Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Hugo Chavez on August 05, 2009, 07:59:15 AM
-
would you care to tell me what happened to left leaning protesters that came to political events during the Bush years with the objective of "Be Disruptive Early And Often?" Don't tell me you don't know, I can show you video after video of them being taken out and sometimes arrested but certainly not allowed to stay. Now imagine that happening to some of these guys doing that! hahahaha, you all would be screaming about your first amendment rights. But what did righties say about lefties when they got hauled off? Pretty much fuck them. I'm sure you don't see anything wrong with this picture.
How about all the tea party gatherings and other rightwing protests going on. Has there been one single time they've had to endure being closed in by riot police and arrested in mass? It's almost guaranteed for any mass protests conducted by the left... Well? anything wrong with this picture?
-
If the right wingers are protesting it.... it must be important.
If the left wingers are protesting it.... it must be Wednesday....
-
that's what I thought 33, that's what I thought....
-
that's what I thought 33, that's what I thought....
I think some got arrested and got settlements.
-
I think some got arrested and got settlements.
WHAT???
Would love to see what you would have posted had some of these intentional disrupters been removed... as could have been easily the case if they were libs intent on disrupting a republican town hall...
-
WHAT???
Would love to see what you would have posted had some of these intentional disrupters been removed... as could have been easily the case if they were libs intent on disrupting a republican town hall...
Again, the people at these town halls are not intentional disrputers by and large, they are local taxpayers sick and tired of their congresspeople doing pelosi's bidding.
Additionally, these people are showing up to dicsuss the issues at hand. If I remember correctly, the code pink people would go anywhere and run in with their signs and shirts, etc.
-
333, how does being "Disruptive Early And Often" at a town hall meeting fit into your views on democracy? lol, this should be priceless... Seriously, what are your views on a group that seeks to "disrupt" the process?
Disrupt:
To throw into confusion or disorder.
To interrupt or impede the progress, movement, or procedure of.
To break or burst; rupture.
-
333, how does being "Disruptive Early And Often" at a town hall meeting fit into your views on democracy? lol, this should be priceless... Seriously, what are your views on a group that seeks to "disrupt" the process?
Disrupt:
To throw into confusion or disorder.
To interrupt or impede the progress, movement, or procedure of.
To break or burst; rupture.
Where did that happen in the video I posted?
-
Again, the people at these town halls are not intentional disrputers by and large, they are local taxpayers sick and tired of their congresspeople doing pelosi's bidding.
Additionally, these people are showing up to dicsuss the issues at hand. If I remember correctly, the code pink people would go anywhere and run in with their signs and shirts, etc.
that doesn't answer my question at all. It's avoiding it. Was there a group that directed people to disrupt these meetings? YES... Were there those that clearly took up the directive and executed it exactly as suggested? YES... And so what are your feelings on these people...???
-
that doesn't answer my question at all. It's avoiding it. Was there a group that directed people to disrupt these meetings? YES... Were there those that clearly took up the directive and executed it exactly as suggested? YES... And so what are your feelings on these people...???
No, it was advertised that these town halls were taking place and if people were not happy to go and make your voice heard. WTF is wrong with that???????
I think this was a great thing! I hope there is more of it and will participate in it myself if I can.
Look 90% of the people called about TARP and the bailouts and the bums did not listen and did whatever they wanted. Same for Cap & trade.
At some point, the congresspeople are going to have to get the message that their constituents will not be ignored.
-
Where did that happen in the video I posted?
oh please, it happened in that video and in others. What the hell do you think a person is doing by screaming out, cutting off the person talking repetitiously and doing things like angrily repeating an answered question over and over. They were disrupting. Are you blind, there have been countless town hall meetings over the years that didn't go down like this even when some were angry, this would be the first time it went down in an almost identical fashion in several different locations where disruption occurred while there was a directive to do exactly that and while someone like you expects people to think they're not connected ::) That's a lot to ask me to buy from a person who is as bias as you.
-
how about the jack asses that protest at the FUNERALS OF OUR U.S. FUKING SOLDIERS THATS RIGHT HUGO OUR SOLDIERS... they dont get arrested...thats far worse imho and those fucks wouldnt be walking away if I attended one of those funerals.
-
No, it was advertised that these town halls were taking place and if people were not happy to go and make your voice heard. WTF is wrong with that???????
I think this was a great thing! I hope there is more of it and will participate in it myself if I can.
Look 90% of the people called about TARP and the bailouts and the bums did not listen and did whatever they wanted. Same for Cap & trade.
At some point, the congresspeople are going to have to get the message that their constituents will not be ignored.
you avoided again... one more time... What do you think about a group that directs people to "DISRUPT" a town hall meeting and what do you think of the people who would show up with the intent of doing just that?
"The Almight says, 'Don't change the subject, just answer the fuckin' question.'"
-
oh please, it happened in that video and in others. What the hell do you think a person is doing by screaming out, cutting off the person talking repetitiously and doing things like angrily repeating an answered question over and over. They were disrupting. Are you blind, there have been countless town hall meetings over the years that didn't go down like this even when some were angry, this would be the first time it went down in an almost identical fashion in several different locations where disruption occurred while there was a directive to do exactly that and while someone like you expects people to think they're not connected ::) That's a lot to ask me to buy from a person who is as bias as you.
Hugo - like I keep telling you, i talk to a ton of people every day, small business owners, etc, and there is a brewing anger and resentment that you simply dont get. Its not some fake bs like Gibbs is saying but real. These are not poor people, but middle class, elderly, and even some upper middle class people who really are at their wits end seeing what is going on.
The congress is inciting people to this by ignoring them. These people who showed up probably tried writing, tried calling, etc, and it fell on deaf ears.
I would not act that way myself in a public forum, but I can see how people feel their need to express their anger in this way as they are being ifgnored by those they elected to represent them.
-
how about the jack asses that protest at the FUNERALS OF OUR U.S. FUKING SOLDIERS THATS RIGHT HUGO OUR SOLDIERS... they dont get arrested...thats far worse imho and those fucks wouldnt be walking away if I attended one of those funerals.
yea, go figure... that's an excellent point that goes with what I'm saying. You just noted the worst of the worst of protestors on the right. They don't get busted or prevented. Not the case when you get some lefties protesting. They get the riot squad treatment, they often get agent provocatuers placed from the police so the riot police can test their toys, and they've been busted several times doing exactly that. But here, the worst of the worst on the right, no problem... Even nazis usually get to have their protests often with police protection!!!! hahaha, really, WTF?
-
Hugo - like I keep telling you, i talk to a ton of people every day, small business owners, etc, and there is a brewing anger and resentment that you simply dont get. Its not some fake bs like Gibbs is saying but real. These are not poor people, but middle class, elderly, and even some upper middle class people who really are at their wits end seeing what is going on.
The congress is inciting people to this by ignoring them. These people who showed up probably tried writing, tried calling, etc, and it fell on deaf ears.
I would not act that way myself in a public forum, but I can see how people feel their need to express their anger in this way as they are being ifgnored by those they elected to represent them.
congrats, you did it yet again... read my question again and tell me how this is a direct answer to it? It's not... So I ask it again! Just answer the fucking question: What do you think about a group that directs people to "DISRUPT" a town hall meeting and what do you think of the people who would show up with the intent of doing just that?
-
congrats, you did it yet again... read my question again and tell me how this is a direct answer to it? It's not... So I ask it again! Just answer the fucking question: What do you think about a group that directs people to "DISRUPT" a town hall meeting and what do you think of the people who would show up with the intent of doing just that?
I dont agree with agitating like that. you and I have no disagreement with that.
BUT - I dont think that most of the people who showed up were under marching orders as Gidds and Durbin tried to intimate.
-
I dont agree with agitating like that. you and I have no disagreement with that.
BUT - I dont think that most of the people who showed up were under marching orders as Gidds and Durbin tried to intimate.
right, so then we're back to you asking me to believe that it's just a coincidence that they conducted themselves in the same fashion as dictated by the group in question. That they were disrupting and preventing a productive town hall out of anger and not directives to do just that... I'm sorry but BWHAHAHAHAHhahahahhahaha you're fucking kidding me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
So you don't agree with that being appropriate and in fact counter to democracy so really that is your only out, to justify that they were not really doing that.... hahaha
I close my case.
