Bring It On!

Majority of Americans Favor Health Care Policies Opposed By the Republican Party

October 20th, 2005 | by Dr. Forbush |

In a new Harris Poll released today it is clear that the Bush administration and the Republican congress are working against the will of the people. Democrats owe it to the American People to point out that Health Care is a major issue and Democrats support the policy desired by the majority of Americans.

See the Poll Results.

  1. 31 Responses to “Majority of Americans Favor Health Care Policies Opposed By the Republican Party”

  2. By Jersey McJones on Oct 20, 2005 | Reply

    I wish they had asked about Universal Healthcare. Look at what’s happening to GM right now! We can not compete with other First World (and many Second and Third) nations saddling our employers with Healthcare costs. It’s time to get off the backs of business in America with this stupid Private Insurance (re: Investment Banks) through Employers scheme. Eh, Libertarians?

  3. By The Bastard on Oct 20, 2005 | Reply

    My brother-in-law is high up at AT&T and he was telling me that they have to lay people off in the states because it is harder to lay people off over seas!!!! How f’d up is that?

    We are a third world country living at the feet of a first world theocracy!!!!

    Can someone point me in the direction of the statue that I can pray to to make me rich???

  4. By Treason on Oct 20, 2005 | Reply

    Bastard, there you go again living your life by polls. A poll that sampled 2,200 people out of 260 million people whom live in this country. Your a bone head!

  5. By Joe Snitty on Oct 20, 2005 | Reply

    Treason, before you go around calling people boneheads, you might want to bone up on your understanding of statistics.

    From Wikipedia:

    An interesting mathematical fact is that the margin of error depends only on the sample size and not on the population size, provided that the population is significantly larger than the sample size. Thus for instance, the poll in the running example with 1,013 randomly sampled registered voters would yield essentially the same margin of error (4% with a 99% level of confidence) regardless of whether the population of registered voters consisted of 100,000 people or 100,000,000 people.

    This may seem counter-intuitive at first; after all, each person in the population has a unique personality and opinion, and in a very large population, only a very small fraction of such people would actually be polled, and it would thus seem that the poll is not capturing enough information. However, because a poll involves only a very specific question, there is only one relevant attribute in the population that needs to be considered, and this means that an individual’s opinion is effectively equivalent to those of many other members of the population, some fraction of which will be polled.

    Now, what was it that you were saying?

  6. By steve on Oct 20, 2005 | Reply

    I hate these kind of polls. I think it’s too much of a generality on some subjects. I will say right now that I am for Universal Health Care for ALL Americans. I just don’t want it controlled by the government with some stupid failed socialist program like welfare, public schools or CALTRANS (California’s Highway Company). If I need a new heart, and I can pay for it, goddamn give it to me first and don’t entitle it to some crackhead on death row because he is next in line or younger than me. (a bit over the top?? no…) I don’t think we need another tax to control it.. As with any government programs, they can be abused by anyone in charge. I don’t think we need a program as serious as health care run by the government in this country. (Goddamn, now sounding like a liberal, let me steer it back). You can ask America if they want Universal Healthcare and they’ll be 70% plus in favor and then say great; how do you want to pay for it? The 70% will clear out to a fraction of itself in a heart beat.

    America is the world’s supermarket. The world wants to sell its products here. America is an innovator as well. (I know you guys will pull out some innovations by some wankers in France or Japan) If we continue to lead the world economically and recognize a need like health care for all, then we need to find a way. Just don’t put it in the governments hands for another program. You all complain about Bush’s big government, what a quagmire this would be. We already have better lives for our freedoms and economy. Healthcare will be an eventuality as it gets better to do through technology.

  7. By The Bastard on Oct 20, 2005 | Reply

    WOW Steve, you have come a long way from yesterday when you said,

    The concept of Universal Health Care SUCKS!!!

    I’m proud of ya’ kid!

