Court rules Arkansas can block Medicaid funding from Planned Parenthood
A federal appeals court Wednesday ruled that Arkansas could withhold Medicaid funding to Planned Parenthood in response to a series of undercover sting videos recorded by an anti-abortion group.
The ruling Wednesday by the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals vacates preliminary injunctions from a federal judge that required the state to continue Medicaid payments following legal challenges brought by three patients challenging Gov. Asa Hutchinson's 2015 decision to end the state's Medicaid contract with the women's health group.
The court ruled 2-1 that the patients do not have the right to challenge the state's Medicaid contract decision.
A handful of other states have attempted to cut off funding to Planned Parenthood following the release of the sting videos by the Center for Medical Progress, which charged that Planned Parenthood illegally sells fetal tissue for profit. Planned Parenthood denied the allegations. David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt of CMP were charged with 15 felonies by California Attorney General Xavier Becerra for criminal conspiracy to invade privacy and recording the organization without consent.
POLITICO Pulse newsletter
Get the latest on the health care fight, every weekday morning — in your inbox.
A federal judge earlier this year blocked Texas from cutting off Medicaid funding from Planned Parenthood. The state's attorney general is urging a federal appeals court to overturn that decision.
Tags
Who is online
75 visitors
In the end the other states will win on this as well
Withholding funding will only hurt those who seek PP services. Especially those on medicaid.
All based on a doctored tape that has been denounced. Withhold funding for abortions, if that floats your boat, but don't cut all medical services-- to many people rely on them for their health.
I find this extremely short-sighted, as usual.
It's amazing there are some people who still buy into those phony tapes. It boggles the mind.
A. Withhold funding for abortions, if that floats your boat, but don't cut all medical services
Why is Dowser that every time that exact solution is proposed, Democrats vote against it?
It's not about health care. It's about giving hundreds of millions to an abortion mill that honors a eugenics obsessed racist that turns around and gives massive donations back to democratic politicians.
It's funny that all the people so upset about the mere existence of statues, have no problem giving hundreds of millions of dollars to a corporation whose founding purpose was making sure blacks and inferior (non WASP) whites didn't reproduce.
That second paragraph alone pretty much shows your bias and lack of credibility.
Compassionate Conservatism on display.
Nothing compassionate about it.
Saving babies is such a mean thing.
Saving babies is such a mean thing.
No one in this thread has said that; but let's go from "mean things" to "hypocritical, stupid things," …
… things like simultaneously legislating against birth control and abortions …
The psychotic views of religiosity's "reality" should be kept far away from legislative pandering.
What babies? There are no babies in an abortion. But cutting off funding to PP might put some "babies," and the women carrying them, at higher risk. So cutting off funding certainly is such a mean thing!
Maybe they can fund bus trips for the poor to still have abortions to keep the welfare rolls from exploding.
Another example of idiocy on steroids.
To the so-called "compassionate conservative" …
"If you're pre-birth, you're good, if you're pre-school …
… YOU'RE FUCKED!" (George Carlin)
Very true!!!
Withhold funding for abortions, if that floats your boat, but don't cut all medical services-- to many people rely on them for their health.
Is Planned Parenthood the only provider of medical services for women?
Is Planned Parenthood the only provider of medical services for women?
I believe it is for poor women … the WORKING poor. And no Federal Money pays for abortions.
Birth control education is the best way to ultimately reduce the number of abortions …
All the religionist objections to abortion do not change reality … how inane/insane is it to simultaneously object to birth control, education regarding human reproduction and abortion?
And no Federal Money pays for abortions
Why do you believe things that aren't true?
You understand how money works right? If I give you money but tell you "you can't use it to buy a car" you are then free to use the money I gave you to pay rent and use your rent money to buy a car.
I can't believe people still fall for this. It's a silly accounting trick. Anyone who understands how a business works knows taxpayers e subsizdize abortion the free money they give to a massive corporation.
