lUPMjC9mq5Y

How many here identify with these people?

I wonder if I would have identified more with the people he chose not to interview or editted out.

Unfortunately, he chose to do a very biased story and focus on those people and statements that supported it.

If those people weren't there he wouldn't have a story would he? But they were, in droves. The signs were "interesting" and all over the place.

More:
UASS1qFAIQ8

NK, how about a different assessment... and not from knuckle-dragging right-winger either. Try The New Republic, which still dumps on the party but notes some other things:


On Saturday, September 12, America threw a gigantic temper tantrum in Washington D.C. Organizers called it the “largest gathering of fiscal conservatives in history,” and they’re probably right. But for an angry, anti-government fit, the march was remarkably civil...

But as much as it appeared the forces of darkness were gathering, this was also a profoundly hopeful event. The Republicans have alternatives--they brandished a reassuring stack of paper that contained all the proposals they’ve been introducing, only to be ignored by the mainstream media and crushed by Democratic leadership. And with the help of ordinary citizens, there was still time to stop the madness.

"I am actually tremendously excited to be here. This is an incredible moment,” Shadegg told the crowd. “And you know what makes it incredible? You. You make it incredible.”

Later that day, they convened again, this time at Upper Senate Park near the Capitol, for a “Physicians Rally Against Socialized Medicine.” There’s something so trustworthy about people in lab coats, and the ultra-conservative group American Association of Physicians and Surgeons had gathered their members to dramatize the point. This is when Obama really started to look bad.

“Doctors have been accused of actually mutilating their patients for financial gain,” an earnest-looking doctor named Scott Barber told the crowd, before describing his long, tortuous years spent training for his profession. “To be honest with you, I’m kind of livid.” Right! The guy next to me shouted. Lies! Cried another. “Because we do not do amputations instead of treat diabetes! We do not take out tonsils instead of treating a sore throat!”

And then, it became not only anti-doctor, but also anti-American, to suggest that the U.S. health care system even needed reform. “We have the best health care system here and everyone knows it,” said another speaker. The cheer went up: USA! USA! USA!

I have never felt more welcome as a reporter than I did at a “Meet and Tweet,” advertised as a gathering of tea partying women on the eve of the march, at the Doubletree Hotel.

“Are you a tweeter?” cried Dianne Shaw, sitting primly cross-legged, in a gray skirt set. About ten middle-aged women sat around a table crowded with empty wine glasses and a few bottles of Heineken, delicately munching mini cheeseburgers. I explained that I wasn’t, but no matter--they sat me down to join the conversation.

One of the 9/12 Project organizers’ primary claims is that their participants are political neophytes, not seasoned activists. That, at least, appears to be true: Almost everyone I talked to was doing this for the first time, and most were tremendously excited. Donna Cohen, a Pennsylvanian with short red hair, was one exception; she had marched against the Vietnam War in the 1960s, but later apologized to the troops. “I said, ‘I’m sorry, I’m sorry, you were right,’” she told me. “But this is as much fun as I’ve had since the ‘60s!”

The discussion drifted from outrage to outrage, lingering on health care. No one actually doesn’t have insurance, the women agreed. Obama’s numbers of the uninsured keep wavering; maybe he just stopped factoring in the illegals. Besides, everyone can just go to the emergency room, or one of those clinics that Wal-Mart runs.

“This administration does not understand the free market,” someone pronounced.

“The only people with private insurance will be unions!” said another.

Above the chatter, Shaw, a retired voice teacher from Alabama, leaned over to get my attention. “I tell you, my Facebook is hot,” she said, putting on her glasses and pulling out her iPhone. She started reading wall postings from all the people back home in Birmingham. “‘I’m so jealous. I want a full report,’” one read. And another: “‘Give ‘em a wedgie!’ Or--I’m not going to say this--‘call them a doo-doo head for me.’”

“I could go on and on,” she gushed. “All these people, rooting for me!”

In a weekend well-attended by women but largely led by men--nearly all the speakers at all the rallies were male politicians and talking heads--this was a rare moment of female camaraderie. It felt like they were on the edge of something big. “We should have a women’s party!” someone proposed.

I am sorry but these people are nucking futs. They truly have no idea what they are talking about!!

I am sorry but these people are nucking futs. They truly have no idea what they are talking about!!!!

You want an entire crowd that's nucking futs try virtually any protest in San Francisco.

