You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #45: Do you have any data to back up your statements? I'd be interested in seeing it. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #41
45. Do you have any data to back up your statements? I'd be interested in seeing it.
Edited on Mon Nov-09-09 03:33 PM by ClarkUSA
I understand what you're saying, but I'm not convinced that's the way it would shake out. Besides, I believe, as
Debbie Wasserman-Schultz does, that the Stupak-Pitt Amendment's language will be removed in conference.
In other words, it was a means to an end to move the bill forward.

Thanks for discussing this controversial issue in a mature and non-vitriolic way. I appreciate it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
  -BREAKING: Democratic Party is now Anti-Women and run by the Pope!!! :sarcasm: Aramchek  Nov-09-09 02:49 PM   #0 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   Nov-09-09 02:49 PM   #1 
  - because the anti-choice compromise was so progressive and "pro-woman?"  villager   Nov-09-09 02:49 PM   #2 
  - there are currently no subsidies for abortion, there will be none in the bill  Aramchek   Nov-09-09 02:54 PM   #6 
     - horseshit! It prohibits insurance companies from offering coverate they *already* offer!  villager   Nov-09-09 02:56 PM   #8 
        - do you have text from the amendment supporting that?  Aramchek   Nov-09-09 02:59 PM   #10 
        - Since you can't be bothered yourself:  villager   Nov-09-09 03:02 PM   #13 
           - this is not text from the Amendment, it is a distorted description of it.  Aramchek   Nov-09-09 03:08 PM   #21 
              - Ah, Aramcheck prounounces Planned Parenthood a "distortion"  villager   Nov-09-09 03:12 PM   #22 
                 - can you provide real evidence for this from the text of the amendment?  Aramchek   Nov-09-09 03:16 PM   #27 
                    - Deleted message  Name removed   Nov-09-09 03:18 PM   #29 
                       - so you cannot provide evidence, but you still believe it. amazing!  Aramchek   Nov-09-09 03:24 PM   #40 
                          - Whereas I provide links to sources, you provide none! Amazing!  villager   Nov-09-09 04:04 PM   #58 
                             - I provided a link to to Amendment text in the OP, and a cut n paste of the text further down.  Aramchek   Nov-09-09 04:09 PM   #64 
        - How is it going to be any different than things stand now?  ClarkUSA   Nov-09-09 03:03 PM   #16 
           - You're also free to "bother," and read the Planned Parenthood release  villager   Nov-09-09 03:05 PM   #17 
           - That's not answering my question. The press release is full of overheated rhetoric. nt  ClarkUSA   Nov-09-09 03:12 PM   #23 
              - And ClarkUSA calls Planned Parenthood and NARAL "overheated!"  villager   Nov-09-09 03:14 PM   #24 
                 - You're being dishonest and trying to distract from my salient points which debunk your rhetoric.  ClarkUSA   Nov-09-09 03:21 PM   #36 
                    - "Facts don't matter" The new rallying cry of HCR opposition  Aramchek   Nov-09-09 03:26 PM   #43 
                       - A few can discuss issues maturely without rancor or vitriol; most resort to vitriolic obfuscation.  ClarkUSA   Nov-09-09 03:36 PM   #46 
                          - I'm waitng to see if you're one of them....  villager   Nov-09-09 03:44 PM   #49 
                             - I have been. You've been dishonest in your statements and refuse to offer facts from the Amendment.  ClarkUSA   Nov-09-09 04:01 PM   #55 
                                - Nor can you offer "facts" from the amendment rebutting the analyses  villager   Nov-09-09 04:03 PM   #56 
                                   - You really cannot answer my original question, can you? Because there is no difference.  ClarkUSA   Nov-09-09 04:07 PM   #61 
                                      - Okay -- for going round and round and *offering nothing of substance*  villager   Nov-09-09 04:07 PM   #63 
                                         - you are proven wrong, and you choose to ignore it. that doesn't speak highly of you.  Aramchek   Nov-09-09 04:11 PM   #66 
                                         - as you already know:  villager   Nov-09-09 04:14 PM   #68 
                                            - but for some odd reason, you cannot point to the text of the Amendment that states this  Aramchek   Nov-09-09 04:18 PM   #73 
                                         - Deleted message  Name removed   Nov-09-09 04:12 PM   #67 
                                         - that's one of our biggest problems. Age says nothing about how 'Adult' you are.  Aramchek   Nov-09-09 04:34 PM   #81 
                                            - It's an eternal human problem but here the bitter Failers usually fall in that category.  ClarkUSA   Nov-09-09 04:48 PM   #85 
                                         - You offer only strawman arguments and false assertions instead of the facts we've asked for.  ClarkUSA   Nov-09-09 04:43 PM   #83 
           - But under this bill, IF they want to buy that separate policy, they will be penalized in  T Wolf   Nov-09-09 03:08 PM   #20 
           - got text? or did someone else tell you this?  Aramchek   Nov-09-09 03:18 PM   #28 
           - Got text proving all these "hysterical women's" groups wrong?  villager   Nov-09-09 03:19 PM   #31 