-
right, so then we're back to you asking me to believe that it's just a coincidence that they conducted themselves in the same fashion as dictated by the group in question. That they were disrupting and preventing a productive town hall out of anger and not directives to do just that... I'm sorry but BWHAHAHAHAHhahahahhahaha you're fucking kidding me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
So you don't agree with that being appropriate and in fact counter to democracy so really that is your only out, to justify that they were not really doing that.... hahaha
I close my case.
I think these people are boiling with anger and were looking to lash out at the reps regardless.
Hugo - you dont get it. Most of these people feel personally assaulted, insulted, and under threat by the madness in DC.
-
"Provides coverage for almost all Americans, even if the government needs to subsidize health care for those who can’t afford it."
63 Favor 31 Oppose 6 Unsure 7/27-28/09
"Regardless of how you usually vote, who do you think has better ideas about reforming the health care system: Barack Obama, or the Republicans in Congress?"
Barack Obama 55% Republicans in Congress 26% Both 1% Neither 7% Unsure 11% 7/24-28/09 55 26 1 7 11
"Do you think the federal government should guarantee health insurance for all Americans, or isn't this the responsibility of the federal government?"
Should Guarantee Not Responsibility Unsure
% % %
7/24-28/09 55 38 7
6/12-16/09 64 30 6
3/12-16/09 62 30 8
http://www.pollingreport.com/health.htm
CBS NEWS/NEW YORK TIMES POLL. Jan. 20-25, 2006.
"Which of the following three statements comes closest to expressing your overall view of the health care system in the United States? (1) On the whole, the health care system works pretty well and only minor changes are necessary to make it work better. OR, (2) There are some good things in our health care system, but fundamental changes are needed. OR, (3) Our health care system has so much wrong with it that we need to completely rebuild it."
8% Minor Changes - 56% Fundamental Changes - 34% Completely Rebuild - 2% Unsure
"Do you think the federal government should guarantee health insurance for all Americans, or isn't this the responsibility of the federal government?"
62% Should Guarantee - 31% Not Their Responsibility - 7% Unsure
"How concerned are you about the health care costs you are facing now or will face in the future: a lot, some, not much, or not at all?"
61% A Lot - 26% Some - 8% Not Much - 5% Not At All
This poll may be available CLICK HERE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
65% OF AMERICANS SUPPORT GOVERNMENT HEALTH INSURANCE EVEN IF TAXES INCREASE
A nationwide survey by the authoritative Pew Research Center found that 65% of Americans said they support "government health insurance even if taxes increase." Even among those identified as "social conservatives," 59% support a tax-financed government system. For other groups, the percent supporting were: "populist conservatives" (63 percent), "conservative Democrats" (73 %) and "liberals" (90 percent). Only one group, "Enterprisers" (libertarian conservatives), did not provide majority support (24 %)
Pew Research Center, "Beyond Red vs. Blue," Survey Report, 5/10/05
* * *
A Seattle ballot initiative advising the mayor and council that "health care is a right" and that "Congress should implement that right" passed with 69.8% of the vote.
Seattle City Council Advisory Ballot Measure No. 1, November 2005
* * *
Medicare is viewed favorably by 96 % of U.S. adults, according to a Harris Interactive poll of 2,242 residents. "Universal health insurance" was favored either "somewhat" or ‘strongly" by 75 % of respondents.
Wall Street Journal / Harris Poll, 10/20/05
* * *
Almost three-quarters of working Americans (72%) would like to see the federal government "guarantee health coverage for all Americans," a finding which crosses party affiliations from Democrats (88 %) to Independents (73 %) and Republicans (55 percent). Just 30 % of working Americans say they are satisfied with the health care system, down from 36% in 1994.
Peter D. Hart Research Associates, "Labor Day: 2005, The State of Working America," August 2005
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BUSINESS HEALTH CARE SURVEY from PR Newswire of February 20, 2006
SMC Business Councils is a non-profit trade association representing 3,500 small business owners in western and central Pennsylvania, which conducted an online survey last week of 150 local small business owners' current thinking about issues related to skyrocketing health care costs.
According to SMC President Cliff Shannon, "Business owners' frustrations with seemingly uncontrollable health insurance costs are mounting. Passing along more costs to their employees -- or even dropping job-based coverage altogether -- is seen by larger and larger numbers of entrepreneurs as a financial and competitive necessity. And although deep misgivings remain about the consequences and costs of a national, single-payer health care system, there is increasing agreement that this outcome may be inevitable."
Nearly two-thirds of SMC respondents said they thought that a national, single-payer system was undesirable - but nearly one-half of all surveyed agreed that a national, single payer system is (politically) inevitable.
Comments from respondents included: 1) "American business is at a huge disadvantage due to high health care costs." 2) "A universal standardized system that covers everybody would be fair and probably less expensive for each individual." 3) "A national health care system is an absolute necessity to keep this country's businesses competitive with the rest of the world."
The original story may still be available: CLICK HERE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HEALTHCARE OF GREAT CONCERN TO REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS ALIKE, from Gallup News Service, by David W. Moore
Two-thirds of Americans say they personally worry A GREAT DEAL about the availability and affordability of healthcare, according to the latest Gallup Poll, making that issue the MOST WORRISOME among a dozen included in the poll. 57, 66 and 78% of Republicans, Independents and Democrats worried "a great deal" about the availability and affordability of healthcare. For each political category that was more than were worried about the Social Security system, the availability and affordability of energy, Drug use, Crime and violence, the possibility of future terrorist attacks in the U.S., the economy, hunger and homelessness, Illegal immigration, the quality of the environment, Unemployment or Race relations.
To compare the relative importance of the issues among the partisan groups, it's important to take into account the average tendency of Democrats to express more worry than Republicans on most issues. For this purpose, a "net worry" scored has been calculated by subtracting the average percentage who worry in each group from the percentage in that group who worry about each specific issue. For example, 30% of Democrats say they are worried a great deal about race relations, compared with 18% of Republicans, suggesting a big difference (of 12 points) between the two groups. But as it turns out, Democrats on average are worried more than Republicans by 13 points -- 52% vs. 39%, respectively, suggesting that race relations is relatively no more worrisome to Democrats than Republicans. The "net worry" score takes this adjustment into account.
The difference in worry between Republicans and Democrats was greater with respect to the economy, the quality of the environment, hunger and homelessness or unemployment than it was for the health care issue.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PUBLIC OPINION ON UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE
Summaries from several polls by Ruy Teixeira
The public wants the government to play a leading role in providing health care for all. For example, in an October, 2003 Washington Post/ABC poll, by almost a two-to-one margin, Americans said that they preferred a universal system that would provide coverage to everyone under a government program, as opposed to the current employer-based system. Similarly, in Kaiser polls from 1992 to 2000, a large majority of the public agreed that the federal government should guarantee medical care for people who don’t have health insurance. In a slightly different question asked more recently by Kaiser in June 2003, more than seven in ten adults agreed that the government should guarantee health insurance for all citizens, even if it means repealing most of the tax cuts passed under President George W. Bush, while less than one-quarter disagreed with this statement. Finally, the last time Gallup asked whether the federal government should make sure all Americans have health coverage, they agreed that was a federal government responsibility by 62-35 (November, 2002).
American overwhelmingly agree that access to health care should be a right. In 2000 just as in 1993, eight in ten agreed that health care should be provided equally to everyone, and over half agreed strongly or completely. In addition, in 2004, 76% agreed strongly or somewhat that access health care should be a right.
The public says it is willing to pay more in taxes to provide every American with health care coverage. In August, 2003, Pew found Americans favoring, by 67-26, the US government guaranteeing "health insurance for all citizens", even if that meant repealing most of "recent tax cuts". And the majority was scarcely diminished (67-29) by referring not to repealing tax cuts but more directly to "raising taxes". Similarly, Greenberg Quinlan Rosner/Public Opinion Strategies (GQR/POS) found, in January, 2004, a 69-28 majority saying they would be willing to pay more per year in federal taxes to assure every American citizen received health care coverage.
