

Aug 6, 2009 - 10:16 am 39. Jamie:

I reported Canada and the UK, specifically, for having given me unsavory ideas about the effects of government-run health care. I wasn’t going to rat them out, but in the end, it was the right thing to do.

(I threw Oregon and Massachusetts under the bus too, as an afterthought.)

Aug 6, 2009 - 10:45 am 40. nora:

This is not a laughing matter. Even KGB was not that direct in asking citizens to report on each other. They mobilized “secsot”s, i.e secret collaborators. As conseqiences, people did not dare to talk their minds from the fear of being repoted to authorities.

I think that the use of ruthless fascist fear tactics by Obama’s administration should be publicized as wide as possible.

Aug 6, 2009 - 10:54 am 41. Metz:

@30 Dan

I agree with you. I find it hard to believe that the people elected to these positions can be allowed to vote on issues without even reading what is contained therein, and this does not somehow violate some fiduciary responsibility they have towards their constituents. I’m not surprised they do it, just that it is not a violation.

If we can bring forth baseball players and ask them whether they’ve taken steroids under oath, why can’t we bring up the representitives who voted on cap and trade and ask them simply, under oath, “Did you read the entire bill prior to voting on it?”

And it still amazes me that there are people who would actually contemplate as a good idea, a piece of legislation written, whereby those writing it will not even subject themselves to it. Even Jim Jones had the courage to drink the same kool aid.

Aug 6, 2009 - 11:11 am 42. Robert:

Isn’t this essentially their way of dealing with any potential Joe the Plumbers out there who might dare to criticize the beauty of a government controlled single payer health care system? Say something “fishy” and the administration flunkies will find out ALL about you and whatever dirty little secrets you might be hiding.

Obama made those comments a mere 6 years ago. That might seem like a lifetime to a teenager, but it’s no time at all for most of us. So, we’re to assume that he’s totally changed his mind in six short years, and the fact that he is now supporting a bill that looks just like the kind of trojan horse he advocated back then is just a coincidence? If we had more than one or two honest reporters in the major media these days he would be made a laughingstock for even attempting this.

Aug 6, 2009 - 11:22 am 43. Doc99:

Joe Biden should be reported for spreading disinformation on Swine Flu.

Aug 6, 2009 - 12:00 pm 44. Victor Erimita:

It is all of our patriotic duty to report fishy information to our leaders. I have turned myself in every day this week so far. I have also reported Nancy Pelosi’s comments about swastika’s a paid prtoestors, as well as a number of detailed concerns about the proposed bill. Everyone should do this every day.

Aug 6, 2009 - 12:53 pm 45. ic:

“…this ever-changing phone book that nobody admits to having read.”

Ah, you don’t understand:
1. If they read the montrosity, they cannot claim they were duped when they run for election next year.
2. If the plan turns out positive, they can claim credits for voting for it.
3. They are not covered by the montrosity anyway, why bother to read it. They have better thing to do.
4. It’s about time for the American people to realize that they are the ruled.

Aug 6, 2009 - 1:08 pm 46. EdSki:

As soon as I read that on Hot Air, I decided it was my patriotic duty to snitch on myself.

So I sent them an email telling them exactly what I think of their health care crisis hoax.

Then I gave them my name, address and phone number.

If the President wants an enemies list, by all means, please put me at the top.

I’m hoping enough people will do it to crash their mail server.

Aug 6, 2009 - 1:55 pm 47. ricpic:

test

Aug 6, 2009 - 5:34 pm 48. hadley:

So, let’s give them what they want. Snitch away and send them links to fishy websites. I googled “fish” and hit almost as many websites as our increasing national debt, then copied the links and e-mailed about 50 of them to “flag.” Let them eat fish.

Aug 6, 2009 - 7:33 pm 49. sooze:

I snitched myself AND my senator, John Cornyn. I told them I’d turn myself in at the police station if need be. Also ended the letter with Sieg Heil and have a nice day!

Aug 7, 2009 - 1:02 am 50. winner:

SEC. 102. PROTECTING THE CHOICE TO KEEP CURRENT COVERAGE

The lie that is being spread is that people can keep their existing plan, but they can only switch to a government plan.

What is says is that if they switch, or are newly enrolled after legislation takes effect, they have to be put on a plan that meets
the new standards for accessibility, affordability and coverage. But, there’s nothing to prevent a private company from offering
a plan that meets these new standards.

