Powerful ad, thanks for posting.
I bet Barry is loving this stuff...
I didn't ask you your opinion on whether you think they are correct or not.
I asked you what you think about the rather large swath of Republicanists who seem to eschew basic scientific facts when forming opinions.
Is it a good thing to base your politics and public policy solutions on beliefs that are provably laughable, given the vast amount of evidence to the contrary?
Yes or no will do.
Went and looked at a Christian school for our youngest (7th grader).
Specifically asked to see the science textbooks:
(paraphrasing)
So, to answer your question, good or not, there are certainly people who DO - and they even write in text books that they are doing it; and no matter what you, me, or EVIDENCE says, they aren't going to change their minds.
We gave the books back. Our son is still in the sucky public school.
Ok, fine.
It isn't a "fairly common view".
It certainly is a recurring idea among some circles of the Republican party, Mr. Akin included.
Why has the Republican party not disowned these asshats prior to now?
You don't see it, but I see, once again, the stink of groupthink where suppression of debate so that a unified face can be presented takes priority over getting at the truth.
You want me to find a few quotes from Republicans to the effect of "don't criticize the party or other Republicans" to support this?
This stinky is always there, swimming in the toilet bowl of extreme right-wing politics.
The only reason any of you give rat's ass now, is that you so committed to winning the presidency at all costs.
If it didn't hurt you in the polls, I genuinely don't think you or the rest of the GOP establshiment would care.
I, honestly, had NEVER heard this claim about Rape/Conception before; and I'm on some pretty wack mailing lists; and have LOTS of relatives that listen to Limbaugh.
Seriously, not saying you haven't seen it, but you must be running in some unique circles.
These are the people who are writing the party platform.
These are the people who are getting elected to textbook selection committees.
These are the people that I see the GOP giving the keys to.
You weren't specific, you simply asked what I thought of them. I think people who believe the earth is only 6,000 years old are wrong. That's what I think of them.
Well, that's not what you asked and I'd ask you to prove that belief is held by a "large swath of Republicans" because, I reject the premise.
No, I'd rather you produce examples of Akin's view being "a recurring idea among some circles of the Republican party."
It's be great if such views had been previously known to a wide audience so that your secondary assertion that Republicans haven't "disowned this asshats prior to now" can be supported.
Go!
Well, when your crazy uncle pokes his head out of the attic and says something bizarre, you explain how his rantings don't represent the entire family, apologize for the distraction, take the Uncle some milk and cookies, and move on.
It's only been the Democrats that keep bringing up Akin. Republicans have, for the most part, moved on.
I don't blame you, I would have probably thrown the book at them (literally). Are there no other private schools in the area?
Mike Huckabee says hi. Is he not speaking at the RNC tonight?
Huckabee, Akin's Biggest Backer, Has Primetime RNC Speaking Slot
Of course it has -- for many people pro-life involves a commitment to oppose abortion, the death penalty, assisted suicide... Only for Republicans, does pro-life = anti-abortion alone.
exactly
Yoni, etc show once again, he's extreme fringe and dramatic minority.
The Republican party is made up of crazy uncles.
Of coures you ass-hats have "moved on". You don't want everybody to notice that your party is run by the nutballs.
I would want to move on too.
Do you really want me to provide quotes that a large swath of the Republican party thinks the earth is 6000 years old and/or the theory of evolution is a made up secularist plot?
Define a "large swath" then, if you want me to prove it. I will take up the gauntlet, if you want to go there.
Put up or shut up.
Last edited by RandomGuy; 08-30-2012 at 10:39 AM.
We could start with the crazy uncles that draw cheers from Republican rank and file.
Republican Candidates Don't Believe in Evolution
Not a scientific sample to be sure. But hey, its a start.
http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/20...ience-problem/A 2007 poll asked respondents if they believed that “Evolution, that is, the idea that human beings developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life,” is “definitely true, probably true, probably false, definitely false?” (That’s a very odd and constrained definition of evolution, of course, but responses would still provide a useful view of broader at udes on the theory.)
Newport said the 2007 survey found that 53 percent of Americans said this particular framing of evolution was either definitely or probably true, while 44 percent said evolution was definitely or probably not true.
Then he wrote this about Republicans:
Of importance to us here is the breakout among Republicans. We found in 2007 that a whopping 68 percent of Republicans did not believe in evolution when using this question wording.
No, the neocons simply dropped the subject because it's embarrassing for them.... meanwhile, they're STILL harping on Obama's misquoted "you didn't build that" soundbyte weeks later, so much for "moving on".....
same articleA 2010 survey with a different approach still found a majority of Republicans, as opposed to much smaller percentages of Independents and Democrats, believing that humans were created in their present form about 10,000 years ago. Here’s the summary of the overall finding:
Four in 10 Americans, slightly fewer today than in years past, believe God created humans in their present form about 10,000 years ago. Thirty-eight percent believe God guided a process by which humans developed over millions of years from less advanced life forms, while 16%, up slightly from years past, believe humans developed over millions of years, without God’s involvement.
Anyone want to define "huge swath"? Anyone?
I will give Yoni a chance to respond. Not that I think he will directly. I fully expect some chicken- prevarication/obfuscation, as usual.
Last edited by RandomGuy; 08-29-2012 at 09:37 PM.
Gonna have to wait. That joker is in a recliner jerking off to Paul Ryan on Fox News as we speak.
No. Well a prep school @ 50k per...
Unrelated, but I was all morning in PA today... was wondering if 101A was living in one of the houses we passed by...
Still waiting Yonivore.
If you don't think a "large swath" of Republicans think the world is 6000 years old and/or think the theory of evolution is some sort of secularist/satanic plot, then define what would cons ute a "large swath".
Maybe after we settle this, we can get to the other question you want to run away from, because you don't want to explore the implication:
Is it a good thing to base your politics and public policy solutions on beliefs that are provably laughable, given the vast amount of evidence to the contrary?
Yes or no will do.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