              - Why are you putting quotes around a comment that was never said by anyone on this thread except you?  ClarkUSA   Nov-09-09 03:26 PM   #42 
              - Let's just say I trust NARAL and Planned Parenthood and women in general far far more  villager   Nov-09-09 03:43 PM   #47 
                 - or even your own eyes, eh?  Aramchek   Nov-09-09 03:44 PM   #50 
                 - One more time before the ignore list: Offer language that rebuts the analsyses  villager   Nov-09-09 04:04 PM   #57 
                    - The "analyses" you mention does not provide a shred of data to back up its rhetoric. nt  ClarkUSA   Nov-09-09 04:09 PM   #65 
                       - I gave a direct quote from the Amendment, that wasn't good enough for this person  Aramchek   Nov-09-09 04:30 PM   #80 
                 - You never answer questions, do you? Gee, I wonder why. nt  ClarkUSA   Nov-09-09 03:50 PM   #54 
                    - No, you don't. Nary a link, Gee, I wonder why.  villager   Nov-09-09 04:05 PM   #59 
                       - Your "analyses" is a series of statements without a shred of data to back them up.  ClarkUSA   Nov-09-09 04:15 PM   #70 
              - I provided a link to the full text of the amendment in my OP  Aramchek   Nov-09-09 03:43 PM   #48 
                 - well, you skillfully excerpted, sure  villager   Nov-09-09 04:06 PM   #60 
                    - holy crap, your head is rock hard. I didn't 'excerpt skilfully'. I provided the exact text.  Aramchek   Nov-09-09 04:15 PM   #69 
                       - It's a five page amendment. Sheesh.  villager   Nov-09-09 04:17 PM   #72 
                       - yes, 5 whole pages. Is that just too much for you to read?  Aramchek   Nov-09-09 04:22 PM   #76 
                       - And you didn't reproduce the section that comes before this!  villager   Nov-09-09 04:19 PM   #74 
                          - section (a) restricts the use of federal subsidies for abortion coverage,  Aramchek   Nov-09-09 04:25 PM   #78 
           - Again, how is that qualitatively different from what happens now?  ClarkUSA   Nov-09-09 03:19 PM   #32 
              - Point is it will become unavailable becasue the insurance corps will not offer it in order  T Wolf   Nov-09-09 03:26 PM   #41 
                 - Do you have any data to back up your statements? I'd be interested in seeing it.  ClarkUSA   Nov-09-09 03:32 PM   #45 
                 - exactly so, T Wolf....  villager   Nov-09-09 04:07 PM   #62 
           - Facts? ..  Cha   Nov-09-09 04:21 PM   #75 
              - Yeah, it's always the bitter Failers that are the most dishonest.  ClarkUSA   Nov-09-09 04:26 PM   #79 
                 - Yeah, a lot of people I respect  Cha   Nov-09-09 04:44 PM   #84 
  - Um...  jefferson_dem   Nov-09-09 02:52 PM   #3 
  - you have seen the barrage of posts around here lately, haven't you?  Aramchek   Nov-09-09 02:53 PM   #4 
     - I've seen bunches...  jefferson_dem   Nov-09-09 02:55 PM   #7 
        - I just can't believe all the dishonesty in pursuit of their aims.  Aramchek   Nov-09-09 03:03 PM   #14 
           - and yet, your dishonesty nearly trumps them all...  villager   Nov-09-09 03:19 PM   #33 
              - Is Baghdad Bob a hero of yours? nt  ClarkUSA   Nov-09-09 04:22 PM   #77 
              - I have provided proof for everything I say. You have provided nothing but vitriol.  Aramchek   Nov-09-09 04:36 PM   #82 
  - At least you're a man.  Beacool   Nov-09-09 02:54 PM   #5 
  - wow. are you not ashamed at this attempt to turn women against HCR?  Aramchek   Nov-09-09 02:57 PM   #9 
  - I'm ashamed of a backdoor slap down the back alley  texastoast   Nov-09-09 03:06 PM   #18 
  - read the amendment before you believe the conclusions some have jumped to  Aramchek   Nov-09-09 03:19 PM   #30 
  - I'm more ashamed of the Democratic party compromising on women's rights  Beacool   Nov-09-09 03:23 PM   # 
     - Funny... Debbie Wasserman-Schultz isn't "ashamed" she helped move the bill forward by voting "Aye".  ClarkUSA   Nov-09-09 03:44 PM   #51 
  - How sexist of you. nt  ClarkUSA   Nov-09-09 03:06 PM   #19 
     - Shoo.........  Beacool   Nov-09-09 03:20 PM   #34 
        - i'm not even going near this aspect of the bill...  dionysus   Nov-09-09 03:30 PM   #44 
        - A banky for me?  Beacool   Nov-09-09 03:46 PM   #52 
        - Yes, the truth about your hypocrisy is inconvenient. Chris Matthews has company! nt  ClarkUSA   Nov-09-09 03:49 PM   #53 
  - Sorry, saw the sarc tag late  stevenleser   Nov-09-09 03:01 PM   #11 
  - Half this site hates Obama, hates every Democrat not named  geek tragedy   Nov-09-09 03:02 PM   #12 
  - LOL  Forkboy   Nov-09-09 03:16 PM   #26 
  - according to my rec thread from yesterday, they represent about 25% of DU  Aramchek   Nov-09-09 03:20 PM   #35 
  - hoo boy  Starry Messenger   Nov-09-09 04:16 PM   #71 
  - So throwing women under the bus is OK with you?  Odin2005   Nov-09-09 03:03 PM   #15 
  - that is not what happened. if you read the amendment yourself, you would see that.  Aramchek   Nov-09-09 03:22 PM   #37 
  - Nobody's being thrown under any bus.  jefferson_dem   Nov-09-09 03:23 PM   #39 
  - Most of the Dems are actually very pro-woman. How do people fail to realize  Jennicut   Nov-09-09 03:15 PM   #25 
     - Rosa did the right thing.  Aramchek   Nov-09-09 03:23 PM   #38 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC