Take the “federal funding for abortions” issue:

Given that Obama and others have flat out stated that there will be no federal funding of abortions in the final bill. Well this is not set in stone, we’ve all just acknowledged that nothing, in the bill that doesn’t exist yet in its entirety, is set in stone. The HELP bill, I believe that’s the one but I’m just writing quickly and going off of recollection, contains the CAPPS amendment which most assuredly does allow federal funding for abortion. The specific details are discussed at length in this article. Most who claim that no federal funding will be spent for abortions, hide behind the Hyde Amendment. However, those same individuals are either unfamiliar with what the Hyde Amendment actually does, or hope that you and I are–and don’t know enough to do our own investigation.

Regarding Rasmussen, thanks for the links and the info. While I do think they are right leaning as you said, I also think they are honest, and they do provide cross tabs, question wording, and all the other information that a top notch professional polling operation must provide. I do not question the validity or accuracy of their data in the least. I have followed them for many years.

I would not imply or even suggest in any way that rasmussen would or ever has handled their data improperly to favor a particular polling outcome. To answer your question about why a biased polling operation (which as I have already said – Rasmussen is not) would start President Obama with a very high Presidential approval rating, is that from there, the only place the President has to go is down. Like I said, I am not saying nor am I implying that Rasmussen has done this. Their polling of presidential approval is consistent with other pollsters in this regard. I am just answering your question.

Right lean from Rasmussen is evident from what questions they ask, and how they present their data. For instance, do you recall how presidential approval numbers were handled by Rasmussen during the Bush Presidency vs how it is handled now. For Bush – Strong Approve, Approve, Disapprove, Strong Disapprove. When you look at total Approval vs Disapproval – the numbers look much better for the president. When you look only at Strong Approval or Strong Disapproval, they look much worse. That is just one example, and the fact is I think all pollsters agree that Rasmussen is honest.

I think you have it right for he most part. I don’t mean to imply that the details of the Finance committee plan are irrelevant, just that details like the difference between the public language of a bill and the legislative language, or the difference between an 11 billion dollar cost estimate vs. a 12 billion dollar cost estimate are irrelevant. Don is right. The real details of the plan will be worked out in the merging and reconciling of the plans. We will have 4 fairly liberal plans merging with one moderately liberal one from the Finance committee. Chet, I agree with you that it is now or never for adding concepts to the bill, but not that any particular type of language is relevant at this point.

just a thought!

I would like to add, as someone who worked for the Department of Veteran Affairs for 5 years, I had access to 100’s of thousands of bank account numbers, routing numbers, social security numbers, financial worth, etc. It has been less than a year since I left

The scary part is that I could access all this information, instantaly, without anyone noticing. for more details on this, read my article:

http://politicalintegritynow.com/2009/08/urgent-proof-that-obamas-health-care-plan-will-put-your-identity-at-grave-risk/

This is what to expect with a government run health care system, as that is what the VA system is.

PJ, you can’t dispute this as it is my own, personal experience working within the system…which is one of the reasons why I am so against it.

Again, that’s exactly why the dems want to rush things thru. Think about the “crisis” of the stimulus, the “crisis” of cap-and-trade in the House. But the best example is their failed attempt to rush health care thru before the August break because it would have been a “crisis” not to. Can you imagine the chaos that would have taken place had they been successful?

Bottom line….it’s never too early to get to the truth, but it can be too late!

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/october_2009/55_oppose_penalty_for_not_buying_health_insurance

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/october_2009/to_pay_for_health_care_plan_59_say_no_new_taxes_on_those_earning_under_250_000

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform

Now, before you say that Rasmussen is right leaning, take a look at the poll at the end of this comment. If it was right leaning, then why would their presidential poll show such a high approval rating at the beginning of his term? Don’t most “partisan” polls typical suppress anything that is not in their favor? Hasn’t Rasmussen been the most accurate while forecasting previous presidential elections too include 2008? Doesn’t both of your links site the main source as from the Kansas City Star? Isn’t the Kansas City star a very liberal newspaper?

Now, the next question is this…will people (republicans and democrats) believe that because they read it? Sure they will. But this may backfire on the democrats. If conservatives feel that the GOP might be “caving” as you call it, I believe the protest will rise again, which will have the same effect as the protest in August.
With that, I welcome articles like this.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

Keep in mind PJ, the majority of citizens want some sort of health care reform, republican, democrat and the like. The difference is the “type” of reform wanted. The fact the all polls show support of health care reform is nothing new.

Any Health Care Plan brought forth by the liberals is an empty shell that will be conveniently filled-in as needed. Oh, did they eliminate the access to bank accounts, personal property, and parental advisory clauses from this new Plan?

Cheers, Donald