AMAC, what happens to the price of abortions at Planned Parenthood if federal dollars stop subsidizing it?
And no Federal Money pays for abortions
Why do you believe things that aren't true?
You understand how money works right? If I give you money but tell you "you can't use it to buy a car" you are then free to use the money I gave you to pay rent and use your rent money to buy a car.
The law prohibits co-mingling of certain designated monies; you choose to see it the way you do because it goes against your ideology (which ignores reality).
I can't believe people still fall for this. It's a silly accounting trick. Anyone who understands how a business works knows taxpayers e subsizdize abortion the free money they give to a massive corporation.
Get back to us on Corporate Welfare some time, Sean. which corporations pay no federal taxes while simultaneously getting tax credits … who picks up the slack for that? Don't be hypocritical; if you truly are not arguing on the basis of ideology, then you should be arguing against an infinitely larger "accounting trick".
AMAC, what happens to the price of abortions at Planned Parenthood if federal dollars stop subsidizing it?
It goes to the pricing structure imposed by the back alley entrepreneurs of America … then, when their clients go to a hospital E.R. uninsured … THE TAXPAYER PAYS FOR IT WHEN HE PAYS HIS INSURANCE PREMIUM.
Give me a major break, Sean … a civilized society doesn't confuse itself over the difference between the COST of something and the VALUE.
g of certain designated monies; you choose to see it the way you do because it goes against your ideology (which ignores reality).
I assume you've never been in charge of a budget. You apparently don't understand how money works.
Reality works just like my example of money "you can't use" to buy a car, that in fact, allows you to buy a car.
No wonder you can't argue against it. .
Sean. which corporations pay no federal taxes while simultaneously getting tax credits …
I oppose corporate welfare generally. I've never defended giving corporations money.
Give me a major break, Sean … a civilized society doesn't confuse itself over the difference between the COST of something and the VALUE.
So I assume that non-answer means you agree that the federal government subsidizes the cost of abortion at Planned Parenthood.
if not, explain how the business will keep costs to consumers the same when revenue falls by hundreds of millions.
I assume you've never heard of the Hyde Amendment. Otherwise, you would know federal funds do not go towards abortions. If you think otherwise, then prove it!
Of course I have. The nature of my response is predicated upon it.
It's been explained.
And you still offer nothing but opinion.
Is Planned Parenthood the only provider of medical services for women?
Jesus Christ, do you live an a bubble somewhere? Oh, I see what you tried to do---by leaving out the word "poor" for women you think you can derail this for a while. Is that to give yourself time to think up some different BS?
The vast majority of PP's clients are poor women with Medicare or no health coverage who won't be seen by private physicians who refuse to take Medicare patients. They will not be seeking abortions but many, many will be wanting to get contraception to avoid having an abortion for an unwanted pregnancy. Oh, pregnancy you ask? Yes, they do pregnancy testing and will try to obtain obstetric care for the many women who want to be pregnant. You people are going to again cause damage to poor people in your perverted cause against the rights of women to have reproductive choice and you will not only NOT destroy PP but actually increase abortions. But, no doubt, you'll ignore or rationalize that horrible effect somehow. It's what you people do to evade all responsibility for your horrible ideas and actions.
The vast majority of PP's clients are poor women with Medicare or no health coverage who won't be seen by private physicians who refuse to take Medicare patients. They will not be seeking abortions but many, many will be wanting to get contraception to avoid having an abortion for an unwanted pregnancy. Oh, pregnancy you ask? Yes, they do pregnancy testing and will try to obtain obstetric care for the many women who want to be pregnant.
