Speaking of phony...
The Inevitable New The Inevitable Trump Mocking Thread
- Thread starter Nonononono
- Start date
And Fries has less...
You're not really this dumb, are you? Or do you just like to spread fake stuff?
Bruddah IZ
DA
I think he just enjoys your reaction. I do too.
Kitsch?
Sheriff Joe
DA
https://www.foxnews.com/world/justin-trudeau-brownface-canada-photo-apologizes
Gotta love racists from the north.
Gotta love racists from the north.
Sheriff Joe
DA
Just can’t make this shit up,
https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2019/09/18/ann-coulter-penis-story-collapses-in-flaccid-hearsay/
If I can produce someone who saw John Roberts’ penis in college, can we get the Obamacare opinion overturned?
As all MSNBC viewers are well aware, last Sunday’s edition of the New York Times ran an excerpt of the book The Education of Brett Kavanaugh: An Investigation, by Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly, which revives Debbie Ramirez’s accusations against the Supreme Court nominee.
Quick reminder: This is NOT the Kavanaugh accuser with two front doors. It is NOT the Kavanaugh accuser whose own father warned that she had psychological problems.
This is the one who didn’t remember what Kavanaugh did to her for more than 30 years, until a few lefty friends helpfully reminded her that they’d heard something about it from a guy, who heard it from a guy, whereupon she spent six days “assessing her memories” during the nomination hearings — and darned if it didn’t all come back to her!
What the guy who heard it from a guy heard was that, at a drunken party in a freshman dorm, Kavanaugh unzipped his pants and stuck his penis in Ramirez’s face.
Contrary to Pogrebin and Kelly’s claim that “at least” seven people “heard about the Yale incident long before Mr. Kavanaugh was a federal judge,” this vast array of witnesses includes only one person whose secondhand, rumor-mill story includes both Kavanaugh and Ramirez: Kenneth Appold.
(All we know about Appold is that he is a professor at the Princeton Theological Seminary, meaning that he is less likely to believe in God than any person not a professor at the Princeton Theological Seminary.)
The guy Appold claims he heard it from doesn’t remember it.
Are you following how absurd this is?
This is not merely hearsay; it’s double hearsay offered by only one person, and he wasn’t there, but he heard about it from another person, who denies knowledge of it. And the corpus delecti is something that happened with a group of drunk teenagers 35 years ago.
The main point made by the excerpt is to remind us that truth means nothing to liberals.
Here’s the book’s big new scoop:
“We also uncovered a previously unreported story about Mr. Kavanaugh in his freshman year that echoes Ms. Ramirez’s allegation. A classmate, Max Stier, saw Mr. Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of a female student.”
This story was on the Times’ website for more than 24 hours when — at close to midnight on Sunday — the paper issued an “Editors’ Note” admitting that the victim does not remember it.
I’m not even going to mention that Stier was a lawyer for Bill Clinton, defending him for whipping it out in front of Paula Jones, as governor of Arkansas. Obviously, that’s not as serious as doing it as a college freshman.
But could some good reporter — which excludes anyone in the mainstream media — look into Stier’s undergraduate years? Any embarrassing incidents when he was a freshman? Any rumors or third-hand accounts? While we’re at it, can we get Stier’s tax returns for the last 30 years? Where’s Chuck Johnson when we need him?
Let’s consider just the physics of Stier’s story.
How can anyone, let alone two or more people, “push” a man’s penis into another person’s hand? Just how big is Brett Kavanaugh’s penis, anyway? Wouldn’t a man’s penis, if it were able to be “pushed” by one’s friends into third parties, need to be erect and at least 3 feet long? Don’t push my penis, bro!
The best part of the Times excerpt is the Women’s Temperance League tone of the piece.
“(Ramirez’s Yale classmates) also had experience with drinking and sexual behavior that Ms. Ramirez — who had not intended to be intimate with a man until her wedding night — lacked. … ‘I had gone through high school, I’m the good girl, and now, in one evening, it was all ripped away,’ she said in an interview. …”
If someone from Bob Jones University said that her dreams of marital purity were “ripped away” because she saw a man’s penis in college, liberals would never stop laughing.
“(Kavanaugh) was … known to attend an annual teenage bacchanal called ‘Beach Week,’ where the hookups and drinking were more important than the sand and swimming.”
It wasn’t much of a “beach party” — if you want to call it that. Instead of wholesome fun, the young people consumed alcoholic beverages and engaged in inappropriate flirting. Everyone said it was inappropriate — not just us.
Most shocking, from a “Little House on the Prairie” perspective, was this:
“People … would start to say ‘Debbie does …’ playing on the 1978 porn movie ‘Debbie Does Dallas.’ But Ms. Ramirez didn’t understand the reference.”
Remind me: Aren’t these the same people demanding that we teach kindergartners about “fisting”?
But the “Debbie Does Defamation” authors weren’t finished.
“(Kavanaugh) came of age during the era of ‘Porky’s’ and ‘Fast Times at Ridgemont High.’”
Ha! What do you say, NOW, Trumpsters?
Ruth Bader Ginsburg “came of age during the era of” the Bay of Pigs and the Vietnam War. Can we impeach her?
I’m beginning to suspect that, instead of writing the book, Pogrebin and Kelly screwed around for six months, then pulled an all-nighter the day before it was due. Also, “American Pie” was big!
But half the Democratic candidates for president are demanding Kavanaugh’s impeachment on the basis of this sublime idiocy. Trump touched their SCOTUS!
https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2019/09/18/ann-coulter-penis-story-collapses-in-flaccid-hearsay/
If I can produce someone who saw John Roberts’ penis in college, can we get the Obamacare opinion overturned?
As all MSNBC viewers are well aware, last Sunday’s edition of the New York Times ran an excerpt of the book The Education of Brett Kavanaugh: An Investigation, by Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly, which revives Debbie Ramirez’s accusations against the Supreme Court nominee.
Quick reminder: This is NOT the Kavanaugh accuser with two front doors. It is NOT the Kavanaugh accuser whose own father warned that she had psychological problems.
This is the one who didn’t remember what Kavanaugh did to her for more than 30 years, until a few lefty friends helpfully reminded her that they’d heard something about it from a guy, who heard it from a guy, whereupon she spent six days “assessing her memories” during the nomination hearings — and darned if it didn’t all come back to her!
What the guy who heard it from a guy heard was that, at a drunken party in a freshman dorm, Kavanaugh unzipped his pants and stuck his penis in Ramirez’s face.
Contrary to Pogrebin and Kelly’s claim that “at least” seven people “heard about the Yale incident long before Mr. Kavanaugh was a federal judge,” this vast array of witnesses includes only one person whose secondhand, rumor-mill story includes both Kavanaugh and Ramirez: Kenneth Appold.
(All we know about Appold is that he is a professor at the Princeton Theological Seminary, meaning that he is less likely to believe in God than any person not a professor at the Princeton Theological Seminary.)
The guy Appold claims he heard it from doesn’t remember it.
Are you following how absurd this is?
This is not merely hearsay; it’s double hearsay offered by only one person, and he wasn’t there, but he heard about it from another person, who denies knowledge of it. And the corpus delecti is something that happened with a group of drunk teenagers 35 years ago.
The main point made by the excerpt is to remind us that truth means nothing to liberals.
Here’s the book’s big new scoop:
“We also uncovered a previously unreported story about Mr. Kavanaugh in his freshman year that echoes Ms. Ramirez’s allegation. A classmate, Max Stier, saw Mr. Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of a female student.”
This story was on the Times’ website for more than 24 hours when — at close to midnight on Sunday — the paper issued an “Editors’ Note” admitting that the victim does not remember it.
I’m not even going to mention that Stier was a lawyer for Bill Clinton, defending him for whipping it out in front of Paula Jones, as governor of Arkansas. Obviously, that’s not as serious as doing it as a college freshman.
But could some good reporter — which excludes anyone in the mainstream media — look into Stier’s undergraduate years? Any embarrassing incidents when he was a freshman? Any rumors or third-hand accounts? While we’re at it, can we get Stier’s tax returns for the last 30 years? Where’s Chuck Johnson when we need him?
Let’s consider just the physics of Stier’s story.
How can anyone, let alone two or more people, “push” a man’s penis into another person’s hand? Just how big is Brett Kavanaugh’s penis, anyway? Wouldn’t a man’s penis, if it were able to be “pushed” by one’s friends into third parties, need to be erect and at least 3 feet long? Don’t push my penis, bro!
The best part of the Times excerpt is the Women’s Temperance League tone of the piece.
“(Ramirez’s Yale classmates) also had experience with drinking and sexual behavior that Ms. Ramirez — who had not intended to be intimate with a man until her wedding night — lacked. … ‘I had gone through high school, I’m the good girl, and now, in one evening, it was all ripped away,’ she said in an interview. …”
If someone from Bob Jones University said that her dreams of marital purity were “ripped away” because she saw a man’s penis in college, liberals would never stop laughing.
“(Kavanaugh) was … known to attend an annual teenage bacchanal called ‘Beach Week,’ where the hookups and drinking were more important than the sand and swimming.”
It wasn’t much of a “beach party” — if you want to call it that. Instead of wholesome fun, the young people consumed alcoholic beverages and engaged in inappropriate flirting. Everyone said it was inappropriate — not just us.
Most shocking, from a “Little House on the Prairie” perspective, was this:
“People … would start to say ‘Debbie does …’ playing on the 1978 porn movie ‘Debbie Does Dallas.’ But Ms. Ramirez didn’t understand the reference.”
Remind me: Aren’t these the same people demanding that we teach kindergartners about “fisting”?
But the “Debbie Does Defamation” authors weren’t finished.
“(Kavanaugh) came of age during the era of ‘Porky’s’ and ‘Fast Times at Ridgemont High.’”
Ha! What do you say, NOW, Trumpsters?
Ruth Bader Ginsburg “came of age during the era of” the Bay of Pigs and the Vietnam War. Can we impeach her?
I’m beginning to suspect that, instead of writing the book, Pogrebin and Kelly screwed around for six months, then pulled an all-nighter the day before it was due. Also, “American Pie” was big!
But half the Democratic candidates for president are demanding Kavanaugh’s impeachment on the basis of this sublime idiocy. Trump touched their SCOTUS!
Sheriff Joe
DA
Lying bitch,
Fact Check: Elizabeth Warren Exaggerates Crowd Sizes for the Third Time
Elizabeth Warren (Drew Angerer / Getty)
JOEL B. POLLAK18 Sep 2019798
3:13
CLAIM: Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) “didn’t have 20,000 people” at her rally in Manhattan on Monday night, according to President Donald Trump.
VERDICT: Likely true. The maximum capacity of Washington Square Park is 10,000.
As Trump suggested Tuesday, Warren appears to have exaggerated the size of her rally crowd in Washington Square on Monday night — apparently the third time she has done so in recent weeks.
Fact Check: Elizabeth Warren Exaggerates Crowd Sizes for the Third Time
Elizabeth Warren (Drew Angerer / Getty)
JOEL B. POLLAK18 Sep 2019798
3:13
CLAIM: Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) “didn’t have 20,000 people” at her rally in Manhattan on Monday night, according to President Donald Trump.
VERDICT: Likely true. The maximum capacity of Washington Square Park is 10,000.
As Trump suggested Tuesday, Warren appears to have exaggerated the size of her rally crowd in Washington Square on Monday night — apparently the third time she has done so in recent weeks.
Bruddah IZ
DA
“Weʻre getting ready for Cincinatti”
Hüsker Dü
DA
It appears parody can be added to the long list of things beyond your grasp.
Sheriff Joe
DA
By Its Own Definition Antifa is Fascist
By Daniel Kowalski
Antifa’s founding can be traced back to 2007 in Portland and the Rose City Antifa group. Prior to 2016, the group’s activities were limited to harassing neo-Nazi gatherings and doxing white supremacists. But that changed in 2016 after the election of Donald Trump, when the group declared a national emergency.
Rose City Antifa has a website full of information about the group. In their FAQ (frequently asked questions) section, they admit that fascism can be difficult to define as all fascist movements do not have the same features. They utilize a definition of fascism that is based on a cluster of traits, so that a specific definition is never mentioned. While a movement may not have every one of these traits, if there is a preponderance (a specific number is never defined but we can believe that it’s two or more) then Antifa will classify that movement or group as fascist. By these criteria, Antifa clearly is fascist.
Seven of the traits of Fascism listed on their page are:
Antifa claims to be against racism and hate speech. In fact, most people are against racism and hate speech and when they hear it, they freely make up their mind and assume that speaker is an idiot. And in a free society, people can say and do stupid things freely without being stopped forcefully unless they’re inciting violence.
Antifa says that all fascists should be prevented from speaking. They are against the concept of free speech and have no problem violatingthe First Amendment rights of others. They are therefore anti-Enlightenment and anti-reason.
“Failing to stop fascists from speaking, that is, giving them the opportunity to organize and impose their agenda on the rest of us – makes you as bad as them.”
The Creation of the Vilified Other: By having a broad list of traits that can be used to label someone as a fascist and then shut them out of society Antifa itself is creating a vilified other.
Reliance on Violence or Threats of Violence to Impose Views on Others: Showing up to demonstrations and events in a ski mask with bats and mace to club those you define as “fascist” fits this criterion. Likewise, the assault on journalist Andy Ngo was meant to serve as a message to anyone who professed a negative view of the group.
Anti-Liberal: The United States of America is a liberal democracy that Antifa rejects because they claim, without proof, that the liberal democratically elected leaders “have more in common with fascism than they do with us” So, the elected leaders and voters must therefore be part of the vilified others. They also criticize the liberals that defend free speech.
Anti-Conservative: They have showed up to harass and attack participants at conservative gatherings that were not-alt right and did not have any ties to White Nationalism on the basis that conservatives are oppressive fascists.
Portraying the Current Social and Political Situation as One of Dire Decay Brought About by Decadence and Corruption:“Likewise, we reject the “right” of the government and police – who have more in common with fascists than they do with us – to decide for us when fascists have crossed the line by merely expressing themselves into posing an immediate threat.”
By rejecting the democratically elected law makers and law enforcers as corrupted fascists they are portraying the current situation as decayed by corruption where the only hope for healing is for them to take matters into their own hands.
By using Antifa’s own definition that one can be a fascist by having traits found in Fascist government, Antifa is fascist by their own logic. It’s clear that they believe the current liberal democracy government of the country has failed and what the people need are strong incorruptible leaders to take the reins and do what is needed to fix it in their image.
And while Antifa does not have a leader or spokesperson whose identity is publicly known, there is someone is running their official website and planning their protests. They might be keeping their identity secret for now out of fear of law enforcement, but they are likely out there.
By Daniel Kowalski
Antifa’s founding can be traced back to 2007 in Portland and the Rose City Antifa group. Prior to 2016, the group’s activities were limited to harassing neo-Nazi gatherings and doxing white supremacists. But that changed in 2016 after the election of Donald Trump, when the group declared a national emergency.
Rose City Antifa has a website full of information about the group. In their FAQ (frequently asked questions) section, they admit that fascism can be difficult to define as all fascist movements do not have the same features. They utilize a definition of fascism that is based on a cluster of traits, so that a specific definition is never mentioned. While a movement may not have every one of these traits, if there is a preponderance (a specific number is never defined but we can believe that it’s two or more) then Antifa will classify that movement or group as fascist. By these criteria, Antifa clearly is fascist.
Seven of the traits of Fascism listed on their page are:
- anti-Enlightenment
- anti-reason
- the creation of a vilified other
- reliance on violence or threats of violence to impose views on others
- anti-liberal
- anti-conservative, and
- portraying the current social and political situation as one of dire decay brought about by decadence and corruption.
Antifa claims to be against racism and hate speech. In fact, most people are against racism and hate speech and when they hear it, they freely make up their mind and assume that speaker is an idiot. And in a free society, people can say and do stupid things freely without being stopped forcefully unless they’re inciting violence.
Antifa says that all fascists should be prevented from speaking. They are against the concept of free speech and have no problem violatingthe First Amendment rights of others. They are therefore anti-Enlightenment and anti-reason.
“Failing to stop fascists from speaking, that is, giving them the opportunity to organize and impose their agenda on the rest of us – makes you as bad as them.”
The Creation of the Vilified Other: By having a broad list of traits that can be used to label someone as a fascist and then shut them out of society Antifa itself is creating a vilified other.
Reliance on Violence or Threats of Violence to Impose Views on Others: Showing up to demonstrations and events in a ski mask with bats and mace to club those you define as “fascist” fits this criterion. Likewise, the assault on journalist Andy Ngo was meant to serve as a message to anyone who professed a negative view of the group.
Anti-Liberal: The United States of America is a liberal democracy that Antifa rejects because they claim, without proof, that the liberal democratically elected leaders “have more in common with fascism than they do with us” So, the elected leaders and voters must therefore be part of the vilified others. They also criticize the liberals that defend free speech.
Anti-Conservative: They have showed up to harass and attack participants at conservative gatherings that were not-alt right and did not have any ties to White Nationalism on the basis that conservatives are oppressive fascists.
Portraying the Current Social and Political Situation as One of Dire Decay Brought About by Decadence and Corruption:“Likewise, we reject the “right” of the government and police – who have more in common with fascists than they do with us – to decide for us when fascists have crossed the line by merely expressing themselves into posing an immediate threat.”
By rejecting the democratically elected law makers and law enforcers as corrupted fascists they are portraying the current situation as decayed by corruption where the only hope for healing is for them to take matters into their own hands.
By using Antifa’s own definition that one can be a fascist by having traits found in Fascist government, Antifa is fascist by their own logic. It’s clear that they believe the current liberal democracy government of the country has failed and what the people need are strong incorruptible leaders to take the reins and do what is needed to fix it in their image.
And while Antifa does not have a leader or spokesperson whose identity is publicly known, there is someone is running their official website and planning their protests. They might be keeping their identity secret for now out of fear of law enforcement, but they are likely out there.
Sheriff Joe
DA
September 19, 2019
'Fake news' before we called it 'fake news'
By Silvio Canto, Jr.
We remember September 2004 and one of the biggest media blunders in recent memory.
During the 2004 election, CBS broke a story about George W. Bush's military service. Eventually, they had to retract it and apologize:
CBS television issued a humbling apology yesterday for a report on an investigative programme, saying that its story claiming that George Bush had been given special treatment during his stint in the Texas air national guard was deeply flawed and should not have gone on air.
It abruptly changed course after days of expressing confidence in the report on 60 Minutes, which relied heavily on four memos purportedly written by a now dead commander in the guard to show that Mr Bush received special treatment during his military service.
"Based on what we now know, CBS News cannot prove that the documents are authentic, which is the only acceptable journalistic standard to justify using them in the report," a statement by the president of CBS News, Andrew Heyward, said.
"We should not have used them. That was a mistake, which we deeply regret."
Dan Rather, the anchorman who presented the story and defended it for nearly two weeks, issued a separate apology.
"We made a mistake in judgment and for that I am sorry," he said.
The statement from Rather, an American television idol for 20 years, went on to make the embarrassing admission that the programme's producers had been duped by a disgrunted former member of the Texas national guard, who had provided the documents.
And that was it. Dan Rather was finished and a massive hit on President Bush blew up in their faces.
I warned my liberal friends back in 2004 to stay away from this story. In fact, it was this "fake story" that got me blogging. I was so angry that I decided to share my anger via blogposts.
The anti-Bush journalists of 2004 could not avoid believing what someone was peddling about President Bush's military service. They fell for it like a bunch of "suckers" eating out of Karl Rove's hand.
And so they learned the hard way that the story was nonsense, as many of us had warned them!.
This month, we celebrate the 15th anniversary of the CBS hoax with the New York Times in panic mode about the story about Justice Kavanaugh.
It's the same old song, as The Four Tops used to sing!
Sheriff Joe
DA
MAGA
These crazy fuck libs can’t wait to kill kids.
Attribution: AFP/Getty Images
Abortion rate plummets to lowest level since the procedure became legal nationwide in 1973
Sep 18, 2019 8:37am PDT by Marissa Higgins, Daily Kos Staff
Sign the petition to U.S. courts: Block every single 6-week abortion ban
Both the rate and the overall number of abortions in the United States has plummeted to the lowest level on record since the safe medical procedure became legal across the country in 1973. A new report from the Guttmacher Institute, a research group that explicitly supports abortion access and rights, made this finding based on data from 2017.
Before we get into the data, it’s important to reiterate that this report does not include data concerning the abortion bans we’ve seen this year. So while incredibly restrictive bans have been passed in a handful of Republican-controlled states including Alabama and Georgia, none of those bans have taken effect yet. And while it’s entirely possible the bans have already made it harder for people to access abortions, that timeframe isn’t included in the context of this study.
Now, let’s look at some specifics from this report. In 2017, the abortion rate was 13.5 abortions per 1,000 women in the 15 to 44 age group. Compared to 2014, that’s an 8% drop. Going all the way back to 1980, when the U.S. had its highest abortion rate, it’s a 54% drop. The 2017 rate is less than half of what it reached in 1990.
Here’s another way to look at these numbers: This report found 826,000 abortions in the nation in 2017. In 2014, the number was 926,000. In 2011, it was about 1 million.
Why the drop? The report offers two possible explanations. One, the country has an overall declining pregnancy rate, which lowers possible abortions. The other reason? The concerning disparity between abortion clinic access depending on the state (or city) you live in.
Relatedly, it’s also possible that there’s been an increase in self-managed abortions, due to access or cost barriers for the procedure. It’s also possible that contraceptive use has gone up (remember all of the people who said they were going to get long-term birth control as Trump neared office?). ACA coverage for some birth control methods also may have contributed to the declining rate.
Another interesting data point from the report is that among people who do have abortions, medication is more common than the surgical procedure. For example, medication abortions (what people often refer to as the “abortion pill”) made up 39% of abortions in 2017. This is in contrast to in 2014, when it made up 29%.
According to Guttmacher’s findings, the abortion rate seems to be declining whether or not the state is red or blue, and whether it’s controlled by Democrats or Republicans. It’s consistent across all regions and almost all states. An important note here, though, is that the decline appears most significant in states where the number of abortion clinics has decreased.
For example, rates were lowest in Missouri, Idaho, Kentucky, South Dakota, and Wyoming. Rates were highest in Washington, D.C., New Jersey, New York, Maryland, and Florida.
Interestingly, though the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention does file federal data on abortions, New Hampshire, Maryland, and California are excluded, as reported by the Associated Press. Guttmacher is the only organization that contacts individual providers across the country in an effort to count every single abortion.
