We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Saturday, June 20. 2009
The New York Times, otherwise known as the Grey Lady, might more appropriately be known as Obama’s Shady Lady. Believe its poll and get a
The lead headline is about a NYT/CBS News Poll, trumpeting “Wide Support for Government-Run Health.” The lead paragraph:
BUT, according to the actual poll data, of the 73% of respondents who said they voted in 2008 only 34% voted for McCain and 66% for Obama. The actual vote was 46% (corrected) McCain. So, 29% of McCain voters ignored by the poll must not be Americans, according to the NYTs methodology, and there are about as much an overpolling of Obama voters. NYT's Shady Lady polling.
Tracked: Jun 20, 23:55
Tracked: Jun 21, 12:27
Tracked: Jun 21, 13:24
Tracked: Jun 21, 14:32
Tracked: Jun 21, 16:19
Tracked: Jun 21, 18:17
Tracked: Jun 21, 18:47
Tracked: Jun 21, 20:02
Tracked: Jun 21, 20:04
Tracked: Jun 22, 01:35
Tracked: Jun 22, 08:36
The Permanent Campaign...Obama On Health Care "Yes We Can", NY Times Spins Faster Than A Top In Support Of Dreamiest Man Ever In White House
Following up on Obama's "campaigny" push back on Iran, Obama reached back in his bag of tricks to rally the troops on health care reform. Facing mounting doubts about health care reform proposals as they become reality ? ?To be...
Weblog: Ace of Spades HQ
Tracked: Jun 22, 13:16
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
What does this have to do with anything??? These questions had zero to do with whether you voted for McCain or not. What a stupid post.
As someone with 2 chronic conditions, I haven't had health insurance for 6 plus years. Work has only provided coverage intermittently and as I am now unemployed, I have none again. How can you justify a system that allows so many people to fall through the cracks? For shame.
With all feeling that may be due for your conditions, Kris, what a stupid comment: The poll respondents were unrepresentative of Americans, and the NYTs article about the poll a misrepresentation.
The majority of Americans want the same service they get at the DMV to expand to their health care. I don't know anyone who wants to control their own healthcare because everyone knows that the government knows best.
Anti-health care people are missing the point.
The point is that hard working Americans are falling through the cracks and America being the "best" and most "powerful" country in the world should have a system where every citizen has quality, affordable health care. Is that too much to ask?
And hate to break it to you, but the government is going to have to have some kind of say in the matter when it's all said and done.
Sorry to bring you down Ryan, but bringing the US down to Europe's stagnation is not the answer. Try reading about the top ten reasons Obamacare is based on false information: http://maggiesfarm.anotherdotcom.com/archives/10836-Top-Ten-Reasons-For-ObamaCare-Are-Based-On-False-Information.html
think the post is correct, because the poll was un true. most americans do not support goverment health care. or goverment controlling anything for that matter. just leave the private sector along.also everyone has acess to health care, no one is denied from emergency rooms. which tax payers pay for.
American Power tracked-back with, "New York Times: Oversamples Democrats, Push-Polls Respondents in Health Care Survey".
I do suggest you read the article Bruce points out.
There are many things that can be done to improve access to health care and address your point about "hard working Americans falling through the cracks."
First, you should recognize that universal care has little to do with that issue. The question is how do you maintain the leading world-class health care found in the USA and improve access and provide long-term affordability.
Second, the government, insurance companies and health care companies (i.e. hospitals, pharma, bio-tech, physicians, et al) have worked out the current system in a way that effectively regulates profits. There is no transparency on price, cost and quality. Remember, much of the inefficiency of the current system reflects the interference of government.
The application of consumer directed health care principles, portability of insurance, health care savings accounts and disclosure of price and quality are just a few of things that would allow market forces to deliver the best available care at the best prices. Of course, tort reform would help too.
Too many people think that more government is the answer when careful thought would bring them to a different conclusion.
Kris and Ryan. Get real. Your faith in 'government' is misplaced in my opinion.
And none of us here are 'anti-health care' I suspect.
And the fact is that no one in this country goes without care. As illustrated by Jared's comment about ER's. There are no cracks for anyone who has the brains to call 911.
And then tell me you want my money to help you. I'm willing to listen. But it's not a 'right' of yours that I have to do so.
May I suggest a few posts on consumer directed health care and other free market solutions to improve access to and the cost of health care?
