You know Dan, you're right with polls...remember Bush/Gore, Gore won the "popular" vote by far, which ultimately meant nothing....
While not everyone is polled, that's a general national poll by a good source in gallop which is very accurate.
As for Bush, yes he spend billions but Obama is factually spending more then Bush did in trillions for this "healthcare plan" of his and other things....
Oh trust, me I'm being effected by what Obama is doing. Prior to his administration, I never had a problem finding work. Now he's in, I guess it's coincidence....yet I did nothing any different then when Bush was in office yet was more successful back then. Go figure.
Except it has nothing to do with religion. The only reason it has in the past was due to political systems with strong religious ties. Atheists get married for a reason too, and no political figures (to my knowledge) have objected to that.
I never said it has anything to do with religion, I said people use marriage as apart of their religious beliefs these days despite the religion in general. I never said marriage originated from religion however....
I'm really not sure where anyone got the idea that women use abortion as a way of birth control. Abortions are typically very stressful and traumatic for women who choose to have one, and no one could take the decision lightly. Sex education is what you should want if you don't want this country to have more unwanted pregnancies, you can't blame it on them being dumb. The statistics showing rises in teen pregnancies within schools teaching abstinence-only sex education confirms that pretty well. Also, I see more reason to outlaw slaughterhouses than to outlaw abortions, personally. It's sentient vs semi-sentient, the only advantage for the semi-sentient is that it's a human, but I don't let that get in the way of my judgment.
Because they do? Not all women, just some...if you read up on several stories concerning abortion(not to mention I know people, family and friends who wanted or got abortions as a tool of birth control) Of course it's stressful and traumatic, but you have to realize some women don't care and feel it would be more stressful to take care of a baby rather then getting an abortion...which inevitably gets rid of the baby. Unfortunately there will always be a rise in teen pregnancies, or it will always happen anyway. Hopefully it'll lower. Slaughterhouses? Really? So you want to outlaw our food warehourse over offering human life? Hmm I see...
I'd feel better about myself if my health deteriorated due to waiting times if it meant that those who couldn't afford healthcare were able to get it. There's no reason why I should be given preference just because I have been fortunate. Half this country's pharmaceutical companies and doctors are against universal healthcare because half this country's pharmaceutical companies and doctors are greedy (especially pharmaceuticals, the amount of money they rake in should throw up a shitload of red flags). Productivity does not increase with monetary incentives, so I'd rather have the doctors who are in it for the money gone. Oh, look at that, more job openings!
So, what's the difference exactly if you're offered "free healthcare" but DIE waiting as oppose to what we have now where you still have a choice and can get cheaper health insurance where you can still get care and not wait? Greedy? I don't see it as greed, I see it as profits....you think doctors, nurses, pharmaceutical companies want to work for "free or for pay cut"? Would you? Probably not...I can't blame them, while I do want medicine for cheaper prices, offering free healthcare is too much and I'm pretty sure most people can afford the cheapest prices. I as I've said earlier have no job, and I still applied for cheaper Health insurance and got it, do I pay? Yes, but a lot less....but do I have health care? Yes. Better then not having it.....people who don't have health care NOW, in this moment in time CHOOSE to not have it. My friend said the same thing, other day I was talking to him:
Me:so have you ever applied for medicaid, medicare, hip family health etc, those at all?
Him:no, never tried.
Me: Why not?
Him: Can't afford it
Me: Uh you don't pay for it, you apply for it and they tell you if you qualify or not depending on how much you make.
Him:Oh really?
Me: Yes, you should at least try to apply that's what I did.
Him: I don't know.
Me: That's your choice then, don't complain about no health insurance until you actually try first.
Another issue with "Free Health Insurance" is say it's passed, then people WILL get greedy since you said the medical companies get greedy for money? Well, so do normal people...if we give this for free, that for free guess what? We the people will want EVERYTHING for free and before you know it, it'll be wolfare times 100 and nobody will want to do anything for themselves and just mooch off the goverment...which I know would happen, the human race is known for that. Give them a lick, they'll take a bite...give them an inch, they'll take a foot..
Also, I must ask you. Since you said you don't mind "waiting months or however long" for health care, ok...what if you have a heart attack, and they tell you ok you have chest pains, you wait here or have to have a procedure done, but in a month's time you can die...then what? What good does your "I'd rather wait knowing I'm getting health care" theory does then when you're not around to wait? Even though you're technically not getting health care, you're getting jerked around....
My mistake, raise taxes and eliminate the (republican-supported) half of our tax dollars that is funneled into the military. We spend something like 10x the amount that the next furthest-down country spends on defense. The idea that the government should just support jobs is a terrible idea. If what people like Ron Paul want were to be put into action, a massive amount of this country's scientific research would end and schooling would become unaffordable for many people (just to give two examples). Taxing the rich more does next to nothing to the rich, it has no effect on their ability to hire employees, yet they get tons of pro-business support because they (falsely) claim it does so they can get more money. It reminds me of that South Park episode about illegal downloading (boo hoo! i can't afford my private island!).
So, now you want to cut off our funds to the military...yeah that's a bad idea. Without military funding, you have no protection, national security. Given THESE times, that's probably a stupid idea. Unless you'd want to get blown up on a plane one day by terror cells and don't care?
Were you alive during 9/11? Curious because I was, and happen to live in NYC. Military action to protect YOU and ME is necessary, especially in these times despite party affiliation or president in the white house. To cut off military funding is to invite death from our enemies, America isn't that stupid...some liberal agenda ideals however...
How is government creating jobs a bad idea? No it's not, instead of wasting trillions on a flawed healthcare plan which more then half the country is opposed to, spend it on new jobs. At least that's beneficial to everyone...and offers people a chance to make money themselves in their own pockets.
I'm not for Ron Paul, so no need to go on about him. He won't get in anyway, far too unpopular, doesn't have a big enough following and as far as I'm concerned too moderate for my taste. He's not a radical liberal, but he's far from conservative either...he's in the middle.
It's not just rich companies they want to tax, it's rich in general....rich people a lot of them work hard for their money or earned it via a talent of some kind. If the liberals had their way, or at least some. They'd tax the rich, and give to the poor while the middle class gets screwed as usual and that solves nothing.....
If the liberals feel bad for the poor, then they should dish out the money themselves directly instead of spending on it flawed ideas. Instead of taking from the wealthy and giving to the poor, because that solves everything...The rich get punished, but can still manage since they're rich, poor gets money and middle class the hard working class gets nothing.
Revolver, btw uh you do know during those times jobs weren't ALWAYS peachy right? Not to mention some of them had to deal with war backlashes, jobs, etc.
And even Bush(junior) while his second term was start of economy going downhill, even his approval rating for jobs overall was higher then Obama's...
opcorn: 