  8. By steve on Oct 20, 2005 | Reply

    Yeah… well… consistency is the key to a good argument. Why don’t ya take me out of context next time?

    Actually, yes, I did think about it. If you want the government to pay for it through some program then yes, it SUCKS.

    The concept of it is great.
    The application to America now… SUCKS!
    Which is consistent with my argument.

  9. By steve on Oct 20, 2005 | Reply

    Yeah… well… consistency is the key to a good argument. Why don’t ya take me out of context next time?

    Actually, yes, I did think about it. If you want the government to pay for it through some program then yes, it SUCKS.

    The concept of it is great.
    The application to America now… SUCKS!
    Which is consistent with my argument.

  10. By Jersey McJones on Oct 21, 2005 | Reply

    Steve, in a workable Universal Healthcare System, the government - THE CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE THAT YOU HATE AND LOATHE SO MUCH - would simply be the customer. Private Actuaries, what would be left of the phony “Insurance Industry” which is nothing but Investment Banking dressed as Insurance and cannibalizing the system, would be contracted to ensure third party independent oversight. This spares the actual functional part of the insurance industry and all those jobs. Bidding would reduce costs of actuation, medicine and care. The Universal Pool would guarentee the fairest and broadest spreead of risk.

    Your comment “If I need a new heart, and I can pay for it” is the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard (well, eliezer’s Homo-Nazi-Cabal is worse…). Do you really want a system whereby the wealthy canget care but the rest can go fuck themselves? Do you think you could really pay for that (I don’t believe you at all)? Do you think you always will be able to? Ya’ know, Steve, in France, a couple hundred years ago, you’d have no head…

  11. By Treason on Oct 21, 2005 | Reply

    Joe, I still say Bastard is a bone head. A nice bone head but still a bone head.

    Of course polling people are going to put a statement out like you quoted above. THEY ARE SELLING THERE POLLS! Think I’m going to believe a poll that is taken from a “sample” of 1,016 people from New York City that says, “80% of people sampled believe in Universal Healthcare”? Of course I’m not going to believe the sample because 80% of New York City are dumb ass liberals. Take the same sample in Texas and it’s going to slant 80% Republican. Polls SUCK period!

  12. By steve on Oct 21, 2005 | Reply

    You’re such fuckhead Jersey, why do you insist that I HATE the Constitution. Answer that one question!!! You defend yourself by accusing a fellow American of hating America.

    What does Universal Healthcare have to do with the Constitution?

    NOTHING!!!

  13. By Jersey McJones on Oct 21, 2005 | Reply

    You lambast anything and everything that is PUBLIC or GOVERNMENTAL. You hate our government. Our government OF THE PEOPLE. Therefore you HATE THE PEOPLE. :)

  14. By Treason on Oct 21, 2005 | Reply

    Jersey wrote: “You lambast anything and everything that is PUBLIC or GOVERNMENTAL. You hate our government. Our government OF THE PEOPLE. Therefore you HATE THE PEOPLE. :)”

    Jersey, keep on drinking that Kool-aide or whatever your smoking.

    Jersey, is that why we, the Repubs, keep on winning at the ballot box elections after elections? Why? Because the people have spoken! The people hate YOUR side because y’all try changing the rules of the game set up by the constitution after you get your asses kicked!!!!
    Your liberal Democrat side is the side the PEOPLE HATE. You are the side with absolutley no message except the message of HATE. So, please stop your BULLSHIT!

  15. By Jersey McJones on Oct 21, 2005 | Reply

    No, the GOP keeps winning because it appeals to the lowest common denominators in a old declining empire - appealing to our lesser angels of distrust, bigotry, dishonesty, and insecurity.

  16. By Treason on Oct 21, 2005 | Reply

    Here you go Jersey. Don’t choke to hard on this news o.k.
    _________________________________________________

    Posted this three times so y’all get the good news:

    Here is some good news for all you luney liberals whom have been wasting your time on this just like Patrick Fitzgerald. Here is the key paragraph in the article that you idiots just liked to overlook the whole past two years of your stupid, lying, pathetic little probe:

    “It’s not clear whether Fitzgerald believes that Rove and/or Libby had indeed violated the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act, but couldn’t prove his case. Or whether he realized early on that the law didn’t apply to Ms. Plame, who doesn’t qualify as a covert agent because she hadn’t served abroad within five years of her “outing.”
    _________________________________________________

    NY Times: Karl Rove, Lewis Libby Likely Cleared on Leakgate Charges

    Friday, Oct. 21, 2005 9:45 a.m. EDT

    Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has likely decided not to indict top White House aides Karl Rove and Lewis “Scooter” Libby based on allegations they “outed” CIA employee Valerie Plame, lawyers close to Fitzgerald’s Leakgate investigation have told the New York Times.

    Instead, the paper said, conflicting accounts given by Mr. Rove and Mr. Libby have been the focus of Mr. Fitzgerald’s probe “almost from the start” - raising questions about whether the respected prosecutor continued his investigation after determining that no underlying crime had been committed.

    It’s not clear whether Fitzgerald believes that Rove and/or Libby had indeed violated the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act, but couldn’t prove his case. Or whether he realized early on that the law didn’t apply to Ms. Plame, who doesn’t qualify as a covert agent because she hadn’t served abroad within five years of her “outing.”

    Instead, the Times said: “Among the charges that Mr. Fitzgerald is considering are perjury, obstruction of justice and false statement” - raising speculation that the Leakgate case may devolve into a Martha Stewart-like prosecution, which drew howls of derision from legal critics.

    Stewart was sentenced to jail in 2003 for lying to investigators after the Justice Department abandoned its insider trading case against her for lack of evidence.

    Unlike the Stewart case, however, it’s hard to see how Fitzgerald could have ever believed that the 1982 law in question had been violated, when a quick check of Ms. Plame’s work history would have rendered his investigation moot from the start.

    Even the Times noted: “Possible violations under consideration by Mr. Fitzgerald are peripheral to the issue he was appointed in December 2003 to investigate.”

    In Mr. Rove’s case, Fitzgerald’s prosecution may rest, not on any false testimony, but instead on Rove’s failure to tell the grand jury early on about a conversation he had about Ms. Plame with Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper.

    “Mr. Fitzgerald has remained skeptical about the omission,” the Times said.

    It’s still not clear that Rove and Libby would be indicted even if Fitzgerald could prove they gave false testimony to the grand jury.

    In 2000, Independent Counsel Robert Ray concluded that then-first lady Hillary Clinton had provided materially false testimony in the Travelgate investigation.

    Mr. Ray declined to indict, however - explaining that he could not prove that Mrs. Clinton’s false statements were intentional.
    http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/10/21/94643.shtml
    _________________________________________________

  17. By Jersey McJones on Oct 21, 2005 | Reply

    So you think they are going to get away with treason and that pleases you?

  18. By BOCAPENDER on Oct 21, 2005 | Reply

    the law didn’t apply to Ms. Plame, who doesn’t qualify as a covert agent because she hadn’t served abroad within five years of her “outing.”
    HORSE PATOOTIE YOU ARE UNDER THE SECRECY ACT FOR LIFE

  19. By The Bastard on Oct 21, 2005 | Reply

    YEAH!!!! What BOCAPENDER said!

  20. By The Cranky Liberal on Oct 21, 2005 | Reply

    Well gee Steve, I think there are several countries with great healkth Cre plans run by the state such as ohh England and France. Both of those countries pay LESS per capita than we do on health care, cover EVERYONE, have better infant mortality numbers than we do and at least France (I don’t remember England) has a longer life expectancy. So man, the government really screws things up.

    Notice the part about pays less than we do??

    Live longer?

    Cover everyone?