Willingness to pay more in taxes for universal coverage is a "soft commitment". For example, when phrased as whether the respondent would be willing to pay more either in higher insurance premiums or higher taxes--in order to increase the number of insured Americans, 51 % say they would not, compared to 45 % who say they would. And, in the GQR/POS survey, when asked how much they’d be willing to pay in additional taxes to assure universal coverage for American citizens, 40% would not name a dollar figure at all and 16 % named a figure under $100. [EINO: The question would more appropriately be worded "How many of you are willing to pay additional premium and taxes so that the egregious salaries and redundant administration and stockholder profit could continue to be extracted out of the health care system?"]
The public is also not completely clear on whether the federal government actually has to lead the way on universal coverage. When asked specifically about responsibility for covering the uninsured, four in ten people (43 percent) do say that the federal government should have the most responsibility for providing health insurance coverage to the uninsured, but two in ten (20 percent) say that state governments should be most responsible, and about one in ten (11 percent) say that employers should be most responsible. Another two in ten (18 percent) think that the responsibility belongs to none of these or to another group. (June 2003 Kaiser poll)
For Mr. Teixera's original summary CLICK HERE
For the Century Foundation Polls CLICK HERE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PUBLIC OPINION OF CONSUMER-DRIVEN PLANS
Which one of the following do you think is the MOST important reason to have health insurance?
71% - To protect against high medical bills
25% - To pay for everyday health care expenses
03% - Don't know
Catastrophic Coverage: Opinions
Suppose you heard about a type of insurance plan that only starts paying once you (and your family) have paid ($2,000/$5,000) of medical expenses out of your pocket. After that, it would cover medical expenses like traditional insurance, requiring you to pay some co-payments each time you use services. The monthly premium for the plan would be less than half of what you would pay for a typical comprehensive health insurance policy.
Would you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion about this type of health plan?
56% - Very unfavorable
21% - Somewhat unfavorable
13% - Somewhat favorable
05% - Very favorable
Would you feel well protected, or would you feel vulnerable to high medical bills with this type of health plan?
79% - Vulnerable
16% - Well protected
05% - Don't know
Consumer-Driven Plans: Opinions
(Asked of those with employer-sponsored health insurance) There is a new type of health plan that some employers are considering. It works like this: your employer pays for a health plan that only starts to pay after you have spent ($2,000/$4,000) in medical expenses. They also put ($1,000/$2,000) in an account you can use for medical costs. If your medical expenses are more than ($1,000/$2,000), you have to pay with your own money until you hit the ($2,000/$4,000) limit.
Would you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion about this type of health plan?
52% - Very unfavorable
21% - Somewhat unfavorable
16% - Somewhat favorable
06% - Very favorable
05% - Don't know
Would you feel well protected, or would you feel vulnerable to high medical bills with this type of health plan?
78% - Vulnerable
18% - Well protected
05% - Don't know
And by political party and ideology - unfavorable opinion of these consumer-driven plans:
67% of Republicans
74% of Independents
78% of Democrats
68% of Conservatives
70% of Moderates
79% of Liberals
For Poll at official Kaiser site CLICK HERE
BEYOND RED VS. BLUE
from The Pew Research Center Survey Report of May 10, 2005
Solid majorities of every group, with the sole exception of Enterprisers, favor a government guarantee of health insurance for all Americans, even if it means raising taxes. Across the electorate, support for guaranteed health insurance ranges from 55% among Upbeats and 59% among Social Conservatives to 90% among Liberals. By contrast, Enterprisers strongly oppose guaranteed health insurance for all, if it means higher taxes (76% oppose, 23% favor).
Percent favoring government health insurance for all, even if taxes increase:
65% of the total
23% of enterprisers
59% of social conservatives
63% of pro-government conservatives
55% of upbeats
64% of disaffecteds
73% of conservative Democrats
65% of disadvantaged Democrats
90% of liberals
For Full Poll Report CLICK HERE
POLL FINDS WOMEN MORE LIKELY TO WORRY ABOUT HEALTH CARE COSTS
Women are more likely than men to say that they are very worried about being able to afford health care.
Four in 10 (40%) adult women in the U.S. say that they are "very worried" about not being able to afford the health care services they need, compared with fewer than three in 10 (27%) men. Women are also more likely than men to say they are "very worried" about being able to afford prescription drugs (40% of women versus 29% of men) and having to pay more for health care or insurance (49% of women versus 41% of men). The gender gap may be due, in part, to the facts that women are often the primary health care decision-makers in the home, that they generally have more significant health care needs than men, and that they are disproportionately lower income.
For complete poll report CLICK HERE
PUBLIC OPINION ON UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE
Summaries from several polls by Ruy Teixeira
The public wants the government to play a leading role in providing health care for all. For example, in an October, 2003 Washington Post/ABC poll, by almost a two-to-one margin, Americans said that they preferred a universal system that would provide coverage to everyone under a government program, as opposed to the current employer-based system. Similarly, in Kaiser polls from 1992 to 2000, a large majority of the public agreed that the federal government should guarantee medical care for people who don’t have health insurance. In a slightly different question asked more recently by Kaiser in June 2003, more than seven in ten adults agreed that the government should guarantee health insurance for all citizens, even if it means repealing most of the tax cuts passed under President George W. Bush, while less than one-quarter disagreed with this statement. Finally, the last time Gallup asked whether the federal government should make sure all Americans have health coverage, they agreed that was a federal government responsibility by 62-35 (November, 2002).
American overwhelmingly agree that access to health care should be a right. In 2000 just as in 1993, eight in ten agreed that health care should be provided equally to everyone, and over half agreed strongly or completely. In addition, in 2004, 76% agreed strongly or somewhat that access health care should be a right.
The public says it is willing to pay more in taxes to provide every American with health care coverage. In August, 2003, Pew found Americans favoring, by 67-26, the US government guaranteeing "health insurance for all citizens", even if that meant repealing most of "recent tax cuts". And the majority was scarcely diminished (67-29) by referring not to repealing tax cuts but more directly to "raising taxes". Similarly, Greenberg Quinlan Rosner/Public Opinion Strategies (GQR/POS) found, in January, 2004, a 69-28 majority saying they would be willing to pay more per year in federal taxes to assure every American citizen received health care coverage.
Willingness to pay more in taxes for universal coverage is a "soft commitment". For example, when phrased as whether the respondent would be willing to pay more either in higher insurance premiums or higher taxes--in order to increase the number of insured Americans, 51 % say they would not, compared to 45 % who say they would. And, in the GQR/POS survey, when asked how much they’d be willing to pay in additional taxes to assure universal coverage for American citizens, 40% would not name a dollar figure at all and 16 % named a figure under $100. [EINO: The question would more appropriately be worded "How many of you are willing to pay additional premium and taxes so that the egregious salaries and redundant administration and stockholder profit could continue to be extracted out of the health care system?"]
The public is also not completely clear on whether the federal government actually has to lead the way on universal coverage. When asked specifically about responsibility for covering the uninsured, four in ten people (43 percent) do say that the federal government should have the most responsibility for providing health insurance coverage to the uninsured, but two in ten (20 percent) say that state governments should be most responsible, and about one in ten (11 percent) say that employers should be most responsible. Another two in ten (18 percent) think that the responsibility belongs to none of these or to another group. (June 2003 Kaiser poll)
For Mr. Teixera's original summary CLICK HEREhttp://www.emergingdemocraticmajorityweblog.com/donkeyrising/archives/001291.php
For the Century Foundation Polls CLICK HEREhttp://www.tcf.org/list.asp?type=NC&pubid=1093 (Century Foundation Sept 7, 2005)
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/03/01/opinion/polls/main2528357.shtml
By almost a 2-1 margin in this poll, 62 percent to 32 percent, Americans said they preferred a universal system that would provide coverage to everyone under a government program, as opposed to the current employer-based system.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/1019-10.htm
http://www.everybodyinnobodyout.org/DOCS/Polls.htm#GovtGuar
-
So 3333, clearly through almost all the polls over the last 8 years a majority of people think there should be universal healthcare even if the government has to jump in to make it happen. A majority even if it means raising taxes!
Well 3333, what's your argument, these people matter more because they can go in and disrupt town hall meetings? You said they're not being represented, that they're being ignored! So really, when do we ignore the majority to appease the minority? Since when 3333? Well??
I'll bring up one more thing. I seem to remember the Bush admin's cure to any angry voters was to have everyone coming into the town hall sign loyalty oaths.