You want an entire crowd that's nucking futs try virtually any protest in San Francisco.Well that's relevant. :rolleyes:

Well that's relevant. :rolleyes:

Well, if you are going to try to marginalize those who are "nucking futs" (great term, btw) at a rally, you really need to do it evenly across the board.

I seem to remember some protests on Washington DC during the Bush Admin wherein the people protesting were totally off the wall. Nobody seemed to make that an issue... the MSM simply reported that there were BAZZILLIONS of people rallying against Bush.

But there seems to be a concerted effort here to marginalize these protestors as "nuckin futs".

Again, the libs do that at their peril. They are, in effect, trying to marginalize 67% of the American public who agree with the protestors. Actively trying to marginalize the majority of the country is NOT the way to win elections.

Elliot

But speech we aren't talking about them. We are talking about these people. Someone should explain to the blond hair kid who said Obama has already destroyed half the country (when did that happen) that actually on November 4th the people spoke and elected Obama for Health Care among other things.

I guess ET and speech miss the point that I'm talking about the present.

That actually on November 4th the people spoke and elected Obama for Health Care among other things.


I don't recall Obama making that a big issue at all.He seduced the people with promises of tax cuts. How'd that work out ?

I remember it being a BIG thing during the campaign. Main reason I voted for him. That tax cut helped me out a little and my mom and mt sister and her husband and my aunt and my best friend...

It was more of a Hillary issue . The President did not put an emphasis on a "public option/universal "care . But we now know his intentions as opposed to his campaign rhetoric.

It was more of a Hillary issue . The President did not put an emphasis on a "public option/universal "care . But we now know his intentions as opposed to his campaign rhetoric.Wrong:

Organizing for America | BarackObama.com | Policy Issues (http://www.barackobama.com/issues/index_campaign.php)

Obama Wins: What It Means for Health Care (http://www.webmd.com/news/20081104/obama-wins-what-it-means-for-health-care)

I see nothing about universal care in either site and a vague reference to a public plan ( National Health Insurance Exchange ) on the other .

But speech we aren't talking about them. We are talking about these people. Someone should explain to the blond hair kid who said Obama has already destroyed half the country (when did that happen) that actually on November 4th the people spoke and elected Obama for Health Care among other things.

So let's get to the present. When is someone going to explain to Pelosi and Hoyer that "we the people" gathering to protest what the people that work for us are doing to us is not "un-American?" Let's start at the top before we worry about the blonde-haired kid, they're only following the example our elected officials are setting.

They are, in effect, trying to marginalize 67% of the American public who agree with the protestors. Actively trying to marginalize the majority of the country is NOT the way to win elections.Hello again, El:

If that's the way most of us think, I'm out of here.

Fortunately for ME, though, your numbers are made up and those loons don't represent MY country... The DO represent the Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, Wolverine wing, though.

excon

I am with EX on this one. I don't think that way and I know more people who think like me not this supposed 67%. If 67% were the case Obama would not be president. What all of a sudden the people who voted for Obama don't agree with him. I HIGHLY doubt that.

So let's get to the present. When is someone going to explain to Pelosi and Hoyer that "we the people" gathering to protest what the people that work for us are doing to us is not "un-American?" Let's start at the top before we worry about the blonde-haired kid, they're only following the example our elected officials are setting.
If you think the posters and the things people were saying are right up your alley then we understand that.

Hello again, El:

If that's the way most of us think, I'm outta here.

Fortunately for ME, though, your numbers are made up and those loons don't represent MY country... The DO represent the Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, Wolverine wing, though.

excon

Ex, you are already outside the 67%... you're in favor of nationalized health care. So I don't expect you to see ANYONE who appeared at the rally as representative of what you believe, no matter how normal or how off the wall they are. They don't represent you or your beliefs. I have no expectation that they should.

You are in the minority on this, and NOBODY in the majority represents your position. That's not a criticism, just a statement of fact.

Elliot

If you think the posters and the things people were saying are right up your alley then we understand that.

Nice swerve NK, if you think people like Pelosi, Hoyer, Reid and Obama are just regular guys we understand that, too.

Ex, you are already outside the 67%...

You are in the minority on this, and NOBODY in the majority represents your position. That's not a criticism, just a statement of fact.Hello again, El:

Like I said... You got your MADE UP numbers.. and I've got the first poll I happened onto when I used the Google machine. It's from the State Journal in WEST VIRGINIA - that bastion of left wing idealogy:

-----------------------

A majority of West Virginia residents favor health care reform and mountaintop removal coal mining, according to the latest polling data from Mark Blankenship Enterprises. The poll, which was released Sept. 3, said 35 percent of the 400 people polled believe it is very important that President Barack Obama and the U.S. Congress pass a major health care reform bill within the next few months.

Twenty-six percent of respondents said a health care reform bill is somewhat important, while 13 percent said it is not very important and 22 percent said it is not important at all. Three percent did not answer.

The scientific poll was conducted by telephone between Aug. 27 and Aug. 30. It has a sampling error of plus or minus 4.9 percent.

Meanwhile, 42 percent of those polled said they were very satisfied with their health insurance and 36 percent said they were somewhat satisfied. Eight percent said they were not very satisfied and 6 percent said they were not satisfied at all. Eight percent did not answer.

Health care was the top concern on the minds of those polled. The cost of health care had 64 percent very worried and 25 percent somewhat worried. Overall government spending was second with 63 percent very worried and 29 percent somewhat worried.

The federal budget deficit was third, with 59 percent very worried and 29 percent somewhat worried. Finally, unemployment had 58 percent very worried and 33 percent somewhat worried.

But respondents seemed unsure if current proposals by federal officials would solve the problems with the country's health care system, according to the polling data.

Of those polled, 19 percent said the proposed health care bill would improve the system and 32 percent said it would not change it. But 48 percent said the proposal would worsen the system. Eight percent did not answer.

In addition to questions about health care, the poll also focused on the coal industry. According to the data, 87 percent of respondents said the coal industry is very important to the West Virginia economy. That compares to 71 percent for the oil and natural gas industry and 59 percent for timber.

Those polled have a high awareness of mountain top removal, according to the data. Seventy-nine percent have read, seen or heard a lot or some about the topic, while just 14 percent reported they have heard very little and 7 percent heard nothing at all.

When asked if they believe mountaintop removal should be illegal, 72 percent of those polled answered no, while 24 percent said yes. One percent did not know.

A majority of respondents also said mountain top removal is important to the state's economy. According to the data, 47 percent said it is very important and 34 percent said it is somewhat important.

Twelve percent of those polled said mountain top removal is not very important to the state's economy and 7 percent said it is not important at all.

-------------------

You don't have to read the stuff about coal..

excon

What all of a sudden the people who voted for Obama don't agree with him. I HIGHLY doubt that.

Then you are wrong. Because 67% ARE against Obama's healthcare policies. That much is a fact.

I'm not saying that those who are against Obamacare would all vote him out of office right now. Many of them would not.

But if it passes.. In that case, many people who "like" Obama and voted for him would "suddenly" no longer like him and would very much be interested in voting him out of office. Only it wouldn't be "suddenly" at all. It would be the result of 9 months of policies and actions on Obama's part that people disagree with... everything from TARP 2, to the Stimulus Bill, to Cap & Trade, to nationalization of private corporations, to government spending, to Obama's "apologetics" in the international scene.

People voted for Obama because they expected something. If he can't deliver on that expectation and in fact delivers something that is CONTRARY to those expectations, those people will "all of a sudden" stop supporting him. And that is what's happening now. He's delivering something that the majority of Americans do not want with his health care plan. And the public is reacting to it. There's nothing "sudden" or unexpected about it.

Elliot

This should have been in humour and comedy because those vids were bloody hilarious :D

Excon,


Meanwhile, 42 percent of those polled said they were very satisfied with their health insurance and 36 percent said they were somewhat satisfied. Eight percent said they were not very satisfied and 6 percent said they were not satisfied at all. Eight percent did not answer.

Thanks for the data. 78% of Americans are satisfied with their health care.

And you think that they would vote for something that would DISMANTLE THE SYSTEM THAT THEY ARE SATISFIED WITH as Obamacare will?

Yeah... most Americans think that health care needs major reform. I happen to be one of them. But most of those Americans are NOT in favor if dismantling their health care system to do it. They aren't in favor of nationalized health care.

So... it's not 67% of Americans who are against Obamacare... it's actually 78%.

Thanks for the correction, excon.

Elliot

ET give me a link for where you got 67% maybe you posted it before but I really don't feel like looking.

Comes from Rasmussen and Zogby a few weeks back. I can't find them right now. I remember it because I found it interesting that Zogby who is a lib and Rasmussen who is a conservative happened to get just about the same numbers in their sepparate polls.

