MSNBC: Gallop Poll - Bush approval lowest of presidency

[No Limit]

45%. It was 52% just last week. They theorized it was because of the Schiavo affair or his handling of it. Most of the loss in his approval was from men and conservatives.

How can a guy that had a 70%+ approval rating after 9/11 have done such a crappy job to be this low? Remember, when Clinton left office his approval rating was around 70%.

 

[Absinthe]

Right now it's pretty much the Schiavo case.

 

[Apos]

He hasn't shown even a little backbone to the nuts in his party, just keeps reciting the tepid "we should err on the side of life" which is just an irrelevant dodge. People aren't going to be very impressed by that.

 

[satch919]

The American people are so easily swayed. He does one good thing, the polls rise. If he does something bad, the polls go down. MAKE UP YOUR MINDS!!! The guy is either a good president or a bad president. This president's actions make it even easier to know what side to be on. :| And yet people still have a hard time deciding.

 

[No Limit]

The American people are so easily swayed. He does one good thing, the polls rise. If he does something bad, the polls go down. MAKE UP YOUR MINDS!!! The guy is either a good president or a bad president. This president's actions make it even easier to know what side to be on. :| And yet people still have a hard time deciding.

I don't know if you could qualify 52% as ever being a good president.

 

[seinfeldrules]

I don't know if you could qualify 52% as ever being a good president.

Harry Truman went out pretty low. Thats just one example.

 

[smwScott]

People are stupid. It's just a fact of life. They are easily manipulated and have very short term memories. Irrelevant shit like the Terry Schaivo case really gets them fired up, while they never bother to look into the facts of major issues like the war in Iraq or the economy.

Terry Schaivo is a damn plant. She is brain dead. She died a long time ago. The only problem I have with the whole thing is that they are letting her slowly starve to death rather than just use euthenasia. Of course that would be even more controversial, and she can't feel any pain so I guess it doesn't matter, but the handling of the whole situation is terrible.

The right to life people really piss me off. The biggest bunch of hypocrites you'll ever see. Supposedly a group of them tried to take out a contract on Michael Schaivo and the Judge who ordered the feeding tube removed, I'll give you half a second to find the irony in that. These same people are responsible for bombing abortion clinics and murdering doctors. A lot of them also support the death penalty. Right to life my ass.

 

[satch919]

Damn smwScott, great post man! I agree with every point of yours.

 

[DarkStar]

The right to life people really piss me off. The biggest bunch of hypocrites you'll ever see.

Not to mention the conservatives fighting for Schiavo's life are the same ones who oppose Stem Cell Research, the only therapy that potentially has any chance of helping the poor woman.

They also oppose Medicare/Medicaid the fund out of which Terri's care in future years will be drawn.

They also oppose any kind of last ditch efforts and appeals to save those on death row over whom legitmate questions about innocence/guilt exist.

Hey consevatives, what about limited government that doesn't interject from on high about intimate family issues ?

What about states' rights?

All the hypocrisy coming from the right in the Terri Shiavo case is beginning to make me ill.

 

[Solaris]

Exactly, and bush didnt have 70% approval, he didnt even win the election.

 

[Bodacious]

Exactly, and bush didnt have 70% approval, he didnt even win the election.

Stuck in 2000 are we?

 

[jondy]

Stuck in 2000 are we?

'nuff of the rhetoric.

 

[Bodacious]

'nuff of the rhetoric.

Oh, yes master.

Whatever, get a moderator tag my your name and then you can tell me to do something.


It sure is funny you tell me something like that and say nothing to the extremist.

 

[Absinthe]

Whatever, get a moderator tag my your name and then you can tell me to do something.

Typical Bodacious. Nothing new to see here.

 

[bliink]

Whatever, get a moderator tag my your name and then you can tell me to do something

'nuff of the rhetoric.

It adds absolutely nothing to the thread except for more antagonistic, hostile attitude that I've seen more than enough of lately.

Typical Bodacious. Nothing new to see here.

Flamebait or not, theres no need for further comments like that.

 

[ríomhaire]

Right now it's pretty much the Schiavo case.

Who's Schiavo

 

[Calanen]

I can't believe you truly don't know. Shes the woman who had brain damage after a heart attack, and was on assisted feeding tube for 15 years. The husband won a fight to pull the feeding tube and let her die. She is nearly dead or has died as I type this. Many US politicians attempted to intervene to keep her alive. Off topic yes - but, an explanation to answer your question.