– In April 2005, Bush’s security detail threw out three people from an event in Colorado, citing a bumper sticker on their care that read “No More Blood For Oil.” White House spokesman Trent Duffy said that if there’s any evidence people might “disrupt the president,” they “have the right to exclude those people from those events.”
– In early 2005, North Dakota residents were refused entry to a Bush event after their names appeared on a “blacklist” of people banned from the event.
– In March 2005, people seeking tickets to a Social Security event were quizzed about their support of Bush and his Social Security plan ahead of time.
Now imagine if these angry republicans had to sign a loyalty oath to get in or found they were on a blacklist and couldn't enter?
-
You know what Hugo - 50% dont even pay taxes so of course they will favor this. We have become a nation of welfare receipients.
When this country falls apart and becomes a marxist state like Cuba or the old USSR, I will not be suprised because I know the writing is on the wall.
Everyone wants free stuff and expects someone else to pay.
No wonder we have the fool in the WH.
Here is the other thing, Hugo - I am not paying for shit, and netiher are my small business clients. We have already told our accountants to structure our finances and businesses so we dont pay a dime more in taxes to pay for this garbage. Obama can GFH ten times over for all I care. He wants to screw me, I am going to screw him right back, and all the freeloading bums who want more of my income.
I dont give a shit anymore and will not work 70 hours a week or more to pay for some lazy freeloading obese slob who does not want to work for anything. I'm done.
Millions and millions out there like me are doing the same thing.
-
You know what Hugo - 50% dont even pay taxes so of course they will favor this. We have become a nation of welfare receipients.
When this country falls apart and becomes a marxist state like Cuba or the old USSR, I will not be suprised because I know the writing is on the wall.
Everyone wants free stuff and expects someone else to pay.
No wonder we have the fool in the WH.
Here is the other thing, Hugo - I am not paying for shit, and netiher are my small business clients. We have already told our accountants to structure our finances and businesses so we dont pay a dime more in taxes to pay for this garbage. Obama can GFH ten times over for all I care. He wants to screw me, I am going to screw him right back, and all the freeloading bums who want more of my income.
I dont give a shit anymore and will not work 70 hours a week or more to pay for some lazy freeloading obese slob who does not want to work for anything. I'm done.
Millions and millions out there like me are doing the same thing.
ohhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!! PRICELESS!!!! We get to the heart of your extremist views. SO FOR YOU, FOR A PERSON'S VOTE IN MATTERS TO MATTER THEY MUST PAY TAXES. SO ACCORDING TO YOU, A PERSON WORKING FULL TIME MIN WAGE WHO SEES THEIR TAXES REFUNDED BY YEARS END DOESN'T HAVE A SAY. WOW, ME THINKS THAT INCLUDES A LOT OF SERVICE MEN TOO... So someone loses their job and what? Their vote no longer is valid to you until they get a job and a job where they have a tax loss...
Wow, I had you pegged for extremist but this is more than I had guessed.
true colors... true colors....
-
Include me with millions of others who are not going to be raped by lazy bums voting themselves a pay increase at my expense.
-
expossed.... ;)
would have been nice if you were able to answer 1/3 of my questions but... nope :)
-
Include me with millions of others who are not going to be raped by lazy bums voting themselves a pay increase at my expense.
well, taking a page out of the psycho rightwing playbook. Since you don't believe in democracy. Since you want to exclude yourself from the process. Since you think your minority matters more. You clearly do not love America. You clearly see such a major fault in America that you won't go along with what the majority wants. You think they don't matter. You think you're more important than majority opinion of the American People! Love it or leave it bro... Seeya... Maybe you can find a time machine and travel back to some fascist regime that better suits you. That is a rightwing thing to say, maybe you should follow the advice buddy :D
-
well, taking a page our of the psycho rightwing playbook. Since you don't believe in democracy. Since you want to exclude yourself from the process. Since you think your minority matters more. You clearly do not love America. You clearly see such a major fault in America that you won't go along with what the majority wants. You think they don't matter. You think you're more important than majority opinion of the American People! Love it or leave it bro... Seeya... Maybe you can find a time machine and travel back to some fascist regime that better suits you. That is a rightwing thing to say, maybe you should follow the advice buddy :D
No, I will pay my taxes, but any tax increase to fund someone elses healthcare will not be paid. I will either spend more on office expenses to get myself under the cap or adjust other finances to avoid this, as will millions of other Subchapter S companies like myself.
I am not going to be a pinata for some lazy slob who wants to vote thesmevles more benefits from my income.
Sorry, tough shit.
-
"Provides coverage for almost all Americans, even if the government needs to subsidize health care for those who can’t afford it."
63 Favor 31 Oppose 6 Unsure 7/27-28/09
"Regardless of how you usually vote, who do you think has better ideas about reforming the health care system: Barack Obama, or the Republicans in Congress?"
Barack Obama 55% Republicans in Congress 26% Both 1% Neither 7% Unsure 11% 7/24-28/09 55 26 1 7 11
"Do you think the federal government should guarantee health insurance for all Americans, or isn't this the responsibility of the federal government?"
Should Guarantee Not Responsibility Unsure
% % %
7/24-28/09 55 38 7
6/12-16/09 64 30 6
3/12-16/09 62 30 8
http://www.pollingreport.com/health.htm
CBS NEWS/NEW YORK TIMES POLL. Jan. 20-25, 2006.
"Which of the following three statements comes closest to expressing your overall view of the health care system in the United States? (1) On the whole, the health care system works pretty well and only minor changes are necessary to make it work better. OR, (2) There are some good things in our health care system, but fundamental changes are needed. OR, (3) Our health care system has so much wrong with it that we need to completely rebuild it."
8% Minor Changes - 56% Fundamental Changes - 34% Completely Rebuild - 2% Unsure
"Do you think the federal government should guarantee health insurance for all Americans, or isn't this the responsibility of the federal government?"
62% Should Guarantee - 31% Not Their Responsibility - 7% Unsure
"How concerned are you about the health care costs you are facing now or will face in the future: a lot, some, not much, or not at all?"
61% A Lot - 26% Some - 8% Not Much - 5% Not At All
This poll may be available CLICK HERE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
65% OF AMERICANS SUPPORT GOVERNMENT HEALTH INSURANCE EVEN IF TAXES INCREASE
A nationwide survey by the authoritative Pew Research Center found that 65% of Americans said they support "government health insurance even if taxes increase." Even among those identified as "social conservatives," 59% support a tax-financed government system. For other groups, the percent supporting were: "populist conservatives" (63 percent), "conservative Democrats" (73 %) and "liberals" (90 percent). Only one group, "Enterprisers" (libertarian conservatives), did not provide majority support (24 %)
Pew Research Center, "Beyond Red vs. Blue," Survey Report, 5/10/05
* * *
A Seattle ballot initiative advising the mayor and council that "health care is a right" and that "Congress should implement that right" passed with 69.8% of the vote.
Seattle City Council Advisory Ballot Measure No. 1, November 2005
* * *
Medicare is viewed favorably by 96 % of U.S. adults, according to a Harris Interactive poll of 2,242 residents. "Universal health insurance" was favored either "somewhat" or ‘strongly" by 75 % of respondents.
Wall Street Journal / Harris Poll, 10/20/05
* * *
Almost three-quarters of working Americans (72%) would like to see the federal government "guarantee health coverage for all Americans," a finding which crosses party affiliations from Democrats (88 %) to Independents (73 %) and Republicans (55 percent). Just 30 % of working Americans say they are satisfied with the health care system, down from 36% in 1994.
Peter D. Hart Research Associates, "Labor Day: 2005, The State of Working America," August 2005
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BUSINESS HEALTH CARE SURVEY from PR Newswire of February 20, 2006
SMC Business Councils is a non-profit trade association representing 3,500 small business owners in western and central Pennsylvania, which conducted an online survey last week of 150 local small business owners' current thinking about issues related to skyrocketing health care costs.
According to SMC President Cliff Shannon, "Business owners' frustrations with seemingly uncontrollable health insurance costs are mounting. Passing along more costs to their employees -- or even dropping job-based coverage altogether -- is seen by larger and larger numbers of entrepreneurs as a financial and competitive necessity. And although deep misgivings remain about the consequences and costs of a national, single-payer health care system, there is increasing agreement that this outcome may be inevitable."