I get the sense that many people don't even know what causes some of today's problems and what can be done that is not government centric.
it just amazes me that people have that much faith in the goverment. just dont know were yall get all this faith from?the goverment is not the answer to our sucess. hard working people are!
You heard it here first, folks. If you point out how NYT is basically lying with polls it means you're "anti-healthcare" and don't care about someone with 2 chronic conditions.
The question is how do you maintain the leading world-class health care found in the USA ...
According to whom?
Second, the government, insurance companies and health care companies (i.e. hospitals, pharma, bio-tech, physicians, et al) have worked out the current system in a way that effectively regulates profits. Really? Like the Medicare
Part D way?
According to the Kaiser Foundation, the US spends $5400/capita on health care. That's the highest in the OECD. Profit is certainly regulated but not in the way you fantasize. http://www.kff.org/insurance/snapshot/chcm010307oth.cfm
The US gets worse results at higher cost than other OECD countries. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/17/business/economy/17leonhardt.html?hp=&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1245579466-MnXzlfVGVrpHimfuPdaTeQ
You folks don't sem uninformed, just misinformed. Perhaps that's ok by you.
Suggest government capability and demonstration project first, i.e., fix Medicare.
As a Canadian watching you people being mislead about health care is truly sad. The fact is our healthcare is second to none. I have complete choice of treatment and Doctors. Wait times are a fantasy disseminated by private healthcare advocates. You guys talk about your superior healthcare but it's only available to the richest of you. We have many relatives in the States with nightmare stories of your healthcare. Do you really thing everyone in the world is wrong and you are right?
I actually give the NYT credit for admitting their poll was skewed to insure the result. I always assume when the NYT, Newsweek, Time, CNN or any of the liberal dunking tanks do a poll it is done with a predetermined outcome. Normally they just lie about how they did it. Not that I think this is the beginning of a new era of honesty and transparency, quite the opposite, heads will roll for this.
There is plenty of documentation to suggest that you are the one who is being mislead.
If the Canadian system is so great (i.e. "second to none"), why do so many Canadians come to the US for medical procedures and health care?
You bring up choice, but my understanding is that it is illegal for a doctor to be in private practice in Canada. Is my understanding wrong?
Perhaps you could share some insight on the great medical advances and pharma/bio-tech discovery coming from purely Canadian ventures?
Perhaps you could share real information (i.e. not propoganda) on access, cost, wait times, mortality (including by age group and the correlation to wait times)?
I have not been convinced that a government system will provide better health care than a free market solution, but please enlighten me.
Then all of the Canadian's I know who spend almost half of the year here in Fla, must be a bunch of liars according to what you saying. As a lot of them like to make as a joke, 'What do you call the emergency room in Canada? The USA! Also being married to a Brit. for 15 years and having spent a lot of time there, it sounds like the same story as Canada. I know a lot of people in England have started buying private insurance so they can get good health care. I saw my father in-law die from colon cancer, after being given pain killers and sent home for a year, no other type of treatment at all. They didn't even figure out he had colon cancer, until my sister in-law took him to a private doctor, and then it was to late, he died 3 weeks later. You can keep your Canadian type health care.
I admit we have to do something about the cost of health care in this country, but I haven't seen or heard of any plan yet that I would support. I pay for my own health care, as does a large portion of this country, i'm a blue collar worker, so save your rich only comments. I have always thought it was strange that the number who doesn't pay taxes, and the number who don't have health care are almost the same number, even tho they are not all the same people. I hear and agree with a lot of people on why should I have to pay for someone elses health care.
Finally someone with common sense. My husband was also blue collar worker. He worked for the wages & benefits . That included health care. I had a co-worker that was telling me he couldn't afford insurance for his family & was eligible for Illinois free health care. I said, "So you think I should pay for you to get health care?" Of course he said no. I replied that my husband didn't work at his job because he loved it but for the benefits for his family. I told him to find a job that had them & quit making me pay. He did just that & then his wife developed severe heart problems that his insurance covered beautifully. Why should we have to work our butts off for ours & then pay others who won't?
You don't live in Indiana by any chance? I have a Dirk in that state. You sound like him. That is a compliment. He too has a lot of common sense which is lacking in this country. At least in most of the media.
48% did vote for McCain, but that include both Republicans and Independents.
On the healthcare issue, many independents and Republicans are probably for reform and for public option. This may explain the discrepancy.
It is also possible that some Republicans may have switched party over the last 7-8 months. Which is not surprising given the self-destructive family feud within the Republican party.