    And I take excpetion to the notion that the government can’t provide the insurance for millions of people - they do it every day with Medicare. Medicare is one of the best run insurance groups in the country. They have an incredibly low overhead, pay on time and have led the way in electronic, paperless claim filing to cut down on costs.

    Oh yeah - and it is probably what 99% of us will have for our retirement insurance because comapnies can;t afford to keep paying - look at GM just this week.

    Once again another scream of the government can’t do when they are. The only government that I’ve seen with a can’t do track record in a while has been this one. Even Daddy Bush looks stellar now.

  21. By Treason on Oct 21, 2005 | Reply

    Cranky, here is the problem I see with you people here on every issue plain and simple. You want the government to take care of everyone for every problem. Next thing you know you Democrats will want the government wiping our asses for us—all 265 + million of us.

    Here’s the solution for everyone here who wants the government taking care of us move to Canada, England, France, Germany all those second rated countries whom are so envious of the United States of America that they wanted or did move here. That’s exactly why my, our, your families moved from those country in the first place. That’s why 80% of Mexico wants to live here. THEY DON’T WANT THERE COUNTRIES GOVERNMENT’S RUNNING THERE LIVES. They want to WORK for a living and CONTROL there own lives. It’s as simple as that!!!!!

  22. By Dr. Forbush on Oct 21, 2005 | Reply

    Treason,
    You are wrong! I don’t want our government giving special treatment to the wealthy and telling those who have fallen on hard times to go fuck themselves. Why should I support a government who thinks its peachy keen to appoint old friends with no experience to important positions? America used to be the land where you could make something of yourself based on WHAT you know, but now its the land where you can make something of yourself based on WHO you know.

  23. By Jimmy on Oct 21, 2005 | Reply

    Amazing! I find it absolutely amazing that people could be so vehemently against something that should be in place solely for their benefit. What’s the deal?

    What if (I’d never wish it on anyone, BTW) one were to have some sort of catastrophic injury or illness and couldn’t afford the medical payments? And got dropped by those vultures in the medical insurance industry? Wouldn’t it be nice to know that you are covered so that you and your family don’t lose everything? Or is that just pure evildoer evil evil communism?

    You know, I’d much rather see my tax dollars go towards a universal healthcare system for ALL Americans than to see those same tax dollars fill the coffers of some corpulent pig at Halliburton.

    Maybe that’s just me.

  24. By Jimmy on Oct 21, 2005 | Reply

    Amazing! I find it absolutely amazing that people could be so vehemently against something that should be in place solely for their benefit. What’s the deal?

    What if (I’d never wish it on anyone, BTW) one were to have some sort of catastrophic injury or illness and couldn’t afford the medical payments? And got dropped by those vultures in the medical insurance industry? Wouldn’t it be nice to know that you are covered so that you and your family don’t lose everything? Or is that just pure evildoer evil evil communism?

    You know, I’d much rather see my tax dollars go towards a universal healthcare system for ALL Americans than to see those same tax dollars fill the coffers of some corpulent pig at Halliburton.

    Maybe that’s just me.

  25. By Jimmy on Oct 21, 2005 | Reply

    Amazing! I find it absolutely amazing that people could be so vehemently against something that should be in place solely for their benefit. What’s the deal?

    What if (I’d never wish it on anyone, BTW) one were to have some sort of catastrophic injury or illness and couldn’t afford the medical payments? And got dropped by those vultures in the medical insurance industry? Wouldn’t it be nice to know that you are covered so that you and your family don’t lose everything? Or is that just pure evildoer evil evil communism?

    You know, I’d much rather see my tax dollars go towards a universal healthcare system for ALL Americans than to see those same tax dollars fill the coffers of some corpulent pig at Halliburton.

    Maybe that’s just me.

  26. By Jimmy on Oct 21, 2005 | Reply

    Amazing! I find it absolutely amazing that people could be so vehemently against something that should be in place solely for their benefit. What’s the deal?