Nearly two-thirds of SMC respondents said they thought that a national, single-payer system was undesirable - but nearly one-half of all surveyed agreed that a national, single payer system is (politically) inevitable.
Comments from respondents included: 1) "American business is at a huge disadvantage due to high health care costs." 2) "A universal standardized system that covers everybody would be fair and probably less expensive for each individual." 3) "A national health care system is an absolute necessity to keep this country's businesses competitive with the rest of the world."
The original story may still be available: CLICK HERE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HEALTHCARE OF GREAT CONCERN TO REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS ALIKE, from Gallup News Service, by David W. Moore
Two-thirds of Americans say they personally worry A GREAT DEAL about the availability and affordability of healthcare, according to the latest Gallup Poll, making that issue the MOST WORRISOME among a dozen included in the poll. 57, 66 and 78% of Republicans, Independents and Democrats worried "a great deal" about the availability and affordability of healthcare. For each political category that was more than were worried about the Social Security system, the availability and affordability of energy, Drug use, Crime and violence, the possibility of future terrorist attacks in the U.S., the economy, hunger and homelessness, Illegal immigration, the quality of the environment, Unemployment or Race relations.
To compare the relative importance of the issues among the partisan groups, it's important to take into account the average tendency of Democrats to express more worry than Republicans on most issues. For this purpose, a "net worry" scored has been calculated by subtracting the average percentage who worry in each group from the percentage in that group who worry about each specific issue. For example, 30% of Democrats say they are worried a great deal about race relations, compared with 18% of Republicans, suggesting a big difference (of 12 points) between the two groups. But as it turns out, Democrats on average are worried more than Republicans by 13 points -- 52% vs. 39%, respectively, suggesting that race relations is relatively no more worrisome to Democrats than Republicans. The "net worry" score takes this adjustment into account.
The difference in worry between Republicans and Democrats was greater with respect to the economy, the quality of the environment, hunger and homelessness or unemployment than it was for the health care issue.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PUBLIC OPINION ON UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE
Summaries from several polls by Ruy Teixeira
The public wants the government to play a leading role in providing health care for all. For example, in an October, 2003 Washington Post/ABC poll, by almost a two-to-one margin, Americans said that they preferred a universal system that would provide coverage to everyone under a government program, as opposed to the current employer-based system. Similarly, in Kaiser polls from 1992 to 2000, a large majority of the public agreed that the federal government should guarantee medical care for people who don’t have health insurance. In a slightly different question asked more recently by Kaiser in June 2003, more than seven in ten adults agreed that the government should guarantee health insurance for all citizens, even if it means repealing most of the tax cuts passed under President George W. Bush, while less than one-quarter disagreed with this statement. Finally, the last time Gallup asked whether the federal government should make sure all Americans have health coverage, they agreed that was a federal government responsibility by 62-35 (November, 2002).
American overwhelmingly agree that access to health care should be a right. In 2000 just as in 1993, eight in ten agreed that health care should be provided equally to everyone, and over half agreed strongly or completely. In addition, in 2004, 76% agreed strongly or somewhat that access health care should be a right.
The public says it is willing to pay more in taxes to provide every American with health care coverage. In August, 2003, Pew found Americans favoring, by 67-26, the US government guaranteeing "health insurance for all citizens", even if that meant repealing most of "recent tax cuts". And the majority was scarcely diminished (67-29) by referring not to repealing tax cuts but more directly to "raising taxes". Similarly, Greenberg Quinlan Rosner/Public Opinion Strategies (GQR/POS) found, in January, 2004, a 69-28 majority saying they would be willing to pay more per year in federal taxes to assure every American citizen received health care coverage.
Willingness to pay more in taxes for universal coverage is a "soft commitment". For example, when phrased as whether the respondent would be willing to pay more either in higher insurance premiums or higher taxes--in order to increase the number of insured Americans, 51 % say they would not, compared to 45 % who say they would. And, in the GQR/POS survey, when asked how much they’d be willing to pay in additional taxes to assure universal coverage for American citizens, 40% would not name a dollar figure at all and 16 % named a figure under $100. [EINO: The question would more appropriately be worded "How many of you are willing to pay additional premium and taxes so that the egregious salaries and redundant administration and stockholder profit could continue to be extracted out of the health care system?"]
The public is also not completely clear on whether the federal government actually has to lead the way on universal coverage. When asked specifically about responsibility for covering the uninsured, four in ten people (43 percent) do say that the federal government should have the most responsibility for providing health insurance coverage to the uninsured, but two in ten (20 percent) say that state governments should be most responsible, and about one in ten (11 percent) say that employers should be most responsible. Another two in ten (18 percent) think that the responsibility belongs to none of these or to another group. (June 2003 Kaiser poll)
For Mr. Teixera's original summary CLICK HERE
For the Century Foundation Polls CLICK HERE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PUBLIC OPINION OF CONSUMER-DRIVEN PLANS
Which one of the following do you think is the MOST important reason to have health insurance?
71% - To protect against high medical bills
25% - To pay for everyday health care expenses
03% - Don't know
Catastrophic Coverage: Opinions
Suppose you heard about a type of insurance plan that only starts paying once you (and your family) have paid ($2,000/$5,000) of medical expenses out of your pocket. After that, it would cover medical expenses like traditional insurance, requiring you to pay some co-payments each time you use services. The monthly premium for the plan would be less than half of what you would pay for a typical comprehensive health insurance policy.
Would you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion about this type of health plan?
56% - Very unfavorable
21% - Somewhat unfavorable
13% - Somewhat favorable
05% - Very favorable
Would you feel well protected, or would you feel vulnerable to high medical bills with this type of health plan?
79% - Vulnerable
16% - Well protected
05% - Don't know
Consumer-Driven Plans: Opinions
(Asked of those with employer-sponsored health insurance) There is a new type of health plan that some employers are considering. It works like this: your employer pays for a health plan that only starts to pay after you have spent ($2,000/$4,000) in medical expenses. They also put ($1,000/$2,000) in an account you can use for medical costs. If your medical expenses are more than ($1,000/$2,000), you have to pay with your own money until you hit the ($2,000/$4,000) limit.
Would you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion about this type of health plan?
52% - Very unfavorable
21% - Somewhat unfavorable
16% - Somewhat favorable
06% - Very favorable
05% - Don't know
Would you feel well protected, or would you feel vulnerable to high medical bills with this type of health plan?
78% - Vulnerable
18% - Well protected
05% - Don't know
And by political party and ideology - unfavorable opinion of these consumer-driven plans:
67% of Republicans
74% of Independents
78% of Democrats
68% of Conservatives
70% of Moderates
79% of Liberals
For Poll at official Kaiser site CLICK HERE
BEYOND RED VS. BLUE
from The Pew Research Center Survey Report of May 10, 2005
Solid majorities of every group, with the sole exception of Enterprisers, favor a government guarantee of health insurance for all Americans, even if it means raising taxes. Across the electorate, support for guaranteed health insurance ranges from 55% among Upbeats and 59% among Social Conservatives to 90% among Liberals. By contrast, Enterprisers strongly oppose guaranteed health insurance for all, if it means higher taxes (76% oppose, 23% favor).
Percent favoring government health insurance for all, even if taxes increase:
65% of the total
23% of enterprisers
59% of social conservatives
63% of pro-government conservatives
55% of upbeats
64% of disaffecteds
73% of conservative Democrats
65% of disadvantaged Democrats
90% of liberals
For Full Poll Report CLICK HERE
POLL FINDS WOMEN MORE LIKELY TO WORRY ABOUT HEALTH CARE COSTS
Women are more likely than men to say that they are very worried about being able to afford health care.
Four in 10 (40%) adult women in the U.S. say that they are "very worried" about not being able to afford the health care services they need, compared with fewer than three in 10 (27%) men. Women are also more likely than men to say they are "very worried" about being able to afford prescription drugs (40% of women versus 29% of men) and having to pay more for health care or insurance (49% of women versus 41% of men). The gender gap may be due, in part, to the facts that women are often the primary health care decision-makers in the home, that they generally have more significant health care needs than men, and that they are disproportionately lower income.