Luke: If you bothered to look at the link to the poll question, and read carefully the post, you would see that the poll question did not distinguish whether Reps or Independents voted for McCain, and the post referred to the % who voted for McCain. Your point is off point.
No doubt many who voted for McCain welcome reforms, but the push-polling questions elsewhere in the poll also overstate support for the type favored by Obama. Also, notice no questions about the sort of reforms proposed by Republicans and others not favoring a statist takeover of our healthcare.
And, thank you for commenting, anyway.
Doesen't anyone realize tha health care is so expensive because of the expectations of the patient? Our hospitals didn't always include private or even semiprivate rooms, not to mention color tv and cable in every room. In other words, people want to live above their means in the hospital just like many do at home. You can get life saving care in a tent, just ask any veteran that was ever treated in a mash hospital. Government health care has nothing to do with health care or the expense, its all about control. Just like the bailouts have nothing to do with getting the auto industry back into profitability, its about controling the people that work there and what kind of cars the rest of us drive. The bigger the government the more control they have over our lives. Its not even about the money anymore as they can print all of that that they need with the help of the Federal Reserve. Health care is just one more leash around our necks and this one gives them control of population growth too.
Kris -- it is called "sampling bias".
Imagine, for example, that you took a poll of college students in your state. Would you do a survey in which 70% of students attended 4-year colleges and only 30% community college students? Or would you reflect the actual distribution between students between the two types of institutions? If you want a statistically valid sample, you would do the latter.
In this case there is a clear sampling bias, one in which individuals with a history of supporting Obama for president are represented at a level that far exceeds their prevalence in the general population. That does, in fact, raise a red flag as to whether the sample is really representative of the American people as a whole.
Am i saying the poll was rigged? Not necessarily. But unless there were steps taken to weight the responses to counteract the imbalance in the sample, there are significant grounds to question the validity of the results.
Of course, I could be wrong -- after all, I only have a masters degree in political science, and only teach college courses that deal with political polling twice a year.
Gee -- I'm against government-run health care.
Oh, yeah -- and I pay the health insurance premiums and medical bills for my wife, who has more than two chronic medical conditions that have left her disabled. So the SOBs who want to state, explicitly or implicitly, that I don't care about those with chronic health issues can kiss my big fat white. . . .
PowerLine blog weighs in: http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/06/023860.php
And thanks to all the other blogs who have noticed our post and the misrepresentation by the NYTs.
Wow, healthcare system would cost money? No way. Next you'll be telling me the Iraq war cost 1 trillion and counting.
I'd be better and cheaper to kill people who get sick and ignore repressive regimes.
Pretty easy to derail this thread, wasn't it?
Should a Christian support universal health care?
What do ya'll think Jesus would have to say about it?
I say to maintain good heath drink at least two large glasses of red wine nightly!!!
Christians support charity. Giving stops being charity when it is mandated by the force of law. So RI, is universal health care charity or a right?
Why does it matter that the US spends more per capita than other nations? We're a (mostly) free market still -- that spending is our choice.
Other nations have cut their spending by cutting the amount of care provided. Is that really a path we want to take?
Anti-health care people are missing the point.
No one is "anti-health care". Nice strawman.
The people missing the point are those who want to involve the government. If you're truly concerned with the plight of people who do not have adequate insurance, you'd do something about it. Note that I said you would do something about it, not that you would get the government to force others to do something about it. Get together with other people who share your concern and form a charity to help those in need, for example. I suspect you'd get better results than from a government program, and -- best of all! -- you wouldn't be intruding on the liberty of those who disagree with the urgency you place on the issue.
The dishonesty of the NY Times is sickening.
Any "health care reform" that doesn't include tort reform is treating the symptom, not the disease.
#16-RI Forced charity is stealing by another name.
No where in the Constitution of The United States does it state that any branch of government has the specific task of health care, nor duty to ensure that the American people have access to health care.
I find it quite funny how many people are willing to give up their freedoms because they are too damned lazy to live their lives without some kind of safety net provided at the expense of others. What is worse, is the sense of entitlement that is shoved down our throats consistently.
The argument that those who oppose government intervention in a private industry are simply anti-health, or anti-whatever is simply flash powder for the "magician" to distract with. Get real about your argument, or gtfo.
There is no health care loophole for people to fall through the cracks, anymore than there is a gun show loophole. They don't exist. I am unemployed, and have been since September, yet I have insurance and health care. News flash: I pay for it out of my own pocket. What a novel idea. Personal responsibility.
