I can’t believe all these people picking on the Democats.
I mean, they have such a fine history of doing the right thing.
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
I can’t believe all these people picking on the Democats.
I mean, they have such a fine history of doing the right thing.[/quote]
Oh stop it. Reaching back into the centuries to dig up this kind of thing is fascinating from a historian’s perspective but it has literally no bearing on–and no place in–a modern political debate.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
Oh stop it. Reaching back into the centuries to dig up this kind of thing is fascinating from a historian’s perspective but it has literally no bearing on–and no place in–a modern political debate.[/quote]
Yeah, so ancient.
Founder of the “Progressive Platform” Democrat President Woodrow Wilson would disagree.
Shall I start putting up LBJ quotes about blacks and the purpose of “the Great Society” (and the entitlement programs that Democrats now use to to keep blacks enslaved, but in another way?
How about Margaret Sanger who started Planned Parenthood for the express purpose of ridding the nation of “ugly black babies”?
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
I can’t believe all these people picking on the Democats.
I mean, they have such a fine history of doing the right thing.[/quote]
Oh stop it. Reaching back into the centuries to dig up this kind of thing is fascinating from a historian’s perspective but it has literally no bearing on–and no place in–a modern political debate.[/quote]
That’s not necessarily true. It demonstrates each parties approach at one point in history. And talking about today is probably no more silly than the modern day liberals making sure that they call everything under the sun “racist” if it has anything to do with attacking Obama.
I wonder how silly that will look 100 years from now?
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
How about Margaret Sanger who started Planned Parenthood for the express purpose of ridding the nation of “ugly black babies”?[/quote]
You know, I just today saw a claim that 60% of pregnancies among blacks in NYC are terminated.
(40% are terminated, overall).
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
How about Margaret Sanger who started Planned Parenthood for the express purpose of ridding the nation of “ugly black babies”?[/quote]
You know, I just today saw a claim that 60% of pregnancies among blacks in NYC are terminated.
(40% are terminated, overall).
[/quote]
I think it’s obvious which party is hostile to blacks.
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
Oh stop it. Reaching back into the centuries to dig up this kind of thing is fascinating from a historian’s perspective but it has literally no bearing on–and no place in–a modern political debate.[/quote]
Yeah, so ancient.
Founder of the “Progressive Platform” Democrat President Woodrow Wilson would disagree.
Shall I start putting up LBJ quotes about blacks and the purpose of “the Great Society” (and the entitlement programs that Democrats now use to to keep blacks enslaved, but in another way?
[/quote]
Go for it. It will do nothing to imply that that Obama or any other Dem in office today is a racist.
You are a Republican, yes? If I were to pull up some mean-spirited and/or racist quotes from Republicans past, would that imply anything about you or your party?
Mitt Romney is a Mormon. Shall I bring up some things about the history of Mormonism? Perhaps some racism? Perhaps some quakers living on the moon? Will that do anything prove that Mitt Romney is a racist and/or believes in moon quakers?
No.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
How about Margaret Sanger who started Planned Parenthood for the express purpose of ridding the nation of “ugly black babies”?[/quote]
You know, I just today saw a claim that 60% of pregnancies among blacks in NYC are terminated.
(40% are terminated, overall).
[/quote]
I wrote extensively about this last year. Some neighborhoods are as high as 60% overall (Bed-Stuy, Brownsville, etc.)
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
How about Margaret Sanger who started Planned Parenthood for the express purpose of ridding the nation of “ugly black babies”?[/quote]
You know, I just today saw a claim that 60% of pregnancies among blacks in NYC are terminated.
(40% are terminated, overall).
[/quote]
I wrote extensively about this last year. Some neighborhoods are as high as 60% overall (Bed-Stuy, Brownsville, etc.)[/quote]
Depressing.
Wondering what people think of this:
It’s a few days old. It predicted that 'things will look grim" for Romney if Obama’s post-convention bounce puts him 5 or six points ahead. Today, CNN has him 6 up, Rasmussen 5. I found it surprising: I honestly didn’t expect things to look this good for Obama at this point in time. Since the end of the primary I’ve thought that the election was Romney’s to lose, but things don’t seem to be developing in that direction, especially with a now 75% chance that Ohio goes blue.
The debates probably won’t do much to change the map significantly. Of course, things could change drastically for a couple of reasons between now and November. But is anyone else surprised about this?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
How about Margaret Sanger who started Planned Parenthood for the express purpose of ridding the nation of “ugly black babies”?[/quote]
You know, I just today saw a claim that 60% of pregnancies among blacks in NYC are terminated.
(40% are terminated, overall).
[/quote]
I wrote extensively about this last year. Some neighborhoods are as high as 60% overall (Bed-Stuy, Brownsville, etc.)[/quote]
Depressing. [/quote]
Extremely.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
How about Margaret Sanger who started Planned Parenthood for the express purpose of ridding the nation of “ugly black babies”?[/quote]
You know, I just today saw a claim that 60% of pregnancies among blacks in NYC are terminated.
(40% are terminated, overall).
[/quote]
I wrote extensively about this last year. Some neighborhoods are as high as 60% overall (Bed-Stuy, Brownsville, etc.)[/quote]
Depressing. [/quote]
Extremely.[/quote]
Hold on a second. 60% of the time, a pregnant woman aborts her child?
This is a real life stat?
[quote]smh23 wrote:
Wondering what people think of this:
It’s a few days old. It predicted that 'things will look grim" for Romney if Obama’s post-convention bounce puts him 5 or six points ahead. Today, CNN has him 6 up, Rasmussen 5. I found it surprising: I honestly didn’t expect things to look this good for Obama at this point in time. Since the end of the primary I’ve thought that the election was Romney’s to lose, but things don’t seem to be developing in that direction, especially with a now 75% chance that Ohio goes blue.
The debates probably won’t do much to change the map significantly. Of course, things could change drastically for a couple of reasons between now and November. But is anyone else surprised about this?[/quote]
This was pretty accurate for predicting the 2008 election based on polls.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
How about Margaret Sanger who started Planned Parenthood for the express purpose of ridding the nation of “ugly black babies”?[/quote]
You know, I just today saw a claim that 60% of pregnancies among blacks in NYC are terminated.
(40% are terminated, overall).
[/quote]
I wrote extensively about this last year. Some neighborhoods are as high as 60% overall (Bed-Stuy, Brownsville, etc.)[/quote]
They really need to change their pro-choice platform, in 18 more years that will start translating to a lot more democrat votes if it were made illegal today.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
How about Margaret Sanger who started Planned Parenthood for the express purpose of ridding the nation of “ugly black babies”?[/quote]
You know, I just today saw a claim that 60% of pregnancies among blacks in NYC are terminated.
(40% are terminated, overall).
[/quote]
I wrote extensively about this last year. Some neighborhoods are as high as 60% overall (Bed-Stuy, Brownsville, etc.)[/quote]
Depressing. [/quote]
Extremely.[/quote]
Hold on a second. 60% of the time, a pregnant woman aborts her child?
This is a real life stat?
[/quote]
Yes, the measurement (called the Guttmacher ratio) represents induced terminations as a percentage of all pregnancies excluding miscarriages. NYC as a whole is 41 I believe, which itself is about double the national average.
Certain neighborhoods across the city have extremely high ratios. The data I analyzed was broken up by zip code and was from 2009 (the most recent available), and certain zips–especially in central Brooklyn–were as high as 60-70%.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
Wondering what people think of this:
It’s a few days old. It predicted that 'things will look grim" for Romney if Obama’s post-convention bounce puts him 5 or six points ahead. Today, CNN has him 6 up, Rasmussen 5. I found it surprising: I honestly didn’t expect things to look this good for Obama at this point in time. Since the end of the primary I’ve thought that the election was Romney’s to lose, but things don’t seem to be developing in that direction, especially with a now 75% chance that Ohio goes blue.
The debates probably won’t do much to change the map significantly. Of course, things could change drastically for a couple of reasons between now and November. But is anyone else surprised about this?[/quote]
Not suprised at all. Americans by and large aren’t into responsibility anymore, so everyone up there saying it is okay to blame everything other than your own actions for failure is right up their ally. Plus people are eating up this class warfare shit like cake.
Add in Obama is an incumbant, and he will win.
I was called a “tough nut to crack” because I destroyed talking point after talking point last night on facebook with links to the governments own website, and critical thinking. This proves to me, the vast majority are going to re-elect this clown on some shimmer of promises long sense proven false.
And honestly, I hope shit stays this bad. Fuck em. You get what you deserve.
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
How about Margaret Sanger who started Planned Parenthood for the express purpose of ridding the nation of “ugly black babies”?[/quote]
You know, I just today saw a claim that 60% of pregnancies among blacks in NYC are terminated.
(40% are terminated, overall).
[/quote]
I wrote extensively about this last year. Some neighborhoods are as high as 60% overall (Bed-Stuy, Brownsville, etc.)[/quote]
They really need to change their pro-choice platform, in 18 more years that will start translating to a lot more democrat votes if it were made illegal today.[/quote]
They can’t. Many of those folks would’ve collected government assistance, bringing the fiscal cliff we’re approaching too close for present vote-buying politicans’ comfort.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
Yes, the measurement (called the Guttmacher ratio) represents induced terminations as a percentage of all pregnancies excluding miscarriages. NYC as a whole is 41 I believe, which itself is about double the national average.
Certain neighborhoods across the city have extremely high ratios. The data I analyzed was broken up by zip code and was from 2009 (the most recent available), and certain zips–especially in central Brooklyn–were as high as 60-70%.[/quote]
Wow… Just… wow.
I mean, pro-choice is one thing, but this is what people are fighting for? This?
People stand up and clap for this?
This is what people cheer for?
This is making me sick to my stomach.
Obama won’t hold his lead, wait a week, bet you he drops by 3 points.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
Yes, the measurement (called the Guttmacher ratio) represents induced terminations as a percentage of all pregnancies excluding miscarriages. NYC as a whole is 41 I believe, which itself is about double the national average.
Certain neighborhoods across the city have extremely high ratios. The data I analyzed was broken up by zip code and was from 2009 (the most recent available), and certain zips–especially in central Brooklyn–were as high as 60-70%.[/quote]
Wow… Just… wow.
I mean, pro-choice is one thing, but this is what people are fighting for? This?
People stand up and clap for this?
This is what people cheer for?
This is making me sick to my stomach.[/quote]
Sir, this is progress. Did you not feel the festive spirit outside of the DNC? You weren’t enraptured by the Vaginas defending and celebrating the ultimate act of freedom?