2007-07-20 02:14:45 · 29 answers · asked by ? 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
A famous politician, running for (and getting elected) Governor of New York, once said to a crowd of supporters:
If you agree with me on 70% of the issues, you should vote for me.
If you agree with me on 80% of the issues, you should vote for me.
If you agree with me on 90% of the issues, you should vote for me.
If you agree with me on 100% of the issues, you should get your head examined!
The crowd laughed, but if you agree with anyone 100% of the time (or vote in lock step), you are not thinking through the issue independently.
2007-07-20 02:21:02 · answer #1 · answered by robert_dod 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
I think there should be a free public component of health care without doing away with private hospitals and private practices by doctors. Health protection should be like police protection; you can have private security personnel if you can afford it, but the rest of us should still be able to call the police if we need protection. Sickness and injury harm us as much as crime or terrorism, and it is no more socialist to have government run hospitals than it is to have the military or police.
I don't know exactly what Moore has to say about Iraq, though I've gotten the impression he believes some sort of conspiracy theory about the reason we invaded. I'm not much into conspiracy theories. What is interesting to me is to hear all the folks in congress say they were lied to by Bush when Moore, Johnny Depp, The Dixie Chicks, etc. seemed to know all along that Saddam didn't have WMD. Were war opponents privy to intelligence information that members of congress didn't have?
2007-07-20 09:29:09 · answer #2 · answered by Yaktivistdotcom 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Micheal Moore is no less the entertainer that Rush Limbaugh is. But it appears he does his research, which is far better than reading an article, and giving your opinion on it.
In reality, i think his conclusions are a little too opinionated and some of his solutions a bit unrealistic, but his concerns legitimate and should be praised for bringing weaknesses in our society into public view, rather than denouncing what he says as false, just because it is easier to ignore them.
He presents the facts, and allows you to imply what you will. If a person doesn't like what they imply from those facts, does it mean that they are lies?
I believe that some people do not like his opinion, so they denounce everything he says as lies.
If you asked many of these people who says he lies or misrepresents facts, they will probably lie and tell you they have researched them.
2007-07-20 10:01:44 · answer #3 · answered by avail_skillz 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Nope.
Let’s crunch some numbers shall we?
The government is a big waste of money they can't do anything right when it comes to handling things like welfare.
A welfare buck taken from taxes about 10 cents gets to the welfare mom.
So my health care cost me about $216 with the company picking up $650. For a total of $856 and using the welfare model it now comes to $8,560/ month will need to come out of my check to get the same health care I am getting now.
Social welfare has issues like in Norway, France, and Canada.
People in Canada come here to see a doctor and we go to Canada to get drugs.
Something is wrong here.
I am not willing to have 8K taken from my check and watch my health care go down the drain.
If you ask Americans are you for universal health care you would get a resounding yes.
However if ask the same Americans OK universal health care is going to cost you 8K a month now I bet you will get a different answer.
We can do something to lower the health care cost and that is law suits.
Sorry Edward fans but the reality is when you sue a big Pharma or a doctor you just shot up the rates for what you pay.
As awful it is doctors will make mistakes and people will die. There is no drug that is 100% safe and some will die when they take it.
Life is all about risks.
Vioxx was one of those risks when the drug company found out the problem they pulled it.
Yet people went on suing.
The reward ~10,000 people lost their jobs.
The lawyers got >70% of that take.
The victims walk away with next to nothing.
So who wins?
A few years ago a vaccine was in short supply due to the fact that they gave up making them here because of law suits.
Yes health care needs to be fix and we need to fix it by getting common sense.
Go to the doctor when you need to now when you want to go.
Take all your anti-biotics.
Wash your hands
If a doctor does make a mistake or their is a problem when you take medicine don't head for the lawyer's office unless of course you know it is criminal in nature not a quick way you think you are going to make money.
Universal Health care sunk the DNC last time do you really think bringing it up again will make a major difference?
2007-07-20 09:42:00 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
No, not really. It is impossible to agree with anyone 100% of the time. The differences in opinion and idea is what makes us great. If we can stop fighting and actually listen, we'd find that people on both sides make some very good points and they should be examined. From those, I think you could find a course of action that is not only reasonable for all parties but probably best for our nation.
2007-07-20 09:19:25 · answer #5 · answered by matt b 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Hmm... probably not 100%....
Though, I did agree almost 100% with Milton Friedman... but unfortunatly he passed away last year.
I agree a lot with John Stossel... excepting questions of foreign policy...
I also like Dennis Miller a lot... though, I probably only agree with him 95% of the time... and I don't think he has his oppinions 100% formulated... though his non inflamitory interviewing style and willingness to try to see the other side of an issue is refreshing.
As for Michael Moore, he is probably the person I disagree with nearly 100% of the time... so if you could find his polar opposite, you'd find me!
2007-07-20 09:24:44 · answer #6 · answered by Schaufel 3 · 5⤊ 1⤋
I don't really know what he said about Iraq or healthcare but if he was right half the time then it sounds like he might make a better job of things than Mr. Bush.
2007-07-20 13:46:23 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Michael Moore is a left-wing Limbaugh.
Neither is always right or always wrong.
2007-07-20 09:47:06 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
i seldom agree with anything or anyone 100%. michael moore had numerous mistatements or complete fabrications in his last couple of movies. i was at first a fan ('Roger and ME') but as i watched him become more famous or imfamous, he now is only interested in lining his pockets.
he chooses hot button topics and skews them to fit the lib agenda. i would give him some credibility if he would not pad his films with innacurrate facts or trick people or edit their interviews so that they appear to be saying something alltoegther different from what they really said.
it is a shame, he could do a lot of good but as is, he only divides our nation futher.
2007-07-20 09:37:06 · answer #9 · answered by ? 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Moore is wrong on everything. If socialized medicine comes to the US there will be no doctors. The older ones will retire and no one to train new graduates. It is a mess in England I know. 50% foreigners
2007-07-20 09:40:58 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