PP does not provide pre natal care, nor do they supply mammaograms, birth control pills are about $6 for a pack of pills so big hardship there.......PP is 90% abortion provider and that is IT....many many free clinics will give the care that PP won't.
let us not forget that margaret sanger , a practictioner of eugenics & one of hillary's hero's--stated she started PP to get rid of and reduce the BLACK population., she said if she got some black preachers to go along with it , they would not fight it...what no outrage from libs on that ? hhhuumm
Clearly you know little about Margaret Sanger if you buy into the eugenics nonsense, which really has no relevance to PP today or the issue of abortion anyway.
rly you know little about Margaret Sanger if you buy into the eugenics nonsense
MArgeret Sanger of "more children from the fit, less from the unfit-that is the chief issue of birth control" fame, edited Birth Control Review, which happily published "Eugenic Sterilization: An Urgent Need" by Hitler's Director of Racial Hygiene. She also putt the author of the book that compared the threat from dark races to that of bacterial invasions on her board of directors for the American Birth Control League.
The examples of racist and eugnic language are endless (keep the masses of Negroes from breeding disastrously)...
Anyone the least bit familiar with her work sees the overwhelming similarities with Nazi eugenic propaganda.
it's amazing how blind Democrats are to their own history.
The only one seeing similarities here is you. And you erroneously imply I'm a democrat.
PP does not provide pre natal care, nor do they supply mammaograms, birth control pills are about $6 for a pack of pills so big hardship there.......PP is 90% abortion provider and that is IT....many many free clinics will give the care that PP won't.
3%!!!!!!!!
Wherever you got your "information" -- it is seriously flawed!
A: Abortions represent 3 percent of total services provided by Planned Parenthood, and roughly 10 percent of its clients received an abortion. The group does receive federal funding, but the money cannot be used for abortions by law.
FULL ANSWER
We received several questions on this topic during the recent budget debate in Congress, after Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl claimed this month on the Senate floor that "well over 90 percent of what Planned Parenthood does" is provide abortion services. That figure was wildly incorrect. Planned Parenthood says only 3 percent of its total services in 2009 were abortions. The other 97 percent of services were for contraception, treatment and tests for sexually transmitted diseases, cancer screenings, and other women’s health services.
Here’s a chart from a March 2011 fact sheet, which reported that the group performed about 11.4 million total services.
let us not forget that margaret sanger , a practictioner of eugenics & one of hillary's hero's--stated she started PP to get rid of and reduce the BLACK population., she said if she got some black preachers to go along with it , they would not fight it...what no outrage from libs on that ? hhhuumm
Show us documentation -- margaret sanger one of hillary's hero's
what no outrage from libs on that ? hhhuumm
DOCUMENTATION PLEASE.
.It is unethical to post misinformation … particularly when the factual information is readily available.
so only 3% of PP funds come from abortion---then what is the big deal shouldn't hurt them too much, what are they bitching about ?
about those fed funds not going to PP for abortion---yes there is a law HOWEVER state medicaid funds DO go to fund abortions...and as arkansa did states can refuse to pay for them also.
as far as hillary--all you have to do is google hillary praising sanger..it's there.
PP is often the only provider of services for those who can't afford other providers.
To the so-called "compassionate conservative" …
No, compassion is for the liberals. Conservatives believe in personal responsibility, limited government, free markets, individual liberty, traditional American values and a strong national defense. They depend on rational thought while liberals are motivated by feelings.
Wow, you have learned your mantra well. It's still 100% pure BS, of course.
No, compassion is for the liberals.
Glad to hear one of you finally admit it.
Conservatives believe in personal responsibility, limited government, free markets, individual liberty, traditional American values and a strong national defense. They depend on rational thought while liberals are motivated by feelings.
No generalizations there …
Limited government doesn't try to legislate morality, give tax breaks to corporations and religious organizations necessitating that the tax payer fund them, support legislation discriminating against certain demographics based ultimately on religionist beliefs, pass voter suppression legislation, support hate groups, disregard violations of the emolument clause of the constitution, allow corporate lobbyists to write portions of the tax code that advantages them and disadvantages working people, appoint the regulated to positions of regulation … got more if anyone wants more …
Do tell … what are "traditional American values" specifically.