Aug 7, 2009 - 1:52 am 51. Swamp Rabbit:

I keep sending e-mails containing the the Osama Joker poster pasted in the body.

OsamaHusseinIslamObama 2012′
(the Terrorist-Uighur-Media choice)
-It’s never too early to campaign-

Aug 7, 2009 - 8:57 am 52. Trunk Junk:

I accidentally sent this post to flag@whitehouse.gov 10,000 times. Must have pushed the wrong button or something.

Aug 7, 2009 - 9:13 am 53. Neo:

It’s so good to see how President Obama has brought us all together … a national “Kumbaya” moment.

Everybody sing …

Aug 7, 2009 - 10:09 am 54. Win:

Winner:
Please read Sec. 102 paragraph 1 and explain how the language allows for private payors’ enrollment of any new individuals after the day the bill becomes law. The only exception I see provided (in what seems like unambiguous language) allows adding dependents to an individual policy that was in force prior to the first day of Y1.

Am I missing something? Am I a liar? Anyone?

PDF Link: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h3200ih.txt.pdf

Aug 7, 2009 - 1:50 pm 55. Win:

After reading further into the resolution, and despite the apparent unambiguity noted above, I see that there are provisions for individuals to participate via a Health Insurance Exchange. I also understand why no one in the congress plans to read H.R. 3200.

Aug 7, 2009 - 2:26 pm 56. jsallison:

I promptly emailed with ‘I am Spartacus’

Aug 7, 2009 - 7:25 pm 57. Subotai Bahadur:

Two points. Buraq Hussein’s Stukachi [Soviet slang for "stool-pigeon"] plan is a direct violation of the 1974 Privacy Act. This was passed, ironically, by a Democrat Congress to limit the power of the Executive branch. Amongst its provisions, it barred anyone associated with the Executive Office of the President for collecting any information on political activities of Americans that were protected by the First Amendment. There are both criminal and civil penalties for the government and government workers for each violation, and it specifically waived sovereign immunity from legal action. I am given to understand, albeit I have not yet done my usual double-check to confirm, that the administration response to that was to claim that the White House is not part of the Executive Office of the President.

Second, since Mr. Simon wrote this piece there has been a change in the situation. We have had two incidents, involving either two or three separate assaults by SEIU union members sent by the administration to intimidate those who attend meetings with Congressmen and who are opposed to ObamaMengeleCare. One involved an attack on an elderly late stage cancer patient, and a man who came to his aid was also attacked. The other involved an attack on a protestor, who happened to be black, who was handing out Gadsden Flags as a “Town Hall” ended. The SEIU member who attacked him [also black] employed racial epithets as he attacked him. Charges have been filed in both cases, but as with the New Black Panther Party intimidating voters and having the DOJ dismiss charges after they had pled guilty; there is no confidence that the law will be followed.

The mood is changing rapidly. The violence may not remain at a low level, one sided, or limited to meetings with Congressmen. If this is forced through over the objections of the country, the consequences may be something that takes us outside our political system. Fire is being played with by this administration. Unfortunately, it is being played with in a napalm factory.

Subotai Bahadur

Aug 7, 2009 - 8:44 pm 58. Capn Eddie Ricketyback:

I’m a little late to this party, but I’ve flagged myself with the following message:

Here’s my contribution to your database, namely, ME. This proposed “reform” program is the biggest attempt of a government takeover of this large segment of the economy in my lifetime of some 75 years. You are trying to fix a 15% problem with a huge disruption in the lives of the 85% of us who have worked all our lives and have provided for our own health care while simultaneously paying into the Medicare fund, and now that sorry program is about to be gutted so that you can give coverage to thoughtless and / or indolent younger people who didn’t have the foresight to provide for their own. It would probably be cheaper just to buy insurance for that 15%, half of whom I suspect are illegals who have no right to be here in the first place.

I spent 12 years of my youth in military service during two wars and various national emergencies such as the Cuban Missile Crisis, and it’s a good thing I had no idea of how far this country, or at least 52.6% of it, would deteriorate in my lifetime. Unless there is a big change, it looks like I will end my days in utter contempt of what this country has become.

Aug 14, 2009 - 8:40 am

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: