McCain was born in Panama - doesn't that make him ineligible to run for president?
Submitted 262 days ago by WishingforSun
Favorite
Embed
Options
|
|
Loading...
|
|
We haven't received enough votes with gender data to show this graph yet.
We will show the graph as soon as we have enough votes!
Community votes are collected from you and other visitors to Ask500People. Independent votes are collected from visitors to hundreds of other websites around the world.
Sorry, this data is only available to users with an account.
Already have an account? Login
| Results | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 123 votes 38% | |
|
|
|
| 204 votes 62% | |
Apparently not.
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 262 days ago by deleted user ReplyYep, thats why..
This comment was deleted.
[2 points] 262 days ago by deleted user ReplyWatched McCain on George Stephanopoulos' news show this morning. Stephanopolulos asked him a question about health insurance. He asked why he (McCain), as someone who had been born to a military family and had enjoyed health insurance, then, in the military enjoyed government sponsored health care, then, as retired military received government sponsored VA benefits, then, as a member of Congress, had enjoyed the best of health benefits, why he felt the average American did not deserve health benefits on par with the health benefits he had enjoyed all of his life. McCain's response: "There were a couple of years where I enjoyed the health benefits of a foreign government that weren't really so good." Then, angrily chucked.
McCain turned a question about health benefits into an attack upon his time as a POW. That was an argument that had nothing to do with health benefits. And he twisted it to make it an attack upon his time as a POW - certainly a horrific experience - but yet he used it to make a reporter back off a question about the state of health care for the average American.
As of today, I have lost a GREAT deal of respect that I once held for John McCain. He is far more out of touch, and very, very unsympathetic of the plight of the average American. I suppose he thinks we all deserve to experience the same type of treatment that he received in Vietnam before we can expect the government to help with our ever-spiraling cost of health care. It's gotten too expensive for me, but evidentially he believes that's MY problem RATHER than a problem due to the greed of the health insurance industry. I'm shocked at what little compassion he has for the middle class. I did not expect that from him. I'm at a loss. I used to really, really respect him - disagree, yes - but I respected him. I don't think I do anymore.
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 262 days ago by deleted user ReplyI too saw it and thought it was an awful response to an important question. PBS aired an impressive Frontline report a few days ago about five capitalist democracies and their health care. All had different approaches, but ALL covered ALL of its citizens. Each government has a large role in the various systems shown. Of course, McCaain made light of them today ("socialized medicine"), but in no instance could any government official of any of the countries recall any of its citizens EVER going broke or bankrupt do to medical costs! And, treatment wise, in many instances the treatment is superior. Japan, for example, has a system that strongly supports preventative medicine.
If you really believe the treatment in socialize medicine states is superior, then you've been hoodwinked by the media and pols who claim that to be true. Would be very revealing if you could accurately measure the relative benefits of that system in Canada or G.B.
The real question is, why do you believe in an obviously seriously flawed system.
Maybe because I personally am acquainted with people who lived in Canada who described what they had to live with.
Maybe because I believe ours, warts and all, is better than any others out there right now. And I'm certain that what "they" (politicians) have in mind will be extremely flawed and much worse than anything you can imagine.
The voters here are thinking with their pocketbooks and their greed in the forefront. I'll get something free that now costs money, pant, pant. And there are all those "free lunches" out there just waiting to be plucked from the trees, you think?
One simple fact that I've learned in my 70 years, there are no free lunches. Another fact is that government control of ANYTHING means poor service, if not poor then no longer offered. If offered, then we'll put your name on a list and when your turn comes ....
The minor realism involved in passing a budget in a country where new taxes are reviled, means that increased taxes will be avoided and medical services will BY NECESSITY be rationed, limited, or terminated. I know I would not like that. I like choosing my same old doc.
Guess that covers it.
It is a flawed system; but I don't want to trade it for an even more flawed system.
He is out of touch.
You have to be a native-born, not naturalized citizen. This is often misinterpreted as a requirement that the person be born on American soil. Native-born is the offspring of two citizens, even if born on Alpha Centauri. The single exception is if you were not native-born but were a citizen at the time that the Constitution of the United States was adopted.