Your comment is a dismissive pronouncement.
Take it from a liberal who has feelings and is capable of rational thought as well.
Consider that my feelings about your comment motivated me to post a most rational and articulate rebuttal … and as I was waxing rationally, my feelings simultaneously kept my rebuttal civil albeit pointed.
limited government doesn't try to legislate morality, give tax breaks to corporations and religious organizations necessitating that the tax payer fund them, support legislation discriminating against certain demographics based ultimately on religionist beliefs, pass voter suppression legislation, support hate groups,
limited gov in that gov cannot tell you to support people you don't agree with or pay for their idealogies by the heavy hand of gov taxation....or that you have to buy an insurance policy you don't need or can afford because someone else needs the money you supply them with...limited gov that says you do not have to join a union to work..limited gov in that you can live in the neighborhood you want too and support the schools and curiculum that best fits your chidren--there is nothing wrong with giving tax breaks to corps that provide jobs, tax breaks to freeloaders don't supply me with anything.
gov does not support hate groups, at least under repubs, dems do however with forced taxation, if they want to support their pet hate groups they can do so on their own dime.
thanks for the rant a mac but that is why dems have been voted out every branch of gov.--we got tired of supporting dem hate and immorality.
gov does not support hate groups, at least under repubs, dems do however with forced taxation, if they want to support their pet hate groups they can do so on their own dime.
Except for Nazis/White Supremacists the KKK by Trump …
Your myopia is frightening.
only in your mind---the gov does not support nazi's --prove it...and no trump did not say he supports them either...
' i have proved to you many times that dems on the other hand have they supported the civil war and supported KKK and jim crowe laws and every other evil..why do you deny it & support them. ?---hell even the beloved kennedy family were nazi supporters as joe kennedy went to germany to support hitler prior to the breakout of WWII...FDR supported hitler to a certain extent and refused to help churchill defeat them until much much later in the war.---geez learn some history.
no wonder dems/libs want to erase their own history and their sordid past.
What does the KKK, Civil War, or Jim Crow laws have to do with PP or the issue of abortion? Perhas you should focus on the topic of discussion rather than some obsession with democrats.
limited government doesn't try to legislate morality, give tax breaks to corporations and religious organizations necessitating that the tax payer fund them, support legislation discriminating against certain demographics based ultimately on religionist beliefs, pass voter suppression legislation, support hate groups,
limited gov in that gov cannot tell you to support people you don't agree with or pay for their idealogies by the heavy hand of gov taxation....or that you have to buy an insurance policy you don't need or can afford because someone else needs the money you supply them with...limited gov that says you do not have to join a union to work..limited gov in that you can live in the neighborhood you want too and support the schools and curiculum that best fits your chidren--there is nothing wrong with giving tax breaks to corps that provide jobs, tax breaks to freeloaders don't supply me with anything.
gov does not support hate groups, at least under repubs, dems do however with forced taxation, if they want to support their pet hate groups they can do so on their own dime...that is why dems have been voted out of every branch of gov.
Ah, good work "judges." Your war on the poor advances nicely. Now thousands of poor women (and men--PP takes care of anyone who shows up) will not get basic health care. Of course, this will not affect abortions in any way since no government money is used for those anyway.
ill not get basic health care
False
ce no government money is used for those anyway.
False.
It's amazing how easily a billion dollar corporation is able to fool people into mindlessly repeating patently untrue things. You should be ashamed at how easily you are manipulated.
I know you have to spread the extreme lies of your extremist connections but they are lies and and you know it.
What happens to the cost of abortions if the Federal government stops giving millions to the massive corporation that idolizes a eugenics obsessed racist that is Planned Parenthood?
Extra white-supremacist points for you for trying to cloak you anti-women politics by pretending PP is racist. That's such an old dog, it not only doesn't hunt, it can't even stand up on its own. But that doesn't mean you should stop using it, right? So you think the choking off of Medicaid funds will keep PP from providing abortion services? In fact, it will increase the demand for them since thousands of women will now not be able to get contraception. Well done--you've helped increase the number of abortions in this country. If you think that this will somehow put PP out of business you are even more clueless than I'd have given you credit for.
