"If a disabled person is not terminally ill, not in a coma, and not being kept alive on life support, and they have no written directive, should or should they not be denied food and water," the poll asked.
A whopping 79 percent said the patient should not have food and water taken away while just 9 percent said yes."
Most of the MSM was careful to make sure people do NOT understand the situation and the facts of the case.
And the MSM will not understand why they are losing more and more credibility with the informed citizens.
Gee ... interesting how wording a question changes the outcome of a poll
Not holding breath until MSM broadcasts this even once, much less as often as they broadcasted the other polls.
Uh-oh.
I have a conflict.
I'd like to believe the American people feel this way, and certainly I think the opinion cited in the MSM polls was predicated on faulty information supplied by the MSM. If given truth numbers would be different.
But, it's Zogby.
Hey, it's that Zogby guy!!! He had Kerry winning 311 electoral votes!!!
We won't see a poll of responses to this question: Do you think a severely disabled person who is not brain dead, is not on life support and is not comatose be starved to death against the wishes of her loving family who are willing to care for her and pay for her care?
My local Long Island paper was surprisingly against starving Terri. Surprisingly because they are usually left wing. I think it had something to do with the fact that their opinion writer has a severely disabled daughter. And while he is usually left wing he wrote a beautiful piece about how is daughter may not be able to walk or talk but that she can smile. They put it on the front page. This issue is resonating with many people. And I think the Democratic party has really dug their grave with their silent approval of this travesty.
Yes, the MSM can go on and on for weeks decrying naked pyramids in Iraq, with above-the-fold pictures everyday, yet will remain silent when an innocent, handicapped, American woman is starved to death.
I wonder how a poll would come out if the options were starve the person to death, put a pillow over their face or give them a lethal injection. No matter what the doctors say they didn't do the right to die cause any good by starving someone to death.
Well, well, well, look at the results when the public is presented with questions based on the actual FACTS of the case. These results are more in line with what my gut told me people's reactions would be. The questions in the ABC poll were based on the falsehoods and lies perpetuated by the MSM.
pattyjo
Zogby?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Zogby??
.
.
.
.
.
.
Zogby?
The "polls" leading up to Schiavo's murder were designed by a bunch of creeps in the Liberal MSM who were doing the bidding of their euthanasia-loving pals. The euthanasia crowd wanted certain "results" from these "polls" and their toadies in the Liberal MSM got them their "results." Once again, the Leftist MSM has snookered the American public. Some people will never learn.
Relevant info:
Schiavo Raised Profile of Disabled
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A19752-2005Apr1.html
For many disabled Americans, seeing the final images of Terri Schiavo was like looking at a terrifying picture of themselves -- undervalued and at the mercy of others.
"We do not identify with the spouse or the parents," Diane Coleman, president and founder of the disability rights group Not Dead Yet, explained just days before Schiavo's death. "We identify with her. She is one of us."
"The concern is that our guardians are being given carte blanche to starve and dehydrate us to death without any meaningful safeguards," she said.
Some disabled people were unconvinced that Schiavo had no higher-brain functioning. Others argued that even people in her condition have the ability to bring meaning to other people's lives. But overwhelmingly, the objections centered on personal fears.
Even many who have a living will worry that a time may come when they are unable to communicate their desire to live, and a nondisabled person will make faulty assumptions. Many talk of a "slippery slope" on which the life of a disabled person is increasingly devalued.
Oh my gosh, this is really scary!! If that is the ENTIRE question ("If a disabled person is not terminally ill, not in a coma, and not being kept alive on life support, and they have no written directive, should or should they not be denied food and water,"), it could apply to ANY disabled person.
9% of respondents think they should be denied food and water????
Should someone with Multiple Sclerosis be starved to death? Cerebral Palsy? Spinal cord injuries? Down's Syndrome?
How could anyone have said we should deny them food and water? Now our media can extol how some people think disabled individuals should be put to death, without concern for the degree of disability. That ANYONE said yes is the bigger concern.
Well, duh!
Only the real brain dead want to attach themselves to and defend the indefensible act of sentencing her to die of thirst. I bet the swamper Boys from Brazil don't like this one little 'ole bit, nor their supporting gaggle of goons.
Read 'em and weep you freaking ghouls!
So, this will be all over the newspapers and TV news tomorrow, right?
Another relevant article:
Terri Schiavo case could affect disabled voters' views
http://news.scotsman.com/opinion.cfm?id=348632005
Then Eleanor Smith, a self-described liberal agnostic lesbian, whose childhood bout with polio left her confined to a wheelchair, argued that "At this point I would rather have a right-wing Christian decide my fate than an ACLU member." Ms Smith protested last week outside the hospice where Mrs Schiavo lay dehydrating and starving.
In fact, surveys of disabled Americans suggest a strong tilt towards the Republican Party. According to the campaign group, the National Organisation on Disability, back during the 2000 presidential elections, the Democratic candidate, Vice- president Al Gore, outpolled George W Bush among disabled Americans by 56 per cent to 38 per cent.
But only four years later, at the 2004 presidential contest, Mr Bush beat Senator John Kerry by 52.5 per cent to 46 per cent - a 24.5 point shift.
Liberalism once championed the interests of society’s most vulnerable members. Today, it increasingly champions their "right to die". No-one should be surprised if this affects their decisions as they exercise their right to vote.