If you can't convince them, call them stupid.
Real Estate Investor · Belvidere, IL · Member since 2009 · 169 posts · 65 votes
I guess we'll see how that tactic works in November:
Speaking on health care Monday, Senator Diane Feinstein said, "I've gotten 90,000 emails and faxes on the health care bill and over 85,000 of them are against it. After all the debate we've had, I can't believe so many people still don't get it!"
This bill is one pile of smelly,stinky,rotten,skunk ridden garbage and the stupid demoncrats don't even see it :roll:
well, with all of the misinformation out there I can't imagine what some of those emails say. I.E. "Please don't kill my grandma" Thanks Fox.
Ali, I couldn't disagree with your premise more. Yes, there has been some misinformation coming from BOTH camps and most news sources, but to say that Americans, in general, are confused about the plan and that is why they are against it is disingenuous at best. I am strongly against this bill, now law, and my opinion is based on analysis of what is in the bill and how it will effect health insurance and health care. I also know that changes need to be made, but that is not the topic of this thread. The 5,000 that responded positively to the bill, were they just so super smart that they could see through the misinformation of Fox News and the Republicans and the Tea Party activists and anyone else who voiced any opposition to the bill? Is that why they got it "right"? I guess we should just through out the old majority rules concept and base our decisions on whether or not Fox News is for or against it. Obviously the majority of us are too stupid to form our own opinions (although, I must admit, some of us are).
Larry,
I appreciate your response, and a little disagreement doesn't hurt my feelings :)
BTW, my post didn't claim that all 85k emails were idiotic, it stated
You and I both know that there has been so much misinformation to excite the masses. I.E. Palin talking about "death squads". As for your point about majority rule, there are polls that show that "majority" of the people surveyed support the bill. As for that I would have to quote Mark Twain on statistic "there are 3 types of lies in this world, there are lies, darn lies and then there are statistics"
1 more point on majority. Obama made it clear during his campaign that he wanted health care reform, and he still won by an overwhelming majority.
Ali,
Civil disagreement is fine. I would never say that you just don't get it (implying that you are stupid) because you reached a different conclusion than I.
Also, I know that you did not claim that the 85% were all idiots; I was being facetious to make a point.
Regarding polls on support for the bill, not components of the bill, I have not seen a single poll that shows a majority support for what was passed. I have seen Democrats make that assertion on news shows, and when challenged to name one poll, have been unable to.
Regarding Obama's campaign promise to reform health care, first, I agree, that health care needs to be reformed, just not with this monstrosity of a bill. Second, health care reform is a very general concept and means different things to different people. My definition of health care reform would include Tort Reform; the Democrat's obviously didn't. To say that Obama was elected so that this specific Health Care Bill would be passed is a huge leap to showing majority support for it.
As an aside, it's funny how statistics lie when they don't support one's point of view.
[U]http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-march-3-2010/anchor-management[/U]
If you are going to hang your hat on polls by the way, what about the polls that showed Bush having the lowest approval rating of ANY president. Again, its funny how statistics lie when they don't support one's point.
Tort reform will not give health care coverage to the poor. It will lower a portion of the doctor's costs, but not enough for him to treat people for free without insurance.
The fact of the matter is that HMOs have been a disaster, and I am surprised that they have lasted this long. There are pre-set budgets for doctors to follow, if the doctor is below the budget, CHA CHING there's a bonus. But if the doctor goes beyondthe budget then it might come out of his pocket.
I am also unsure that this bill is the answer, as a matter of fact, I think like most other things that the gov't gets involved in they will mess this up too. However, SOMETHING had to be done, and it had to be more than a token tort reform.
Ali,
What does Bush's approval rating have to do with the subject of this thread? Who said I supported Bush? I agree that Bush's popularity was very low when he left office, so what?
As far as what the bill will or won't do, or the merits of HMOs, again, not the point of this thread. Something has to be done, I agree. With this bill, I strongly disagree. And if a politician of any party tells me that I am just not getting it, they can kiss my ***. That's the point.
Ali,
Did you just cite The Daily Show for a serious political discussion? You do realize that's a Comedy Central show do you? What's that first word?
surprisingly Tim, Jon Stewart does a better job of reporting "news" than the 24 hour bozos.
BTW, have you caught the obsession with Tiger woods lately on those channels? Oh No, he has a powerade in his hands not a gatorade...they need to get a life.
Larry,
I think you will agree that if politicians knew what they were doing, we wouldn't have had half of the messes we have today.
As to the original post regarding Diane Feinstein, I find her to be really STUPID. If she is getting 17 to 1 letters against the Health Bill and still touts the Health Bill, she is the one who doesn't get it. Same goes for my stupid Representative, the Moron John Salazar. Childish name calling? Absolutely. There is no other way to define these people.
The US Government cannot force a US Citizen to carry health insurance. That goes against everything we stand for, namely FREEDOM. What's next? Forced Life Insurance so your heirs can make a buck from your death? FREEDOM is about making personal choices. (Don't bring up Auto Insurance, different, vastly different issues)
While I agree that requiring citizens to carry insurance is wrong, the argument that it's wrong because the government is not allowed to take away our freedom of choice seems spurious.
But, since you made the argument, are you as firmly against instating a draft as you are against mandatory health insurance?
If not, and assuming it's all about protecting our freedom to do what we want, what's the difference?
Tom,
my comment that you might be better informed with the above programs was extremely fictitious.
However, today's news media is no more than opinion page. There are very few facts(if any) and a bunch of what the person with the microphone thinks.
BTW, there is literature on both sides about the media bias. On the left, check out the link above and the 10 minute video will show you some examples of how Fox is biased. As for O'Reilly and Limbaugh, check out any of Al Franken's books.
As for calling anyone racist, I wouldn't stereotype like that. If someone makes a racist remark, I would call them racist, if they don't then I won;t.
Thanks Tim, the funny thing is that you and I have disagreed more but I guess we just did it civilly.
No sweat Ali. I usually get along well with people I disagree with. I've got a buddy who's part of the Nation of Islam and I believe secretly NBPP (but he won't confirm it....lol). We're like cats and dogs on some issues and when it's over we're buying each other drinks and talking real estate, women and cars. I think my tone comes across as argumentative (I'm an insurance adjuster - I have gotten attorneys to apologize to me for "being such an attorney") but you really can't take individual disagreement between two people too seriously until it crosses certain lines.
Best case, it's "poor" reporting...
Hopefully that's the proof you were looking for when you asked about examples of "poor or biased reporting"...
Very interesting, especially since most of what is being reported as bias in the news coverage is actually on one of the commentary (opinion) shows and not the news show.
That said everyone (even those here) have been called on gramatical errors, or interpretation errors, and even factual errors. Because one makes mistakes that does not make the case for bias (it does not disprove it either).
J Scott
Yes, I am against the draft as well.
As for your example's about Fox, similar things can be said about CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, MSNBC, etc.... We can talk about Dan Rather saying that forged letter about President George W Bush in the National Guard was real. We can talk about how the networks convicted the Duke La Crosse boys when it was all false. And so on and so forth.
During the campaign, watching most of the major news media talk about Obama was like watching a child on Christmas Morning. But then they opened the present and all they got was Black Coal.
This bill is one pile of smelly,stinky,rotten,skunk ridden garbage and the stupid demoncrats don't even see it :roll:
Thank you for strengthening my argument...
Sorry, if you want to ignore the obvious and continue to hold Fox in high regard for being "fair and balanced", go for it. But, you're just fooling yourself...