For complete poll report CLICK HERE
PUBLIC OPINION ON UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE
Summaries from several polls by Ruy Teixeira
The public wants the government to play a leading role in providing health care for all. For example, in an October, 2003 Washington Post/ABC poll, by almost a two-to-one margin, Americans said that they preferred a universal system that would provide coverage to everyone under a government program, as opposed to the current employer-based system. Similarly, in Kaiser polls from 1992 to 2000, a large majority of the public agreed that the federal government should guarantee medical care for people who don’t have health insurance. In a slightly different question asked more recently by Kaiser in June 2003, more than seven in ten adults agreed that the government should guarantee health insurance for all citizens, even if it means repealing most of the tax cuts passed under President George W. Bush, while less than one-quarter disagreed with this statement. Finally, the last time Gallup asked whether the federal government should make sure all Americans have health coverage, they agreed that was a federal government responsibility by 62-35 (November, 2002).
American overwhelmingly agree that access to health care should be a right. In 2000 just as in 1993, eight in ten agreed that health care should be provided equally to everyone, and over half agreed strongly or completely. In addition, in 2004, 76% agreed strongly or somewhat that access health care should be a right.
The public says it is willing to pay more in taxes to provide every American with health care coverage. In August, 2003, Pew found Americans favoring, by 67-26, the US government guaranteeing "health insurance for all citizens", even if that meant repealing most of "recent tax cuts". And the majority was scarcely diminished (67-29) by referring not to repealing tax cuts but more directly to "raising taxes". Similarly, Greenberg Quinlan Rosner/Public Opinion Strategies (GQR/POS) found, in January, 2004, a 69-28 majority saying they would be willing to pay more per year in federal taxes to assure every American citizen received health care coverage.
Willingness to pay more in taxes for universal coverage is a "soft commitment". For example, when phrased as whether the respondent would be willing to pay more either in higher insurance premiums or higher taxes--in order to increase the number of insured Americans, 51 % say they would not, compared to 45 % who say they would. And, in the GQR/POS survey, when asked how much they’d be willing to pay in additional taxes to assure universal coverage for American citizens, 40% would not name a dollar figure at all and 16 % named a figure under $100. [EINO: The question would more appropriately be worded "How many of you are willing to pay additional premium and taxes so that the egregious salaries and redundant administration and stockholder profit could continue to be extracted out of the health care system?"]
The public is also not completely clear on whether the federal government actually has to lead the way on universal coverage. When asked specifically about responsibility for covering the uninsured, four in ten people (43 percent) do say that the federal government should have the most responsibility for providing health insurance coverage to the uninsured, but two in ten (20 percent) say that state governments should be most responsible, and about one in ten (11 percent) say that employers should be most responsible. Another two in ten (18 percent) think that the responsibility belongs to none of these or to another group. (June 2003 Kaiser poll)
For Mr. Teixera's original summary CLICK HEREhttp://www.emergingdemocraticmajorityweblog.com/donkeyrising/archives/001291.php
For the Century Foundation Polls CLICK HEREhttp://www.tcf.org/list.asp?type=NC&pubid=1093 (Century Foundation Sept 7, 2005)
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/03/01/opinion/polls/main2528357.shtml
By almost a 2-1 margin in this poll, 62 percent to 32 percent, Americans said they preferred a universal system that would provide coverage to everyone under a government program, as opposed to the current employer-based system.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/1019-10.htm
http://www.everybodyinnobodyout.org/DOCS/Polls.htm#GovtGuar
Hugo..you mean to tell me you actually sat down and typed all this stuff? Just to prove a point?..you are HARDCORE man!!! :)
-
It was a cut and paste job.
As far as me being owned - thats funny considering other than maybe one story I got wrong on the SS matter, no one has proved me factually wrong on almost anything.
-
No, I will pay my taxes, but any tax increase to fund someone elses healthcare will not be paid. I will either spend more on office expenses to get myself under the cap or adjust other finances to avoid this, as will millions of other Subchapter S companies like myself.
I am not going to be a pinata for some lazy slob who wants to vote thesmevles more benefits from my income.
Sorry, tough shit.
So that majority that wants universal healthcare are all lazy slobs?... wow, you really do hate Americans. Actually do you even consider them Americans since you don't think a large percentage of their voices are even valid? You said it! Shit, we're getting to the heart of some epic hatred there 3333... true colors true colors! I called it right with you.
-
Hugo..you mean to tell me you actually sat down and typed all this stuff? Just to prove a point?..you are HARDCORE man!!! :)
no, but it took a few to find the polls which make the point. The point wouldn't have been much without backing it up.
-
Im not getting involved in this debate because I am too lazy to read everything posted above.
But Hugo, its common sense; If you pay taxes and someone else doesn't and the government decided to bend you over and and take a shit load more of your income to pay for those who don't pay anything ( oh and by the way, the have nots out number the haves) wouldn't you object?
Also, do you really find it astounding that those who dont pay any taxes support this kind of legislation? Gee- I think I'll oppose government programs that give me free money ::)
The fact that young people support this nonsense is also not difficult to fathom in light of the fact that most pay no taxes, have no concept of what it is to work for a living and are educated in American Universities that preach this socialist propaganda bs.
Also Hugo, no offense- but are these outfits that you yanked these statistics from unbiased?
-
It was a cut and paste job.
As far as me being owned - thats funny considering other than maybe one story I got wrong on the SS matter, no one has proved me factually wrong on almost anything.
oh I think what you've been exposed on here is enough. The things you've said, probably without even thinking it over, showing your true colors, the answers you have refused to address and just ignored show a little self ownage there bro. deny it all you want, it won't change the fact.
-
So that majority that wants universal healthcare are all lazy slobs?... wow, you really do hate Americans. Actually do you even consider them Americans since you don't think a large percentage of their voices are even valid? You said it! Shit, we're getting to the heart of some epic hatred there 3333... true colors true colors! I called it right with you.
It is not healthy for our country when 50% of the voting population pay no taxes at all and can vote themselves a pay increase from a smaller and smaller and smaller percentage of people who do pay taxes. Those people are always going to vote for the guy who promises more free shit at the expense of the other 49%.
At some point the golden goose is killed and whole society collapses. Do you realize that the top 1% pay 40% of all income taxes?
And, yes, I do despise all able bodied people on welfare.
-
Im not getting involved in this debate because I am too lazy to read everything posted above.
But Hugo, its common sense; If you pay taxes and someone else doesn't and the government decided to bend you over and and take a shit load more of your income to pay for those who don't pay anything ( oh and by the way, the have nots out number the haves) wouldn't you object?
Also, do you really find it astounding that those who dont pay any taxes support this kind of legislation? Gee- I think I'll oppose government programs that give me free money ::)
The fact that young people support this nonsense is also not difficult to fathom in light of the fact that most pay no taxes, have no concept of what it is to work for a living and are educated in American Universities that preach this socialist propaganda bs.
Also Hugo, no offense- but are these outfits that you yanked these statistics from unbiased?
OK, so you're another who thinks that the lower classes don't have a valid say. great, two of you on this board, can't say I'm shocked, I bet it's even more!
These outfits??? Look at the sources yourself, I posted links. Those are all the major polls taken over the last several years. Not some shit I yanked off of Michael Moore's web poll or something ::) Look, when you have poll after poll year after year that all show a majority for universal healthcare, you're going to have a real problem saying that isn't valid.
-
Do you realize that the top 1% pay 40% of all income taxes?
That number should be way higher. :)
-
Interesting discussion guys, keep it going.
Maybe post a poll:
If you don't pay taxes should you be able to vote?
-
OK, so you're another who thinks that the lower classes don't have a valid say. great, two of you on this board, can't say I'm shocked, I bet it's even more!
These outfits??? Look at the sources yourself, I posted links. Those are all the major polls taken over the last several years. Not some shit I yanked off of Michael Moore's web poll or something ::) Look, when you have poll after poll year after year that all show a majority for universal healthcare, you're going to have a real problem saying that isn't valid.
You are amazing - you cant see the problem, with allowing people to vote themselves a pay increase?
-
Lower classes have a valid say- But not when it comes to getting free hand outs from everyone else who isn't indigent. This isn't a fucking soup kitchen. Lower classes should get assistance from the government and should recieve tax breaks or other cash incentives such as charitable donations. What they should not recieve is more of my income tax when they dont pay any income tax in the first place.
Peanlizing the successful ( or in actuality, those who aren't poor) is a slippery slope to nowhere.
