Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 10-28-2014, 10:39 AM
 
8,391 posts, read 6,297,969 times
Reputation: 2314

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Joshua View Post
It's because conservatives think liberals are well-meaning boobs where liberals think conservatives are Beelzebub.
No it's because conservatives are far less likely to have friends on social media with differing opinions are far less likely to get messages from sources with differing opinions.

The data is there for all to see.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-28-2014, 10:40 AM
 
Location: Pa
20,300 posts, read 22,224,166 times
Reputation: 6553
It wasn't a real friendship if a person can't get past political differences. Who would want to be friends with such a person anyway?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2014, 10:49 AM
Status: "everybody getting reported now.." (set 24 days ago)
 
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,560 posts, read 16,548,014 times
Reputation: 6042
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volobjectitarian View Post
Really, the subject of the thread is the Pew poll that hammers Fox News? That was included as both deflection and axe grind since the other thread it's in got closed.
these threads are merged, the subject is media, both social and entertainment/informative

And the specific post you responded to was about the social portion, so again, how was it changing the subject ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2014, 10:49 AM
 
3,216 posts, read 2,231,567 times
Reputation: 1224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamme73 View Post
This is what's so radical about a huge percentage of conservatives, they hold odious and ignorant beliefs.
And this statement is a perfect example of how most liberals consider anyone who holds a belief different than their own to be "less than". Most people will not choose to read entries in their FB from people that close minded.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2014, 10:58 AM
 
13,961 posts, read 5,628,343 times
Reputation: 8617
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankMiller View Post
Do I even need to add anything? Anybody who is actually familiar with birth control can read this and see how crazy this statement is.
Sandra Fluke claimed, in her own words, that "without insurance coverage, contraception, as you know, can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school."

The cost of a medical exam at any Planned Parenthood shop or minute clinic, for the purpose of getting a birth control prescription, costs a max of $250 (per Planned Parenthood's own website). From there, depending on "coverage" birth control pills cost $0-50 per month. In 32 months of law school, I get $1800 (max exam cost plus $50 per month for max cost, again according to Planned Parenthood). That's max freaking cost of contraception. Now, if you have some medical reason for not taking the pill, there's condoms. The average decent quality condom runs about $1 a piece. If during 32 months you burn through $3,000 worth of condoms at $1 a piece, you're having sex ~3x a day, every day. That's a whole lot of sex.

So her numbers are whacked, unless she is not on the pill and has a ton of sex with condoms. No other way to get her $3k thing to gel.

What Fluke did right after her "contraception cost" comments though, was switch to OB/GYN coverage generally, like ovarian this, and cervical that, and cancer something else, and blah blah. None of that had anything to do with contraception, but like all good rent seekers, she switched topics midstream to make contraception appear as a women's health and safety issue. It never was. The Catholic Church pays for OB/GYN coverage, and they offer plans that cover a wide array of these things. They don't cover abortifacients and most contraception. She mixed the two things, intentionally misdirecting the truth.

Rush chose poor words, but parsing her $3k statement, she can defend her numbers or let people wonder how anyone in the era of cheap birth control spends a $grand a year.

And again, the entire "you called her a ****" thing detracts from the absurd spectacle of a college student being called to deliver essentially a campaign speech filled with lies and misdirections in order to advance a political agenda and do a hatchet job on the Catholic Church, using...yes, say it with me...EMOTION BASED arguments devoid of verifiable fact.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2014, 11:00 AM
Status: "everybody getting reported now.." (set 24 days ago)
 
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,560 posts, read 16,548,014 times
Reputation: 6042
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Christina Romer's (Obama's former chief economic advisor, before she realized Obama and other Dems are completely clueless on this) research.

Christina Romer Knows Tax Hikes Will Kill the Recovery - Forbes

http://emlab.berkeley.edu/~dromer/pa...ERJune2010.pdf
You should probably read the whole paper, im only on page 6 and it says tax cuts are bad as well. In fact, it argues that any exogenous(their word, not mine) tax cut or increase is bad.

It basically argues that everything, cut or increase, should be phased in over a number of years, not all at once.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2014, 11:29 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,031 posts, read 44,840,107 times
Reputation: 13715
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsjj251 View Post
You should probably read the whole paper, im only on page 6 and it says tax cuts are bad as well.
Apparently, you missed this :
Quote:
"The most significant tax cuts to stimulate long-run growth are well known: the 1948 tax cut passed over Truman's veto; the 1964 Kennedy-Johnson tax cut; the 1981 Reagan tax cut; and the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts."
Page 16.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2014, 11:38 AM
 
Location: Boston, MA
14,483 posts, read 11,285,313 times
Reputation: 9002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamme73 View Post
No it's because conservatives are far less likely to have friends on social media with differing opinions are far less likely to get messages from sources with differing opinions.

The data is there for all to see.
I wasn't referring specifically to social media.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2014, 11:40 AM
Status: "everybody getting reported now.." (set 24 days ago)
 
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,560 posts, read 16,548,014 times
Reputation: 6042
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Apparently, you missed this : Page 16.
1. That is page 13, not 16

2. The study talks about both increases and decreases in tax. It list both the best increases and best decreases, why do you think what you posted discredited what I posted ? Did i claim all tax increases were good, all tax cuts were bad or vice versa ????
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2014, 11:54 AM
 
17,273 posts, read 9,562,968 times
Reputation: 16468
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volobjectitarian View Post

That WAS Fluke's argument. She has so much sex that she cannot afford her own contraception, and that not forcing others to subsidize it is tantamount to restricting her from having sex. Read her testimony before the committee. Everybody flipped on Rush so hard they forgot that FLuke was whining that because she has so much sex, birth control costs exceed her financial wherewithal. According to her own words, she's definitely promiscuous, and there is a fitting pejorative for promiscuity.
Wow. Seriously, back away from the radio or the tv that is blaring blatant lies & start reading. You have absolutely no idea how birth control works. Literally, none. That's embarrassing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:30 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top