Kris, I'm sorry for your condition. The question here is should you be responsible to pay for your own healthcare or will the government make other's pay for your treatments? What if your religion won't let you take health treatments -- should that person still have to pay for your treatments?
You really can't trust ANYTHING reported by the NY Times. I know for a fact that their editors will not report stories that don't support their philosophies. It's OPINION, not NEWS.
Alot of those "working people falling through the cracks" manage to be able to afford cell phones for their whole families and cable TV. They have chosen to spend their money on non essential items instead of health care.
My father was self employed and we did not have some of the things my friends did because he made sure we had a roof over our heads, food on the table, heat in the winter and health coverage. You know what? We were happy despite the fact that we could not take trips to Disneyland like my best friend's family could or we did not get new bikes every year.
And, in the end, me and my siblings are much better off then my best friends and her brother and sisters are. We learned by example from our parents what is important and what is not. My best friends sister just had her house foreclosed on because they bought a house they couldn't afford, ran up their credit cards furnishing the thing, buying new vehicles and taking expensive vacations. Her brother's both have gone through bankruptcy for pretty much the same reasons. The only one in that family that has done well is my best friend and that is because she married a guy who came from a background similar to my family and made sure the important things were taken care of first.
I worked thirtyone years in grocery retail, always had pretty good insurance, but after an accident at work, workers comp, (another nonbeloved government entity), screwed everything up. I already had a pre-existing condition from older injuies, add to that having broken my back in two places, and all that entails.
They messed up my case so badly, I could go on at length,.. but the details don't really matter so much, as that in my experience,. any government envolvment in medical decisions is at best, a bad joke.
I know what it's like to be on a wait list, workers comp delays, delays, delays,.. then,. delays some more.
My first instinct was to just use private insurance, but I let a union rep talk me into going to workers comp, and it's been a nitemare,. cut off from pain meds for months while they dallied over paying for them, had to get a lawyer and they even after admitting fault,.
still, fight my treatment on every level.
more of that for everyone?
not a chance..
I'd go with any private sector solution, but never, never a government run one. I've seen how they operate.
and they suck.
I call bullshit on what you said. I have a friend who is a practicing physician in Canada and he was told he would have to wait three months for an MRI, a scan for a tumor behind an eye. He instead went to Boston to get one done where his brother is a physician.
Yes its a great system for routine stuff, not so much for the expensive stuff. Incidentally your Supreme Court has a case coming up regarding your health care system. It seems someone in Quebec is pissed of that in addition to paying taxes for health care, the provincial system won't provide the care in a timely manner as it was intended to do so as promised as such and won't allow him to seek care outside the system.
It may well be an irony that your Supreme Court may well revers or substantially modify Canada's system as we here in the US madly rush in to copying your system.
Congratulations for the Instalanche, but I suspect there is less here than meets the eye.
No, Obama didn't beat McCain 2-1, but Americans have a tendancy to claim they voted when they didn't and, when pressed for who they voted for, tend to say they favor the candidate who won. Slate had a pretty good article on the phenomenon, here http://www.slate.com/id/2220803/. So the results may be skewed in that they include people who didn't vote in 2008 and probably don't ever vote, but not necessarily skewed as a result of a sampling error.
There was a retro poll done after Nixon resigned, asking among other things who people voted for in 1972. McGovern won handily, even though he lost the election 49 states to Massachusetts and DC.
And no, that wasn't a fix -- the electoral college systems makes that nearly impossible.
The NYT/CBS poll also oversampled liberals, even compared to other current polling, and support for ObamaCare differed widely from, for example, Rasmusson. Obamacare is sinking under the weight of revealment and not even the NYT/CBS funny numbers can hide that.
It's just a badly "fixed" poll. Accept the facts.
Doesn't have to be "fixed", just a different criterion for inclusion. Most Rasmussen polls are "likely voter" polls, most NY Times polls are "breathing adult" polls. Historically "likely votes" are more conservative than "registered voters" and both are more conservative than "all adults." Possibly related to responsibility and getting around to registering and voting, I suspect.
Obama won the election because he got marginal voters to register and vote. He significantly underperformed the "all adults" polls, though.
Obama "won" by getting ACORN to fraudulently register voters in at least 214 states, to be voted by the machine politicians in Democratic precincts. He won by having his political allies in the New Black Panther Party show up at the polls with clubs. And he won by having all verification checks for donations disabled on his web site, allowing 35 million plus in illgal donations, including from groups like Hamas.