American Politics 16

[Shryke]

Shryke,

Because no political group would ever try to use or manipulate census data to it's advantage?

Wait, so your suggesting that ACORN is triyng to rig the next election?

Or are you simply making spurious allegations under the guise of "innocent questions" with no basis other then your own paranoia?

[Greg]

So insane conspiracy theory, gotcha.

Very witty, sir.

But if you had any idea how batshit insane the post census redistricting is, it wouldn't seem that insane to you.

Once again, I don't think that the numbers are being rigged, but surely you can see the legitimate concern over keeping the numbers as honest as possible?

[Shryke]

Once again, I don't think that the numbers are being rigged, but surely you can see the legitimate concern over keeping the numbers as honest as possible?

The concern is only legitimate if you can show some sort of attempt to fudge the numbers.

If you can't, your inventing phantom boogeymen.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Shryke,

Wait, so your suggesting that ACORN is triyng to rig the next election?

Or are you simply making spurious allegations under the guise of "innocent questions" with no basis other then your own paranoia?

I'm suggesting ACORN employees have a history of unreliablity when it comes to voter registration (an endevour not dissimilar to Census taking). Whether there is a political motive for those actions is irrelevant. The unreliablity is the problem. The Census needs to be as accurate as possible. If ACORN is consistent in its hiring practices I don't think they should participate in the Census.

[Annelise]

If they can't be trusted to act on a trigger, they can't be trusted to enact and maintain UHC legislation.

Simple as that.

Well, I wouldn't trust a GOP majority to enact it, true. I may be nutty, but I have more faith (in both parties) once it's actively on the books, so to speak. Until that time, I fully expect it to be a political tug of war.

[Sariel]

If they can't be trusted to act on a trigger, they can't be trusted to enact and maintain UHC legislation.

Simple as that.

yes.. cause you know.. they're the same.. :leaving:

[Swordfish]

Shryke,

I'm suggesting ACORN employees have a history of unreliablity when it comes to voter registration (an endevour not dissimilar to Census taking). Whether there is a political motive for those actions is irrelevant. The unreliablity is the problem. The Census needs to be as accurate as possible. If ACORN is consistent in its hiring practices I don't think they should participate in the Census.

Yes, this.

Well, I wouldn't trust a GOP majority to enact it, true. I may be nutty, but I have more faith (in both parties) once it's actively on the books, so to speak.

Ignoring the fact that it would have to be crafted and enacted to begin with, why would you have more faith once it's on the books? All the same factors will still be in place.

[Greg]

The concern is only legitimate if you can show some sort of attempt to fudge the numbers.

If you can't, your inventing phantom boogeymen.

For the third time, >>I<< don't think anyone is rigging the numbers.

However, I don't think that someone being concerned that the contractor who is being given a very politically important task has a very definite political bias, is insane. I agree some expressions of concern are painfully tin-foil hat in nature, but still I don't think the concern itself is foolish.

[Shryke]

I'm suggesting ACORN employees have a history of unreliablity when it comes to voter registration (an endevour not dissimilar to Census taking). Whether there is a political motive for those actions is irrelevant. The unreliablity is the problem. The Census needs to be as accurate as possible. If ACORN is consistent in its hiring practices I don't think they should participate in the Census.

Who normally does the census? And how do you know that the alternative is any more reliable?

Also, ACORN is pretty damn reliable in that most of the people from ACORN who end up being reported for doing illegal shit are reported by ACORN themselves.

But your right, self-policing is a sign of guilt.

For the third time, >>I<< don't think anyone is rigging the numbers.

However, I don't think that someone being concerned that the contractor who is being given a very politically important task has a very definite political bias, is insane. I agree some expressions of concern are painfully tin-foil hat in nature, but still I don't think the concern itself is foolish.

Well I may not be concerned that the President is, in fact, a secret Alien Jew Lizard, some people are. I think people should be concerned too.

Also, where's ACORN's political bias?

[TrackerNeil]

If they can't be trusted to act on a trigger, they can't be trusted to enact and maintain UHC legislation.

Simple as that.

To you, Swordfish, I am sure it is.

[Swordfish]

To you, Swordfish, I am sure it is.

Why would you doubt it? i have said so many times in many ways.

Or was this supposed to be some kind of dig at me?

;)

[The Progressive]

Shryke,

I'm suggesting ACORN employees have a history of unreliablity when it comes to voter registration (an endevour not dissimilar to Census taking). Whether there is a political motive for those actions is irrelevant. The unreliablity is the problem. The Census needs to be as accurate as possible. If ACORN is consistent in its hiring practices I don't think they should participate in the Census.