Also- "Major Polls taken over several years." :-\ A cursory glance shows that the most recent poll you posted was from 06'.
Not exactly a ringing endorsement on impartiality. I am sure I can rustle up some of my own "major polls taken over several years" which refute everything you posted.
Also, the demographics are certainly skewed in these polls and there is no cognizant definition of what Universal Healthcare means-- I dont think these major polls taken over several years correctly represent Obamacare as it stands today. What counts are the polls taken right now based on Obama's healthcare plan, not some nameless, faceless idea of "Universal Care."
-
Interesting discussion guys, keep it going.
Maybe post a poll:
If you don't pay taxes should you be able to vote?
haha, it sounds so ludicrous but they actually think that. They said it... Lose your job, lose your vote... wow!!! It took me almost a year when I got out of the service to get a good job. economy sucked bigtime then too. I guess I wouldn't have mattered for that year....
-
It seems like thats what they are saying.
Are you saying that 3333 and George?
-
No, and I never posted anything resembling that anywhere.
Prove me wrong if you don't believe me.
This entire argument took a wrong turn somewhere. If tommorow a nationwide vote was held and someone was elected that decided everyone earning less than 100,000$ should pay no taxes and everyone (every household) making above 100k should have 50% of their income taxed, would that be ok with you also? Or is my disagreement with something that absurd indicative of my hostility toward those who dont pay taxes?
-
Lower classes have a valid say- But not when it comes to getting free hand outs from everyone else who isn't indigent. This isn't a fucking soup kitchen. Lower classes should get assistance from the government and should recieve tax breaks or other cash incentives such as charitable donations. What they should not recieve is more of my income tax when they dont pay any income tax in the first place.
Peanlizing the successful ( or in actuality, those who aren't poor) is a slippery slope to nowhere.
Also- "Major Polls taken over several years." :-\
Not exactly a ringing endorsement on impartiality. I am sure I can rustle up some of my own "major polls taken over several years" which refute everything you posted.
Also, the demographics are certainly skewed in these polls and there is no cognizant definition of what Universal Healthcare means-- I dont think these major polls taken over several years correctly represent Obamacare as it stands today. What counts are the polls taken right now based on Obama's healthcare plan, not some nameless, faceless idea of "Universal Care."
what exactly do you want to go by? Hannity's phone in polls? What the hell do you mean it's not a ringing endorsement? It's a thundering fucking endorsement. Are you saying all the major polls that show this over years and years are all bias liberal? hahahaha... do you have a CT for this one? I'm getting a kick out of the massive increase in rightwing CTr's since the election.
Most of these polls ask questions that clearly illustrate what it will mean to pass. So nice try, you must not have looked them over.
-
Hugo take a chill pill bro- your off the reservation with this one. These polls you posted are not recent, most are not unbiased and most have nothing to do with Obama Care as presented today.
There is no conspiracy theory- Put on the news and take a look around you. Support for universal healthcare as presented by Obama and the democrats right now its a 50/50 proposition at best. Nothing else going on but reality-- Please come back to us Hugo. :-\
-
No, and I never posted anything resembling that anywhere.
Prove me wrong if you don't believe me.
This entire argument took a wrong turn somewhere. If tommorow a nationwide vote was held and someone was elected that decided everyone earning less than 100,000$ should pay no taxes and everyone (every household) making above 100k should have 50% of their income taxed, would that be ok with you also? Or is my disagreement with something that absurd indicative of my hostility toward those who dont pay taxes?
yes you did, 333 more directly, but above you basically laid out their irrelevance. You both provided reasons why the majority opinion is not valid. but 333 did so more blantenly, you followed with supporting argument and additional backup to that.
-
No, and I never posted anything resembling that anywhere.
Prove me wrong if you don't believe me.
This entire argument took a wrong turn somewhere. If tommorow a nationwide vote was held and someone was elected that decided everyone earning less than 100,000$ should pay no taxes and everyone (every household) making above 100k should have 50% of their income taxed, would that be ok with you also? Or is my disagreement with something that absurd indicative of my hostility toward those who dont pay taxes?
It wouldn't be ok with me and it would never happen.
-
Hugo take a chill pill bro- your off the reservation with this one. These polls you posted are not recent, most are not unbiased and most have nothing to do with Obama Care as presented today.
There is no conspiracy theory- Put on the news and take a look around you. Support for universal healthcare as presented by Obama and the democrats right now its a 50/50 proposition at best. Nothing else going on but reality-- Please come back to us Hugo. :-\
WTF buddy, the first part of that post provided several recent polls along with a link to the rest of the polls taken over the last year. The rest of the post is polling taken over the last several years just like I said it was. The reason I posted both recent and past polls is give a better picture of how the country thinks on the matter and how it's changed or if it's changed. How can you find fault with any of that :-\
-
Thank you- finally someone sees the light.
What you guys don't see is that this whole thing is a smokescreen to keep Obama and the Democrats in power. Its not a conspiracy theory, its just smart politics. If 2/3rds of the people dont have to pay taxes and 1/3rd do-- how the hell is the 1/3rd ever going to vote those in power out of office? Having a majority get free money while the minority busts its ass always ends up with everyone becoming collectively lazy and dependent on handouts rather than working, taking risks or increasing profits.
Legalizing the illegals, Government mandated healthcare, raising taxes on corporations and the rich, taking control of the private sector= These are all things that tie into the democrats agenda. If the have nots outnumber the haves, even if the haves get fed up and dont want to pay anymore, where the hell are they going to go?
-
I'm out for the rest of the day. Talk later, good thread ;D
-
WTF buddy, the first part of that post provided several recent polls along with a link to the rest of the polls taken over the last year. The rest of the post is polling taken over the last several years just like I said it was. The reason I posted both recent and past polls is give a better picture of how the country thinks on the matter and how it's changed or if it's changed. How can you find fault with any of that :-\
I apologize, there was no date on the very first polls- which were recent. However, they dont really say anything about the plan as it is constituted now. The rest are from 03, 05, 06 and seem to be all over the place. The only relevant issue is whether Obama's plan has the support of the majority of Americans.
-
You know what Hugo - 50% dont even pay taxes so of course they will favor this. We have become a nation of welfare receipients.
When this country falls apart and becomes a marxist state like Cuba or the old USSR, I will not be suprised because I know the writing is on the wall.
Everyone wants free stuff and expects someone else to pay.
No wonder we have the fool in the WH.
Here is the other thing, Hugo - I am not paying for shit, and netiher are my small business clients. We have already told our accountants to structure our finances and businesses so we dont pay a dime more in taxes to pay for this garbage. Obama can GFH ten times over for all I care. He wants to screw me, I am going to screw him right back, and all the freeloading bums who want more of my income.
I dont give a shit anymore and will not work 70 hours a week or more to pay for some lazy freeloading obese slob who does not want to work for anything. I'm done.
Millions and millions out there like me are doing the same thing.
where is your proof of this? You don't have it. It's made up scare mongering numbers. You seem to think a majority of americans are unemployed or illegal immigrants or some other nonsense.
-
Polls today are against it.
Even more interesting. Is that the Democrats that do support it most are more worried about reigning in costs then providing coverage.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/102931/increase-public-pressure-healthcare-reform.aspx#5
http://media.gallup.com/poll/graphs/healthcarereform112907graph15.gif
http://www.gallup.com/poll/121943/Benefits-Healthcare-Reform-Tough-Sell-Americans.aspx
PRINCETON, NJ -- Forty-four percent of Americans believe a new healthcare reform law would improve medical care in the U.S., contrasted with 26% who say it would improve their personal medical care. Forty-seven percent of Americans believe reform will expand access to healthcare in the U.S., while 21% say it will expand their own access to healthcare.
Further to your Post Chavez
http://www.gallup.com/poll/121664/Majority-Favors-Healthcare-Reform-This-Year.aspx
Majority in U.S. Favors Healthcare Reform This Year
Controlling costs a higher priority than expanding coverage
by Jeffrey M. Jones
PRINCETON, NJ -- As U.S. House leaders unveil a plan to reform the U.S. healthcare system, a USA Today/Gallup poll finds 56% of Americans in favor and 33% opposed to Congress' passing major healthcare reform legislation this year. Support for healthcare reform before the end of the year is sharply split along party lines, with 79% of Democrats in favor, compared with only 23% of Republicans.