While the report references “women,” trans men, as well as people who identify as agender, non-binary, or beyond can and do access abortions. For the purpose of this study, it doesn’t appear that language explored differences among sex and gender identity and possible correlations with abortion access.
These crazy fuck libs can’t wait to kill kids.
Attribution: AFP/Getty Images
Abortion rate plummets to lowest level since the procedure became legal nationwide in 1973
Sep 18, 2019 8:37am PDT by Marissa Higgins, Daily Kos Staff
Sign the petition to U.S. courts: Block every single 6-week abortion ban
Both the rate and the overall number of abortions in the United States has plummeted to the lowest level on record since the safe medical procedure became legal across the country in 1973. A new report from the Guttmacher Institute, a research group that explicitly supports abortion access and rights, made this finding based on data from 2017.
Before we get into the data, it’s important to reiterate that this report does not include data concerning the abortion bans we’ve seen this year. So while incredibly restrictive bans have been passed in a handful of Republican-controlled states including Alabama and Georgia, none of those bans have taken effect yet. And while it’s entirely possible the bans have already made it harder for people to access abortions, that timeframe isn’t included in the context of this study.
Now, let’s look at some specifics from this report. In 2017, the abortion rate was 13.5 abortions per 1,000 women in the 15 to 44 age group. Compared to 2014, that’s an 8% drop. Going all the way back to 1980, when the U.S. had its highest abortion rate, it’s a 54% drop. The 2017 rate is less than half of what it reached in 1990.
Here’s another way to look at these numbers: This report found 826,000 abortions in the nation in 2017. In 2014, the number was 926,000. In 2011, it was about 1 million.
Why the drop? The report offers two possible explanations. One, the country has an overall declining pregnancy rate, which lowers possible abortions. The other reason? The concerning disparity between abortion clinic access depending on the state (or city) you live in.
Relatedly, it’s also possible that there’s been an increase in self-managed abortions, due to access or cost barriers for the procedure. It’s also possible that contraceptive use has gone up (remember all of the people who said they were going to get long-term birth control as Trump neared office?). ACA coverage for some birth control methods also may have contributed to the declining rate.
Another interesting data point from the report is that among people who do have abortions, medication is more common than the surgical procedure. For example, medication abortions (what people often refer to as the “abortion pill”) made up 39% of abortions in 2017. This is in contrast to in 2014, when it made up 29%.
According to Guttmacher’s findings, the abortion rate seems to be declining whether or not the state is red or blue, and whether it’s controlled by Democrats or Republicans. It’s consistent across all regions and almost all states. An important note here, though, is that the decline appears most significant in states where the number of abortion clinics has decreased.
For example, rates were lowest in Missouri, Idaho, Kentucky, South Dakota, and Wyoming. Rates were highest in Washington, D.C., New Jersey, New York, Maryland, and Florida.
Interestingly, though the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention does file federal data on abortions, New Hampshire, Maryland, and California are excluded, as reported by the Associated Press. Guttmacher is the only organization that contacts individual providers across the country in an effort to count every single abortion.
While the report references “women,” trans men, as well as people who identify as agender, non-binary, or beyond can and do access abortions. For the purpose of this study, it doesn’t appear that language explored differences among sex and gender identity and possible correlations with abortion access.
Look out, I'm sure the fiscal responsibility crowd around here 'bout to stampede the heartland...
The farm rescue is more than twice as expensive as the 2009 bailout of Detroit’s Big Three automakers, which cost taxpayers $12 billion. And farmers expect the money to keep flowing.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...y-trump-s-28-billion-bailout-isn-t-a-solution
The farm rescue is more than twice as expensive as the 2009 bailout of Detroit’s Big Three automakers, which cost taxpayers $12 billion. And farmers expect the money to keep flowing.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...y-trump-s-28-billion-bailout-isn-t-a-solution
Don't worry......You Democrats are going to pay for it....
Oh...You'll pay dearly in 2020..!