 

[Calanen]

I just saw what people had to say about the whole Schiavo case. I am a conservative.

I would not have fought so strongly to keep this woman alive. The only objection I had about it all, and I don't know whether you can deal with this objection in any substantive way - is that starving a person to death is an incredibly horrible way to kill anyone, human being, or animal. It would have been better if they injected her with nembutal so she just never woke up. I realise though that the legal system does not allow this, ie you can remove assistance but you cannot actually kill them humanely.

Which seems a terrible shame to me. That a person's only way to die is through immense suffering.

 

[seinfeldrules]

I just saw what people had to say about the whole Schiavo case. I am a conservative.

I would not have fought so strongly to keep this woman alive. The only objection I had about it all, and I don't know whether you can deal with this objection in any substantive way - is that starving a person to death is an incredibly horrible way to kill anyone, human being, or animal. It would have been better if they injected her with nembutal so she just never woke up. I realise though that the legal system does not allow this, ie you can remove assistance but you cannot actually kill them humanely.

Which seems a terrible shame to me. That a person's only way to die is through immense suffering.

My exact thoughts. Couldnt they have just ODed her on morphine or something

 

[Edcrab]

Arguably, she wouldn't suffer, as she's in a PVS and incapable of feeling pain. As stated, however, it's an awful way to die and I hope in future cases that subjects with more brain activity will someday be allowed to go more "humanely".

Maybe Bush should see that poll-plunge as an example- the world has had enough of unnecessary intervention in any form.

 

[ríomhaire]

I can't believe you truly don't know.

I don't follow news much, especially not American news. If I read a headline about a woman being being euthenized I would not read it unless it was some sort of debate or editorial, I don't want to read about 1 single case of it.

 

[Calanen]

Arguably, she wouldn't suffer, as she's in a PVS and incapable of feeling pain. As stated, however, it's an awful way to die and I hope in future cases that subjects with more brain activity will someday be allowed to go more "humanely".

Don't kid yourself there - just because she is unable to respond, does not mean she would not feel the pain. And it would be pain throughout her whole body.

 

[Calanen]

I don't follow news much, especially not American news. If I read a headline about a woman being being euthenized I would not read it unless it was some sort of debate or editorial, I don't want to read about 1 single case of it.

The news, and I guess the rest of the thread. But you didn;t know so I told you.

Btw the reason this is on topic, is that pundits have said its the reason for Bush's lower approval rating. I have to say I doubt that to be honest. I think people's political views are a little more complicated than this one case.

 

[Edcrab]

Kidding myself? No, I'm acting on the doctors' statements- to the effect that she can neither respond to stimulus or register pain- rather than the hearsay circulated in the media.

 

[seinfeldrules]

I dunno what the doctors say, but in her situation I'd rather go out quickly rather than waiting 2 weeks to die.

 

[Edcrab]

Can't say I'd like to be in her position starving to death (or in her position at all, come to think of it) but, personally, I don't think Schiavo still inhabits that body- I think the brain damage that occured all those years ago means that what remains is, in essence, mindless.

 

[Absinthe]

Edcrab is right. Terri is gone. She's unable to feel pain at this point. You chould shoot her, stab her, starve her, drown her, whatever, and her body would never be able to tell the difference. I would, however, opt for euthanasia if it was legal, if only for the sake of dignity.

 

[mortiz]

They should just end her life now as oppose to starving her to death. It all boils down to the same thing, it's just one way is quick and definitely painless, and the other is long and drawn out and arguably painful for her, nevermind her family. (I’m not saying that it is, but that's what the conservatives would have you believe).

Anyway, yeah, Bush sucks!

 

[Calanen]

Kidding myself? No, I'm acting on the doctors' statements- to the effect that she can neither respond to stimulus or register pain- rather than the hearsay circulated in the media.

Hearsay huh? Check out paragraph 6 of this 'admissible' affidavit which is not hearsay. There is sufficient doubt in my mind at least, to think that this woman on the balance of probabilities does experience pain. You need very little mental function to feel pain.

http://www.nationalreview.com/pdf/Affidavit.pdf

 

[Edcrab]

The "hearsay" I refer to is the consistent misquoting of her own doctors, not the differing opinions of others in the field of medicine.

There's divison regarding how much pain, if any, she is capable of feeling, and further debate over how much patients in terminal decline feel when starving anyway. I'll respect the differences in opinion within the medical community, but I'll also respect the findings of her own doctors.