1. Goals of Reform
Any healthcare reform legislation will likely address the twin problems of covering a large number of uninsured Americans and keeping a lid on quickly rising costs for those who do have insurance. When asked which of the two is the more important goal, the public says, by 52% to 42%, that controlling costs is more crucial than expanding coverage.
-
well, taking a page out of the psycho rightwing playbook. Since you don't believe in democracy. Since you want to exclude yourself from the process. Since you think your minority matters more. You clearly do not love America. You clearly see such a major fault in America that you won't go along with what the majority wants. You think they don't matter. You think you're more important than majority opinion of the American People! Love it or leave it bro... Seeya... Maybe you can find a time machine and travel back to some fascist regime that better suits you. That is a rightwing thing to say, maybe you should follow the advice buddy :D
good work ;)
-
Benny - how is your plate doing?
-
Benny - how is your plate doing?
"Oh, Archie!" ;D
Lot's of pictures...no substance, no brain cells.
-
"Oh, Archie!" ;D
Lot's of pictures...no substance, no brain cells.
Ill take that as the highest compliment coming from you.
-
where is your proof of this? You don't have it. It's made up scare mongering numbers. You seem to think a majority of americans are unemployed or illegal immigrants or some other nonsense.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/250.html
The top-earning 25 percent of taxpayers (AGI over $66,532) earned 68.7 percent of the nation's income, but they paid more than four out of every five dollars collected by the federal income tax (86.6 percent). The top 1 percent of taxpayers (AGI over $410,096) earned approximately 22.8 percent of the nation's income (as defined by AGI), yet paid 40.4 percent of all federal income taxes. That means the top 1 percent of tax returns paid more in federal individual income taxes than the bottom 95 percent of tax returns.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/1410.html
March 30, 2006
Number of Americans Paying Zero Federal Income Tax Grows to 43.4 Million
by Scott A. Hodge
Fiscal Fact No. 54
With the April 17th deadline for federal tax returns looming, Americans are sharply aware of their federal income tax liabilities. However, one aspect of federal income taxes they may not be aware of is the growing number of Americans who pay zero federal income tax after taking advantage of deductions and credits.
During 2006, Tax Foundation economists estimate that roughly 43.4 million tax returns, representing 91 million individuals, will face a zero or negative tax liability. That's out of a total of 136 million federal tax returns that will be filed. Adding to this figure the 15 million households and individuals who file no tax return at all, roughly 121 million Americans—or 41 percent of the U.S. population—will be completely outside the federal income tax system in 2006.1 This total includes those who pay no tax, and those who pay some tax upfront and are later refunded the full amount of the tax paid or more.
-
yea, go figure... that's an excellent point that goes with what I'm saying. You just noted the worst of the worst of protestors on the right. They don't get busted or prevented. Not the case when you get some lefties protesting. They get the riot squad treatment, they often get agent provocatuers placed from the police so the riot police can test their toys, and they've been busted several times doing exactly that. But here, the worst of the worst on the right, no problem... Even nazis usually get to have their protests often with police protection!!!! hahaha, really, WTF?
actually huggy bear these ppl protesting at again OUR U.S SOLDIERS FUNERALS are allowed to be there and they know it and is why they continue to show up and disgrace themselves as americans...
-
actually huggy bear these ppl protesting at again OUR U.S SOLDIERS FUNERALS are allowed to be there and they know it and is why they continue to show up and disgrace themselves as americans...
I'm not agreeing with Hugo, but I think you know as well as I that the people protesting at the funerals are not liberals. In fact, they're protesting the funerals because they believe the soldiers are protecting homosexuality which they are against. Hardly a lib stand-point.
-
expossed.... ;)
would have been nice if you were able to answer 1/3 of my questions but... nope :)
Since when has 333386 been known to answer a question in a straightforward manner.
He ducks and weaves so much, he ought to have his own bobble head doll.
-
Since when has 333386 been known to answer a question in a straightforward manner.
He ducks and weaves so much, he ought to have his own bobble head doll.
HA! :D
-
Since when has 333386 been known to answer a question in a straightforward manner.
He ducks and weaves so much, he ought to have his own bobble head doll.
pot kettle 8) ;D
-
I'm not agreeing with Hugo, but I think you know as well as I that the people protesting at the funerals are not liberals. In fact, they're protesting the funerals because they believe the soldiers are protecting homosexuality which they are against. Hardly a lib stand-point.
This has to be a gimmic or an escaped mental patient who has access to a computer.
-
I'm not agreeing with Hugo, but I think you know as well as I that the people protesting at the funerals are not liberals. In fact, they're protesting the funerals because they believe the soldiers are protecting homosexuality which they are against. Hardly a lib stand-point.
::)
-
where is your proof of this? You don't have it. It's made up scare mongering numbers. You seem to think a majority of americans are unemployed or illegal immigrants or some other nonsense.
Deuchebag.
STFU.
-
I'm not agreeing with Hugo, but I think you know as well as I that the people protesting at the funerals are not liberals. In fact, they're protesting the funerals because they believe the soldiers are protecting homosexuality which they are against. Hardly a lib stand-point.
The Phelps clan, I wouldn't consider them liberal or conservative, they are what I would call functional retards. They are protesting the funerals in hopes of recruiting more asshats into their flock. Why can they do it without being arrested, well because they get all the necessary permits, dot the i's and cross the t's. fortunatly we have good people like the patriot guard that get between those fuckers and the funeral service
They are atttention whores nothing more nothing less. I can only hope that a semi looses control an plows through one of their stupid ass protests.
-
This has to be a gimmic or an escaped mental patient who has access to a computer.
good one ;)
-
good one ;)
So, lets look at what the studies posted show. The show the majority of Americans are in favor of healthcare REFORM. Read that again, that doesn't say the majority of Americans are in favor of the legislation being proposed. I don't think too many people are in disagreement with the fact that something needs to be done about healthcare, whether that be tort reform, mal practice caps, single payer system, etc.
When will everyone on this board be able to see through the bullshit surveys/polls.
-
I'm not agreeing with Hugo, but I think you know as well as I that the people protesting at the funerals are not liberals. In fact, they're protesting the funerals because they believe the soldiers are protecting homosexuality which they are against. Hardly a lib stand-point.
hmm skip youre right there has been a story as of late to that end but the majority of groups that have been protesting for years are far left loonies brother...
-
hmm skip youre right there has been a story as of late to that end but the majority of groups that have been protesting for years are far left loonies brother...
Who are these groups? The only organized group I ever hear about is the Westboro Baptist Church (Phelps clan as noted above).
-
Who are these groups? The only organized group I ever hear about is the Westboro Baptist Church (Phelps clan as noted above).
not necissarily groups skip do a little google search and youll find incidents of this its happend more then a few times here in Tx a number of times groups of bikers would come out and ride around to drown out these jackasses protesting. These ppl were allowed to stay and protest at a fuking funeral of all places and a funeral for our fallen soldiers none the less.
-
not necissarily groups skip do a little google search and youll find incidents of this its happend more then a few times here in Tx a number of times groups of bikers would come out and ride around to drown out these jackasses protesting. These ppl were allowed to stay and protest at a fuking funeral of all places and a funeral for our fallen soldiers none the less.
Alright. Well, I can't imagine these ass-clowns are part of the regular lib group. I work for the military and love them to death, but I'm not sure I would put these idiot protesters in with the regular lib crowd.
Calm down George, adults are talking here.
-
Alright. Well, I can't imagine these ass-clowns are part of the regular lib group. I work for the military and love them to death, but I'm not sure I would put these idiot protesters in with the regular lib crowd.
Calm down George, adults are talking here.
I dont think i said liberal groups if i did i mispoke but anti war these ppl protesting at the town halls arent necissarily attributed to a certain group. Groups have put out shit saying to go do this type of stuff but that doesnt mean these ppl align themselves with that group only with that line of thinking just like the anti war ppl at the funerals...
-
I dont think i said liberal groups if i did i mispoke but anti war these ppl protesting at the town halls arent necissarily attributed to a certain group. Groups have put out shit saying to go do this type of stuff but that doesnt mean these ppl align themselves with that group only with that line of thinking just like the anti war ppl at the funerals...
They are not a political group, but a fringe hate group who try to provike people to attack them so they can sue for damages.