This is grossly inaccurate. A very few ACORN employees (the number is so small it is almost insignificant) have generated fake paperwork in order to make money off ACORN. The majority of these cases were uncovered by ACORN itself and were duly notified to the approriate governmental agency that would handle them.

Thus, whether or not ACORN has a political slant in irrelevant. The self-policing on their part is vastly more adequate than any governmental contractors of any size and is therefore quite capable of handling the contractual work of conducing Census survey.

I don't think that someone being concerned that the contractor who is being given a very politically important task has a very definite political bias, is insane. I agree some expressions of concern are painfully tin-foil hat in nature, but still I don't think the concern itself is foolish.

The concern itself is foolish and verge on tin-foil hat territory if there's no evidence that their Census contract work have been implemented fraudulently.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Lev,

I said political bias is irrelevant. Why is it important to you that ACORN be a Census contractor.

[Shryke]

Lev,

I said political bias is irrelevant. Why is it important to you that ACORN be a Census contractor.

Why is it important to you that they not be?

[The Progressive]

Lev,

I said political bias is irrelevant. Why is it important to you that ACORN be a Census contractor.

You made grossly exxaggered assumptions about the caliber of employees, correction was needed. As to their relationship to the Census, don't you think that they should be given an equal opportunity for receiving the grant just like every other non-profits?

[The Progressive]

Why would you doubt it? i have said so many times in many ways.

Or was this supposed to be some kind of dig at me?

;)

Well you have changed your stances so many times now (from doctor's choice, to patients right, to cost equation, to unique snowflake argument, etc.) ............ it's getting rather difficult to keep track of.

*obligatory ;) *

[lokisnow]

But your right, self-policing is a sign of guilt.

This is how republicans know that Halliburton and Blackwater are innocent. If they don't self-police it is impossible they are guilty of anything.

[Guy Kilmore]

You are right about being impartial, in a way. What can be done with census data? I suppose you could over count liberal areas and under count conservative ones.

But.. why do we need to contract out to a political group for Census duty? Is the current system of using bored retirees not working anymore?

If they are attempting to take a count of low income people and the homeless, bored retirees will have a difficult time doing this, whereas various non profits have cultivated trusting relationships with people who are apart of these groups. In Saint Paul and Minneapolis, trying to take any kind of census of the homeless without involving the Wilder Foundation would be an exercise in futility. They are the only non-profit with the resources and the connections with either the population themselves or other service providers to begin such a task.

Also, by having individuals that the homeless trust they are more able to help reduce errenous answers. Not that this is always successful.

I personally think it is important to ensure that some of our move vulnerable citizens are recognized as much as the rest of us.

[Aemon Stark]

Do NOT get me started on the pre-authorization bullshit thing. Fuckity fuck -- back in July when the doctors thought I had a close-to-rupturing aneurysm (a ruptured cerebral aneurysm can be fatal), I had to fight the fucking insurance company tooth and nail to get "pre-authorization" of an emergency MRI. Because nothing says "wait a few days" like "emergency." It was a nightmare. I was sent home with the instructions "if you get a bad headache, go to the nearest ER as fast as you can." :thumbsdown: It took 2 days to get that MRI OK'd.

ETA: sorry for that OT rant. Clearly, I just needed to get that out of my system. You can admire the results of my "emergency MRI" in my avatar. ;)

I don't even understand how this is permitted. It's so far beyond the pale as to be completely inconceivable. For all the whining about wait times for elective procedures, there is no bureaucrat involved in emergency matters. Why are health care reformists not playing up these kinds of *rationing* in their arguments?

[Annelise]

Ignoring the fact that it would have to be crafted and enacted to begin with, why would you have more faith once it's on the books? All the same factors will still be in place.

If you mean when retooling is necessary like currently with Medicare and Medicaid, yes, that would incite a partisan squabble. But both parties will have the mutual issue of voters to please, once the public becomes invested in a public option, like they are with Medicare and Medicaid.

You know I don't share your total lack of confidence (or you don't share my naiveté if you prefer). I may still get there depending how this stab at reform goes of course. I think we worry about the same thing- healthcare costs bankrupting the country. Me, if we do nothing (and maybe you too) but you are certain that a public option will do it, while I am not. IIRC, neither of us see a different option on that score that seems very hopeful. :(

Hopefully both of us will end up pleasantly surprised, somehow. The glass is half full, the glass is half full...