Samwell Seed Well
Well-Known Member
becuase their only opposition are republicans and teabaggers . . .of course . . .you can thank yourself for setting the bar so high
assinine threads like this only make my point
Question for Democrats
- Thread starter desert dude
- Start date
assinine threads like this only make my point
bizarrojohnson
Well-Known Member
Yup, that's about right
desert dude
Well-Known Member
You are a useless hack.
I could probably fill 1,000 pages of RIU comments with examples of Democratic (and Republican) position that are "anti-science". Neither party is friendly to "science" when it runs counter to their politics:
"Consider California’s Proposition 37, which would require genetically modified food to carry a warning label. The American Medical Association is opposed because “there is no scientific justification for special labeling of bioengineered foods.” Every major scientific and regulatory agency -- including the prestigious National Academy of Sciences, the World Health Organization, EPA, FDA, and USDA -- recognizes the importance of genetic modification.
Yet, the California Democratic Party has officially endorsed Proposition 37 -- in direct opposition to the recommendation of America’s finest doctors and in contradiction to the scientific consensus. The Republicans endorsed the pro-science position. Did this fact make the news? No.
Digging deeper into the issue, one finds that California Democrats have de facto allied themselves with some of the biggest anti-science quacks in America. Among Prop 37’s most fervent supporters are peddlers of alternative medicine, anti-vaccine groups, and even one crank who claims that genetically modified food causes autism.
This anti-science mentality is not a recent development. The Democratic Party has long made common cause with prominent people who thought vaccines caused autism, two in particular who stand out among the rest.
The first person is Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., who published an influential article in Rolling Stone and the progressive website Salon back in 2005 tying vaccines to autism. It was so inaccurate that both publications retracted it several years later. But the damage had already been done. Because of widespread misinformation from celebrities like him, to this day, millions of Americans falsely believe that vaccines cause autism."
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/09/10/are_democrats_really_the_pro-science_party_115367.html
ChesusRice
Well-Known Member
You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to BadDog40 again.
desert dude
Well-Known Member
TEA Party Demographics:
[h=3]Membership and demographics[/h] Several polls have been conducted on the demographics of the movement. Though the various polls sometimes turn up slightly different results, they tend to show that Tea Party supporters tend more likely than Americans overall to be white, male, married, older than 45, regularly attending religious services, conservative, and to be more wealthy and have more education.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Party_movement
[h=3]Membership and demographics[/h] Several polls have been conducted on the demographics of the movement. Though the various polls sometimes turn up slightly different results, they tend to show that Tea Party supporters tend more likely than Americans overall to be white, male, married, older than 45, regularly attending religious services, conservative, and to be more wealthy and have more education.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Party_movement
brotherjericho
Well-Known Member
What do you call an informed Democrat? Nothing...no such thing.
GOD HERE
Well-Known Member
Carrying around that extra chromosome must be hard.
You won't get that message if you just stop jacking him off Chesus.
blacksun
New Member
Takes one to know one, for sure.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
please demonstrate one instance of me posting an article i clearly have not read about a subject that i got completely wrong.
there is this saying about opening one's mouth to remove all doubt, and desert ballerina certainly removed all doubt with that one. as well as in so many other ways.
i await reciprocal idiocy from yours truly.
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
You realise you just said you're awaiting reciprocal idiocy from yourself?
UncleReemis
Well-Known Member
I don't understand why scrutinizing over miniscule grammatical errors like that is more important than responding to the actual subject of his response.
MuyLocoNC
Well-Known Member
Holy shit that's funny. You're kidding, right? UB has over 37,000 posts and 36,999 of them were spent scrutinizing minuscule grammatical and spelling errors rather than responding to the actual subject of someone's response. You MUST not spend much time in the politic's section.
kelly4
Well-Known Member
That shouldn't take long.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
Typical Buckism. Thinks online activities really mean something..lol.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
We don't have a two party system.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
Your "point" isn't related to the thread. If you wear a hat, most won't notice your point.