Her own staff have repeatedly stated that she does not respond to "pained stimulus", such as being pinched upon the arm, and that her "awareness" of things like a balloon or a family member can not be recreated in the presence of an official. That's enough for me to form a differing opinion of my own.

 

[Calanen]

The "hearsay" I refer to is the consistent misquoting of her own doctors, not the differing opinions of others in the field of medicine.

Did you read the affidavit (probably not). It was from a doctor who examined Terri, and reviewed her history, which demonstrated that the staff which treated her had noticed her feeling pain and gave examples.
Thats why I referred you to paragraph 6.

Its not just some talking head in the medical profession. This nuerologist met with and examined Terri.

All I am saying is that the doubts expressed, are not hearsay, but are admissible evidence based on facts and expert option such that the point of view that she does feel pain is not ridiculous, but a valid one.

 

[Edcrab]

And I point you to the line where he declares that he is an independant operative called in to examine her, so my own point- regarding his separation to the opinions of the hospital staff- stands.

They have both interpreted the same information- the same displays of possible emotion in the one patient- in different ways, and thus the "admissable evidence" differs for both sides, and as I stated I'll respect both parties but choose to "side" with Teri's original examiners.

 

[No Limit]

Don't kid yourself there - just because she is unable to respond, does not mean she would not feel the pain. And it would be pain throughout her whole body.

Let me ask you Calanen, are you a neurologist? Do you now better than the 7 out of 8 doctors that examined her? Your affidavits are taken from people that are simply not credibile in any way; the courts found this, not anyone else. This doctor talks about the celebral cortex needed to function, he fails to explain why she would have fucntion when the celebral cortex doesn't exist (noone has disputed this). I might also remind you the judge is a Republican and was assigned to this randomly. There have also been I believe 19 other judges that came to the same conclusions. What you are doing is sticking your nose where it doesn't belong; this is a family matter that is being used as a political tool by your fellow conservatives. There are currently about 30,000 cases like this, you guys haven't mentioned a single other one; this is an outrage. Here are some real medical facts:

http://atheism.about.com/od/terrischiavonews/a/facts.htm

A CT scan taken in 1996 revealed profound abnormalities. An EEG performed reveals that there is no electrical activity. In 2002, a CAT scan demonstrated massive atrophy. In place of normal brain tissue, almost all that is left are connective tissues and spinal fluid. Aside from a brain stem that keeps some autonomic functions going, she simply doesn’t have a brain.

This is not a condition for which there is any medicine or any therapy. When your brain is gone, it’s gone for good. Some describe Terri Schiavo as “brain damaged,” but this is as irresponsible as it is inaccurate. It’s done for the same reason that some refer to her as "Ms." Schiavo instead of the more correct "Mrs." Schiavo: to mislead. Terri Schiavo is “brain damaged” in the same way that a quadruple amputee has “arm damage.”

All of the doctors hired by Michael Schiavo and all independent doctors hired by the courts have agreed: Terri Schiavo is in a Persistent Vegetative State. No other conclusion is possible given the absence of a cerebral cortex. Doctors hired by Terri’s parents have disputed this diagnosis, but not in a substantive way that the courts have been able to take seriously. These doctors do not explain why the tests done so far are wrong (i.e., that she really does have a cerebral cortex) or, if the tests are correct, how a person can have consciousness and self-awareness in the absence of a cerebral cortex.

A persistent vegetative state means that a person’s brain is so severely damaged that even though they may exhibit wakefulness, they are incapable of experiencing awareness or reacting in a consistent manner to external stimuli. Terri Schiavo’s behavior may mimic normal consciousness and the heavily edited tapes released by Terri’s parents serve to perpetuate that impression, but tests performed by qualified physicians have demonstrated that there is simply nothing left there.

Here is a picture of the brain with a good explaination:

http://www.amptoons.com/blog/archives/2005/03/20/regarding-the-cat-scan-of-terri-schiavos-brain/

What completely pisses me off is the fact her parents and these so called "pro-life" supporters are trying to completely destroy the image of her husband again for their own political gain. Her husband has treated her extremely well and is in there everyday taking care of her, in 15 years she hasn't had a single bed sore. There are rumors he put her in this condition, that he just wants money (false considering people offered him 10 million to keep her alive, he refused), and that he abused her (again false as he allowed an autopsy). This is a good guy and I would say the same about the parents if they weren't out to destroy him. This case is an outrage and I am ashamed of anyone that sticks their nose in to this.