    What if (I’d never wish it on anyone, BTW) one were to have some sort of catastrophic injury or illness and couldn’t afford the medical payments? And got dropped by those vultures in the medical insurance industry? Wouldn’t it be nice to know that you are covered so that you and your family don’t lose everything? Or is that just pure evildoer evil evil communism?

    You know, I’d much rather see my tax dollars go towards a universal healthcare system for ALL Americans than to see those same tax dollars fill the coffers of some corpulent pig at Halliburton.

    Maybe that’s just me.

  27. By steve on Oct 21, 2005 | Reply

    Cranky:

    The infant mortality rates are higher in England and France because they don’t have the 3rd World minorities we do. It sucks, but minorities suffer from more health problems than the white population. Go look it up, minorities suffer more than whites.

    Dr. Forbush:

    Ha Ha… I’ll be sure not to send my kids to high school or college since they won’t be rich for knowing something. Why not, they can go work at Taco Bell or the local car wash. I wonder what “Hiring old friends..” has to do with health care but thanks for playing. The Cho– I mean, Treason is absolutely correct, hispanics from south of the border for example, work harder than most people around. They get the work, not because they are cheap, that’s a myth, they get the work because they work hard. The landscapers working on my house get 15 bucks an hour, have full medical benefits and work their asses off. Pretty good for low skilled, non-english speaking people if you ask me. I promised a case of cervezas when they’re done. They freaking rule…

    Mr. Forbush, you should support our government until it’s time for a change in 2006 and 2008, when you and I have the opportunity to vote for a change. Unfortunately that is why “vote for a change” is exactly why people come to this country. I am glad we went to Iraq and Afghanistan and freed those people to get what they want even if it has been a rough start. I am glad America has the power to do that. No other country would lead the way. We live in a great place, if I have to live without free health care, that’s just fine with me. In the former Iraq and today in China, Bring It On would not exist because the government would control you. Don’t forget that! It’s ok to disagree and bitch and moan and make fun of Bush all you want, it’s your right supported by our Constitution. If you don’t want to support our country, look for another country. Just remember, Canada is freaking cold and France sucks.

    Hope all is well, I am off to enjoy the rest of the afternoon in my old Porsche… in freedom!

  28. By Jimmy on Oct 21, 2005 | Reply

    Sorry for the triple post. Apple’s Safari browser sucks balls.

  29. By Dr. Forbush on Oct 21, 2005 | Reply

    Steve, I’d lay odds that you’ve never been to France, so you don’t know what you are talking about…

    BTW, Germany does have a much better Health care system than the US. My wife had two of our kids there and the care was better than anything we’ve had in the US since. The US system costs more, even with insurance and you get less…

    If you were so excited about freeing the Iraqis and Afghanis, then why didn’t you say so when the Taliban were blowing up the ancient Buddhas and the World wouldn’t do anything to stop them? The left was telling the world about the human rights violations of Afghanistan long before 9/11, and the right just looked the other way and Bush said, “We aren’t the world’s policeman…”

  30. By steve on Oct 21, 2005 | Reply

    I’m not gonna address that last comment… except for the fact, that if you are now pointing out the destructions of Buddhas then why are you (your party that is) so against religion in schools, crosses on buildings and our religious President. By definition, isn’t that a human rights violation to Forbush? Oh I forgot, people choose to be religious… That doesn’t count then. Bush is correct still by saying, “We aren’t the world’s policemen.” We’re just the backbone that the UN doesn’t have…

    I can sum what you liberals are doing with one picture.

    Put that in your glass pipe and smoke it!

  31. By Treason on Oct 22, 2005 | Reply

    Steve wrote: “I can sum what you liberals are doing with one picture.”

    Steve I have a strange feeling that the picture you linked to above may actually be a picture of The Bastard!

  32. By The Bastard on Oct 22, 2005 | Reply

    No, you’re wrong Treason, I was the model for the Gerber baby! ::smile::

Post a Comment

Fish.Travel