Your post is a riot of nonsense. Do you think spewing factually unsupported conclusions and silly straw men arguments is actually worthwhile? Four years old make more coherent arguments that the word diarrhea you just subjected the world to.
One more time, if the federal government stops giving taxpayer money to Planned Parenthood, what happens to the cost of an abortion at Planned Parenthood?
Do you think spewing factually unsupported conclusions and silly straw men arguments is actually worthwhile?
Comment removed for Skirting the CoC [ph]
if the federal government stops giving taxpayer money to Planned Parenthood, what happens to the cost of an abortion at Planned Parenthood?
I forgot that I need to really type slowly for your sort and using very short words. So here's the answer that I hope you'll understand: Not....a....goddam....fucking....thing.
Got it yet?
ot....a....goddam....fucking....thing.
Of course that's what you'd say. Basic economics is beyond the scope of a sixth grade education. Given your behavior and the fact that you call yourself atheist (no self respecting grown up atheist would call themselves that)I shouldn't hold you to standard higher than that.
Thanks for broadcasting your ignorance far and wide though. You must be a either a 12 year old who lacks a basic understanding of elementary economics or you are an adult who has no problem spewing nonsense in service of your rabid ideology. Either way, it's clear that you are not worth taking seriously.
So you think the choking off of Medicaid funds will keep PP from providing abortion services? In fact, it will increase the demand for them since thousands of women will now not be able to get contraception. Well done--you've helped increase the number of abortions in this country. If you think that this will somehow put PP out of business you are even more clueless than I'd have given you credit for.
well if that is so then dems can pay for their own abortions---sounds fair to me....if a $6 pack of birth control pills are going to cause such a great hardship what the hell is a $600 abortion going to do...?
taxpayers are sick and tired of being taken for a ride down lib/dem freeloader street.....if you truely feel so bad along with the rest of your compassionate libs donate to a clinic to take care of them..USE YOUR OWN FRIGGIN MONEY FOR A CHANGE.
Just as a side note: I have never paid less than $25/month for birth control pills, ever. And I am now way beyond that.
Limited government doesn't try to legislate morality
Nor does it advocate for immorality.
give tax breaks to corporations and religious organizations necessitating that the tax payer fund them
Right now we do need a corporate tax cut. We have the highest corporate tax rate in the world. We need to bring all those American companies home. We also need a tax cut on investments which leads to more investment and jobs. We also need a tax cut on all individuals earning between $25,000 to $250,000 a year. It's called the middle class and they need a big break.
support legislation discriminating against certain demographics based ultimately on religionist beliefs, pass voter suppression legislation, support hate groups,
I have to call you out on that - prove that statement
disregard violations of the emolument clause of the constitution,
Oh yes that law has to be finally used - and then it will be used on everyone we want to remove
allow corporate lobbyists to write portions of the tax code that advantages them and disadvantages working people, appoint the regulated to positions of regulation
As opposed to union lobbyists.
Do tell … what are "traditional American values" specifically.
they start with family & the respect thereof. For instance when your parents tell you not to do drugs, you listen to them instead of the likes of Timothy Leary or some leftist teacher. It means you work at being self sufficient. It means you treat everyone equal (no bias for your type AND no bias for other types). Most of all it means the preservation of the things that are important, like the Constitution.
Maybe you can tell me what modern liberalism is?
Vic, I've just come to realize that your avatar is a photograph of a man who was a great American mass murderer of genocidal proportions. Sad.
they start with family & the respect thereof. For instance when your parents tell you not to do drugs, you listen to them instead of the likes of Timothy Leary or some leftist teacher. It means you work at being self sufficient. It means you treat everyone equal (no bias for your type AND no bias for other types). Most of all it means the preservation of the things that are important, like the Constitution.
Comment removed for CoC violation. jwc2blue
they start with family & the respect thereof. For instance when your parents tell you not to do drugs, you listen to them instead of the likes of Timothy Leary or some leftist teacher. It means you work at being self sufficient. It means you treat everyone equal (no bias for your type AND no bias for other types). Most of all it means the preservation of the things that are important, like the Constitution.
Jesus, is there no self-serving, sanctimonious rightwing horseshit that you won't shovel? Comment removed for CoC violation [ph]
Limited government doesn't try to legislate morality
Nor does it advocate for immorality.
Really? How many Republican efforts have been advanced to legislate on birth control, abortion, rights ascribed or denied on the basis of sexual orientaion …
give tax breaks to corporations and religious organizations necessitating that the tax payer fund them
Right now we do need a corporate tax cut. We have the highest corporate tax rate in the world. We need to bring all those American companies home. We also need a tax cut on investments which leads to more investment and jobs. We also need a tax cut on all individuals earning between $25,000 to $250,000 a year. It's called the middle class and they need a big break .
"High corporate tax rates" have no significance when a corporation pays no federal tax and simultaneously gets tax credits!
CONSUMERISM is what creates jobs … the economic stupidity of paying shit wages is what economists call "a race to the bottom." 70% of the American economy comes from the consumer.
support legislation discriminating against certain demographics based ultimately on religionist beliefs, pass voter suppression legislation, support hate groups,
I have to call you out on that - prove that statement
No transgender individuals in the military for one.
disregard violations of the emolument clause of the constitution,
Oh yes that law has to be finally used - and then it will be used on everyone we want to remove
Dismissive argument; it's the law.
allow corporate lobbyists to write portions of the tax code that advantages them and disadvantages working people, appoint the regulated to positions of regulation
As opposed to union lobbyists.
Sorry; union lobbyists do not get to write the language of the tax code.
"The purpose of this part of Dodd-Frank was to basically say that Wall Street derivatives activities should be funded by private money and shouldn't get a public subsidy, and this bill kind of reversed that," Stanley says.
What the bill would do is exempt broad categories of trades from this rule.
The New York Times and Mother Jones obtained draft language that lobbyists for Citigroup — one of the largest banks in country — offered to lawmakers. And it turns out that 70 of the 85 lines in the final House bill reflected Citigroup's recommendations. In fact, as The Times reports , two paragraphs were copied almost word for word — except lawmakers had changed two words to make them plural.
Do tell … what are "traditional American values" specifically.
they start with family & the respect thereof. For instance when your parents tell you not to do drugs, you listen to them instead of the likes of Timothy Leary or some leftist teacher. It means you work at being self sufficient. It means you treat everyone equal (no bias for your type AND no bias for other types). Most of all it means the preservation of the things that are important, like the Constitution.
Yeah! What was I thinking … no liberal ever goes along with that stuff. I will jog my memory to come up with anything any liberal ever advocated in the way of "treating everyone equal" (no bias like you said).
Maybe you can tell me what modern liberalism is?
It's what you wrote just above but somehow believe it only applies to those traditional America (conservatives); but there is one significant difference … liberals that I know personally understand that the traditional values you described are not just subscribed to by …
… liberals …
________________________________________
Time to walk the dog and break for dinner.
We seriously disagree … but this is a good debate.
Vic, I've just come to realize that your avatar is a photograph of a man who was a great American mass murderer of genocidal proportions.
Think again. How about a man who buried terrorist with pigs
How about a man who buried terrorist with pigs
Not really. That story just another big lie the rightwing loves to spread. Trump, of course, your Liar-in-Chief is particularly fond of it:
No, I was referring to the actual systematic murder of tens of thousands of Filipinos and the deaths of manifold more due to US miiltary and civilian actions in those islands:
You would do well to abandon your fairy-tale history of this country's actions both domestic and international--but I know you'd never be able to bring yourself to face that facts.
Jesus, is there no self-serving, sanctimonious rightwing horseshit that you won't shovel? You're a veritbable geyser of it. Hilarious, though. You're a caricature of the rightwing con artist.
Sorry, by I really got to flag this
Of course, you do. It's what rightwingers do when their fee-fees get hurt. I actually got a bit of a lecture on this from ph. It's apparently fine to call out the lie without calling the person spreading it a liar. That's pretty much the same as it was on NV, n'est-ce pas? Oh, and cute winky face. As if we needed to know that you were "sorry, not sorry."
Time to walk the dog and break for dinner.
We seriously disagree … but this is a good debate.
I guess i'll stop for a bite as well - talk later
We have the highest corporate tax rate in the world.
We hear that over and over from you lot but it's pretty deceiving. This link explains why it's only absolutely true in the tax code:
The other thing about this claim is that it's based on the conservative myth that having lower taxes always correlates with being wealthier. As the table shows some of the weakest countries in the G20 have much lower rates in all 3 columns. Italy's MECTR is a -23.5% (I don't know how that works--the government is "paying" corporations with tax credits maybe?).
I think there is a case to be made for lowering the tax rates if closing all the loopholes that allows the richest corporations to avoid paying tax altogether:
Finally, I think Trump's claim that lowering these rates will result in a flood of corporate cash being repatriated and taxed resulting in a huge revenue windfall is totally bogus (as it must be with Trump). For that to work a real stick wood have to accompany that carrot: for any corporation to be able to avail itself of a new lower tax rate it would be required to bring all that untaxed revenue back. I doubt if republicans would ever do something as fiscally sound as that.
We hear that over and over from you lot but it's pretty deceiving.
It's really fairly straightforward:
We hear that over and over from you lot but it's pretty deceiving.
It's really fairly straightforward:
How about a man who buried terrorist with pigs
Not really. That story just another big lie the rightwing loves to spread. Trump, of course, your Liar-in-Chief is particularly fond of it:
Here is the history:
Medal of Honor winner Colonel Frank West buried three pigs with three Muslim terrorists after the murder of an American officer. He appears to have done so with the approval of General Pershing. Some stories mention Colonel Alexander Rodgers of the 6th Cavalry becoming so celebrated for it that he was known to Moro Muslims as “The Pig”. One contemporary account does describe him burying a pig with the corpse of a Muslim terrorist who had murdered an American soldier.
Rear Admiral Daniel P Mannix III had contended that, "What finally stopped the Juramentados was the custom of wrapping the dead man in a pig's skin and stuffing his mouth with pork".
The other thing about this claim is that it's based on the conservative myth that having lower taxes always correlates with being wealthier.
It depends on what your'e trying to do. Lower the extremely high rates on Corporations and you induce them to come back. Lower high taxes on investments and you will induce people to invest and you may get business expansion. Lower taxes on everyone making between $25'000 and $250,000 a year and you encourage spending.
Tax & spend via government and you get Detroit
Of course, you do. It's what rightwingers do when their fee-fees get hurt. I actually got a bit of a lecture on this from ph.
Um-hum, that's what the code is for - civil conversation
It's apparently fine to call out the lie without calling the person spreading it a liar. That's pretty much the same as it was on NV, n'est-ce pas?
No, on Newsvine the Code of Honor was seldom enforced
Oh, and cute winky face. As if we needed to know that you were "sorry, not sorry."
I tried to bring some levity to it. We all get too intense at times, even I have lost my temper. It's forgotten.
Yeah! What was I thinking … no liberal ever goes along with that stuff. I will jog my memory to come up with anything any liberal ever advocated in the way of "treating everyone equal" (no bias like you said).
The liberals once did believe in similar values. They fought for civil rights and civil liberties. Not so for the modern liberal/ progressives. They believe in social justice, identity politics, victimization and the denial of free speech