But as excon has now posted, that 67% figure is outdated. It's 78% who are satisfied with their health care and wouldn't want to eliminate it in favor of nationalized health care.

Elliot

Ok so you think just because people are satisfied with their health insurance then that is the end of the debate. I wonder out of the 67% who are satisfied how many of them actually use their health insurance (not just check ups etc.. ). I would be willing to bet if those people had to go through the hassle of being kicked out of a hospital because their insurance says that is all they are going to cover would still say they are satisfied. What do you think ET?

What a bunch of rednecks, reminds me of my hometown unfortunately. Half of them can't even put together a coherent sentence. Bet they don't even know what czar means or how to spell it properly.

Earl half of them thought Obama was the first one to have a czar. Too much teLIEvision for these people.

Just saw the video

The filmmaker should contact Michael Moore and see if he has a job available. He displays similar documentary making skills.

Hello again:

I don't think these people are nuts... I thought GW Dufus was going to declare martial law and stop the elections... I'll bet if vice had his way, he would have. The dufus is looking better and better to me... Just like Obama will to you guys when you can finally stop worrying about going bankrupt when you get sick. You're going to LOVE it - just like people LOVE their Medicare.

excon

just like people LOVE their Medicare.

excon

You mean the samer Medicare that Obama is defunding by $1.4 billion to pay for Obamacare?

Yeah... everyone's going to love Obama. Those who like their Medicare are going to love him, and those who don't want government health care are gonnal love him.

>snicker<

Elliot

Million Med March - Doctors Marching on Washington DC (http://www.millionmedmarch.com/)

NOte , the AMA does not represent most doctors, less than 25&#37; of doctors join the AMA

Investors.com - 45% Of Doctors Would Consider Quitting If Congress Passes Health Care Overhaul (http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=506199)

-------------------------------------------

Right now I can't link the Facebook poll, but about 70% are against gov run UHC. I know, not scientific, but I would have expected the opposite result among a younger, tech crowd.



G&P

In 70&#37; of Facebook users are outside of the US.


Statistics | Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/press/info.php?statistics)

EDIT: 35 and older are the fastest growing demographic.

Plus there are thousands of "polls" on Facebook at any given moment.

In 70% of facebook users are outside of the US.


Statistics | Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/press/info.php?statistics)

EDIT: 35 and older are the fastest growing demographic.

You mean that people from foreign countries... many of them with government-run health care... are overwhelmingly against government-run healthcare, according to Facebook?

What does that tell you?

Elliot

It means that the poll was likely set up by liked minded people who forward the poll to their like-minded friends.

Et what I was pointing out that out of the 300,000,000 users on Facebook 210,000,000 are not Americans so any poll is pretty much bullsh*t. Well anything from Facebook is pretty much bullsh*t

Et what I was pointing out that out of the 300,000,000 users on facebook 210,000,000 are not Americans so any poll is pretty much bullsh*t. Well anything from facebook is pretty much bullsh*t

True.

But if THAT MANY people on Facebook are against nationalized health care, and 70% of them are likely from countries that OFFER nationalized health care, then it tells me that they are people who have experience with what national health care means AND 70% OF THEM DON'T LIKE IT.

Essentially the poll has NO statistical value whatsoever. But it SHOULD be a warning to us about how well liked nationalized health care is around the world.

Elliot

Et did you ever think not everyone voted on this poll ? What if 10 people voted and 7 said no that would be 70&#37;. Hence Bullsh*t.

Et did you ever think not everyone voted on this poll ? What if 10 people voted and 7 said no that would be 70&#37;. Hence Bullsh*t.

True again.

But then why mention 300 million users?

I have no intention of checking the poll to see how many people have seen and voted in the poll. I happen to hate all the social linking websites.

But if it wasn't a significant number of people who voted in the poll, why mention it at all?

That's not a question for you, actually. It's a question for whoever first posted the poll.

Elliot

I am with you on the social networking sites ET! I mention the 300 million because that has been on the news lately so I just wanted to point out it is not 300 million Americans.

That's not a question for you, actually. It's a question for whoever first posted the poll.

ElliotThat would be inthebox.

But if it wasn't a significant number of people who voted in the poll,As of right now it's 512 people.

As of right now it's 512 people.

About 1/3 the number in the IBD poll and 1/4 the number in the NPR poll.

Rough estimates, of course.

Elliot