If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#291
|
|||
|
|||
James Robinson wrote:
Joe Young wrote: James Robinson wrote: Joe Young wrote: Every poll shows the vast majority of the American public apposes abortion. If that is the case in a democracy, shouldn't the majority rule? I'm not sure what polls you are reading, but here is a link that shows the opposite, i.e. support for legal abortions at about 53 percent, and opposition at 43 percent. They state this has been the trend for at least the last decade. http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/Da...oll010702.html This one seems to have some different stats?????........?? http://christianparty.net/abortiongallup.htm I prefer ABC news as a less biased source than an advocacy group, thank you. Was is ABC or CBS that staged the Chevy pickup truck exploding gas tank? I don't trust any of the news organizations anymore. Almost every one has been caught doing something like this when they can't get the real data to match the outcome they desire to report. Matt |
#292
|
|||
|
|||
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Matt Whiting" wrote in message ... No originally. Not originally? Of course it did. See article 1, section 8, clause 1. Right you are. I thought this came into being with the 16th amendment. That seems superfluous, given your reference above. Since article 1, section 8, clause 1 seems pretty general with regard to taxation, I'm now curious why the XVI amendment was necessary. Matt |
#293
|
|||
|
|||
Matt Whiting wrote:
James Robinson wrote: Joe Young wrote: James Robinson wrote: Joe Young wrote: Every poll shows the vast majority of the American public apposes abortion. If that is the case in a democracy, shouldn't the majority rule? I'm not sure what polls you are reading, but here is a link that shows the opposite, i.e. support for legal abortions at about 53 percent, and opposition at 43 percent. They state this has been the trend for at least the last decade. http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/Da...oll010702.html This one seems to have some different stats?????........?? http://christianparty.net/abortiongallup.htm I prefer ABC news as a less biased source than an advocacy group, thank you. Was is ABC or CBS that staged the Chevy pickup truck exploding gas tank? Neither. That was NBC. I don't trust any of the news organizations anymore. Almost every one has been caught doing something like this when they can't get the real data to match the outcome they desire to report. You just have to be skeptical. At least there is an editorial board, and they have to answer to the FCC. If you want manipulated data, just look at any number of sites on internet, which don't have to answer to anybody. |
#294
|
|||
|
|||
"Matt Whiting" wrote in message ... I prefer ABC news as a less biased source than an advocacy group, thank you. Was is ABC or CBS that staged the Chevy pickup truck exploding gas tank? I don't trust any of the news organizations anymore. Almost every one has been caught doing something like this when they can't get the real data to match the outcome they desire to report. That would include most every academic and government research group as well. |
#295
|
|||
|
|||
"James Robinson" wrote in message ... Was is ABC or CBS that staged the Chevy pickup truck exploding gas tank? Neither. That was NBC. I don't trust any of the news organizations anymore. Almost every one has been caught doing something like this when they can't get the real data to match the outcome they desire to report. You just have to be skeptical. At least there is an editorial board, and they have to answer to the FCC. They don't to the FCC for the factual content of the reports. Where di you get that idea? If you want manipulated data, just look at any number of sites on internet, which don't have to answer to anybody. The ones on the internet answer to the same people as the mainstream media -- the market they serve, and their credibility is at stake. That reputation is something that bureaucrats can neither enhance, nor destroy. |
#296
|
|||
|
|||
"James Robinson" wrote in message ... Matt Whiting wrote: James Robinson wrote: Joe Young wrote: James Robinson wrote: Joe Young wrote: Every poll shows the vast majority of the American public apposes abortion. If that is the case in a democracy, shouldn't the majority rule? I'm not sure what polls you are reading, but here is a link that shows the opposite, i.e. support for legal abortions at about 53 percent, and opposition at 43 percent. They state this has been the trend for at least the last decade. http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/Da...oll010702.html This one seems to have some different stats?????........?? http://christianparty.net/abortiongallup.htm I prefer ABC news as a less biased source than an advocacy group, thank you. Was is ABC or CBS that staged the Chevy pickup truck exploding gas tank? Neither. That was NBC. I don't trust any of the news organizations anymore. Almost every one has been caught doing something like this when they can't get the real data to match the outcome they desire to report. You just have to be skeptical. At least there is an editorial board, and they have to answer to the FCC. Unless it involves a boob the FCC could care less what the networks broadcast. They certainly do not monitor them for news accuracy. Most so called news programs are actually entertainment programs. |
#297
|
|||
|
|||
"Matt Whiting" wrote in message ... Was is ABC or CBS that staged the Chevy pickup truck exploding gas tank? I don't trust any of the news organizations anymore. Almost every one has been caught doing something like this when they can't get the real data to match the outcome they desire to report. That was "Dateline NBC". |
#298
|
|||
|
|||
"Matt Whiting" wrote in message ... Right you are. I thought this came into being with the 16th amendment. That seems superfluous, given your reference above. Since article 1, section 8, clause 1 seems pretty general with regard to taxation, I'm now curious why the XVI amendment was necessary. The 16th amendment was needed to allow a direct tax on income. Article 1, section 2, clause 3 required direct taxes to be apportioned. The 16th amendment states; "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration." |
#299
|
|||
|
|||
But only to the extent needed to support government operations. The problem
is all this charity crap and illegal redistribution of our assets. "Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message ink.net... "Matt Whiting" wrote in message ... No originally. Not originally? Of course it did. See article 1, section 8, clause 1. |
#300
|
|||
|
|||
Really? Every poll I've seen supports abortion. Have you noticed that the only people that advocate abortion are those that have already been born? -Doug |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
Juan Jiminez is a liar and a fraud (was: Zoom fables on ANN | ChuckSlusarczyk | Home Built | 105 | October 8th 04 12:38 AM |
Bush Pilots Fly-In. South Africa. | Bush Air | Home Built | 0 | May 25th 04 06:18 AM |
AOPA Sells-Out California Pilots in Military Airspace Grab? | Larry Dighera | Instrument Flight Rules | 12 | April 26th 04 06:12 PM |
Photographer seeking 2 pilots / warbirds for photo shoot | Wings Of Fury | Aerobatics | 0 | February 26th 04 05:59 PM |