It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

'Playgirl' Editor Fired After Outing Self As Republican

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 05:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by RANT

If you aren't aware of the broad and overwhelming displeasure of America with Apoc's assertion that the Florida judges needed Federal intervention, then I suggest broadening your horizons.

[edit on 24-3-2005 by RANT]


I would suggest you re-examine the flawed content of the poll questions ask to determine the "poll" . The "congress" and the president acted precisely as provided in the consitution. It is the "black robed" bunch that are acting outside the law. They will be held accountable.




posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 05:11 AM
link   
Rant, your post cntinue to enlighten and crack me to f--- up:



posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 05:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrHoracid

Originally posted by RANT

If you aren't aware of the broad and overwhelming displeasure of America with Apoc's assertion that the Florida judges needed Federal intervention, then I suggest broadening your horizons.


I would suggest you re-examine the flawed content of the poll questions ask to determine the "poll" .


I already read your concerns about the ABC poll over at WorldNutDaily before you even had them (assuming you aren't the anonymous fringe blogger over there).

As to the factual blurb read by the independent firm hired by ABC, see definition of "factual." Regardless, when over 60% of respondents already state they are following the case VERY CLOSELY and over half say they got most of their information FROM PEERS, how exactly could a factual poll question mislead them?

Moving on, what of the latest polls? After the fact, now that everyone knows about the issue?

How is this question wording misleading?

SHOULD CONGRESS AND THE PRESIDENT BE INVOLVED IN SCHIAVO MATTER?

Yes
13%
No
82%

There are no partisan political differences on this issue: majorities of Democrats (89 percent), Republicans (72 percent), liberals (84 percent) and conservatives (76 percent) are in agreement that the government should not be involved. 68 percent of white evangelicals think that Congress and the President should stay out of the Schiavo case.

Is it just wrong because reported by CBS? I'm sure WorldNutDaily thinks so.

737 Adults. MOE +/- 4
The party breakdown for this poll is:
Republican 44 %
Democrat 29 %
Independent 28 %

Ouch for you. Look at alllll those Republicans that think you're wrong.


13% of the country think like you. That makes you fringe on this one. A radical faction contrary to the will of the people.

Thoughts on your irrelevance?



posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 05:47 AM
link   
What do I care about Republi-crates?

It is a consitutional issue.

The irgnorance of the consitution is the issue. Result of liberalism in public schools.

Please provide the RAW data on your "push" poll.



posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 05:53 AM
link   
Are americans going to take a "poll" to murder other "handicapped" people? If 51% of american say murder say "downs sydrome" or how about all over 65?

Straving and denying water to anyone is horrible and america will pay the price for this if Terri dies.



posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 06:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrHoracid
Please provide the RAW data on your "push" poll.


Well I'm neither the Research Director over at CBS polling nor am I the outsourced firm so I'm not exactly sitting on a Quanvert, ASCII or SPSS file to send you.

But those two links represent the current poll (findings, semantics and methodology) and CBS's SOP to the best of my knowledge.

I've posted the full PDF to ABC's elsewhere though. I know it's around. CNN should have some soon as well.

[edit on 24-3-2005 by RANT]



posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 06:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrHoracid
It is a consitutional issue.


You know, I keep hearing this phrase being batted around yet noone offers explanations as to why this is a constitutional issue.

Do enlighten us.



posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 06:56 AM
link   

Since Christianity only counts if you're a right wing fringe political extremist now.

I do take offense at this comment. To make this true, you'd have to annialate almost ALL Southern Democrats....since most Democrats down here in the bible belt area are HIGHLY religous, pro-life, save-the-whales typs (I find them that believe this more consistant than Democrats who want to kill babies yet save trees because the trees are precious but the babies get in the way of mommy's social life. The other type I'm talking about think that life is precious PEROID.), church going with leadership roles. (Hell, that's about half the white catholics, and almost all the black baptists. Then you have the Church of Christ: some believe that our faith should effect how we vote, and others believe that it's a matter of giving Caezar his due, and they take the seperation of church and state EXTREMLY serously.) ....In the end, down here, I've never seen problems with Democrats and their church, as long as they showed proper respect for the living (they could even be pro choice, as long as they don't get into the morality side of it. It is then that a million and one verses come up about life being precious.) As it is, me being a republican, I've said things that are directly pro-gay...as I am technically gay (gasp!!!), and I've been a bit shakey on what to do when the baby endangers the mother's life...even as my nephew did to my sister in law. I love him, but because of him, my sis-in-law may need a liver transplant (rare diesase, can't accomodate kids). Guess what, I'm still in a position of authority--I teach 8 year old girls from hell
; my belief, with them being that young, most certainly does effect how they deal with their faith. Yet who is going to remove me? I'm mor elikely to resign because my job is interfering with my being there on Sunday mornings.

What if that Gay employee every day announced to all customers he was gay, gay, gay, gay, and... gay!

I see it all the time. Some of my direct coworkers are like that.....they won't be fired, either. Even when they so obviosuly drool over the customers. @@:

It is a constitutional issue they way that blacks being slaves was a constitutional issue BEFORE the amendments for blacks were passed. We have a document that goes on about HUMAN rights, yet allowed slavery? ...It was because, at that point, blacks wern't considered human...they were animals, and treated as such...to the point where provisions were writtn in the constution on how the black vote was to be used while they were still slaves. Again, it's like a woman's right to vote. There was nothing agains women voting, in fact the way the constitution was worded, the women's right to vote amendment was never really needed, but was put there to shut the fighting down...and to make sure that the interpretations of future udges would not stop women from voting. It's the same with the fetal tissue/ babies. The arguement is over whether they are human. With Terry, it's an argument over whether or not she is really LIVING. ..as a dead human is not covered by the constitution. If babies are human before they leave the womb, then they are to be protected BY the constitution, just as born children are...but because there are arguments over whether this is so, an amendment will have to be passed to protect their rights, just like it was for the blacks...just a reinforcement of much of what was dealt with in the constitution. (Remember, not all blacks were slaves, and as free men, they had the right to vote before the amendmentwas made, yet we eneded an amendemnet for blacks to vote???) If Terry is still living, then she is protected by the constitution. ...unless this becomes a generational argument, where we use this as an excuse to kill our grandparents, under the excuse of they aren't living because they can't do this that and the other, it may not need to be reinfroced with an amendment, because the information is already there.



posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 07:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by jlc163

Since Christianity only counts if you're a right wing fringe political extremist now.

I do take offense at this comment.


Then you also take it out of the context of this discussion in which it was offered, and the cited news item of a Baptist Church excommunicating the membership of Judge Greer for doing his job.

Which I still support their right to do, being that I'm not the hypocrite here.



posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 07:27 AM
link   
My reaction had nothing to do with the circumstances, nor the context. I jsut hate that phrase...and the saddest part is that there are people out there who believe it, as a generalization.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join