08-30-2012, 11:02 PM | #121 |
Goon Squad Leader
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Seattle
Posts: 27,063
|
Regarding strident calls from the Republican Party for Akin to withdraw from the race, I find myself on Akin's side. I feel he should stay in the race. And not only because I think he is a poor candidate and that McCaskill can and should prevail in the general election against him. But also because he is the choice of the voters. Akin said as much himself, and more power to him. I think he's wrong on the facts, and those who believe him are wrong too. But it is true that he was chosen by the voters to stand in the general election.
The alternative is to accede to the wishes of the party. The party wants to reject the clear intent of the voters. I find this objectionable. I find it hypocritical for any party leadership to make such demands. The party backed him in the first place, put him forward as the party's representative, and in other circumstances proclaims "the will of the voter this" and "the will of the voter that". This is as patronizing as a parent of a young child, when faced with a child who is aggravatingly copying their parent's bad behavior, says "do as I say, not as I do". Only ten times more patronizing and insulting as we voters are not children. Stay in the race Akin. I hope you lose, but you deserve to run.
__________________
Be Just and Fear Not. |
08-31-2012, 07:42 AM | #122 |
™
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 27,717
|
|
08-31-2012, 11:31 AM | #123 |
Read? I only know how to write.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 11,933
|
|
08-31-2012, 11:35 AM | #124 | |
Read? I only know how to write.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 11,933
|
Quote:
Also curious - and I don't understand what this means. McCaskill had manipulated her primary campaign ads to feed or encourage support to Akin. I do believe Cellar dwellers exist in MO. What was that report saying? |
|
08-31-2012, 12:40 PM | #125 | |||||||||||||
Goon Squad Leader
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Seattle
Posts: 27,063
|
Let's get the cheapshot out of the way first, shall we?
Do you even know where babies come from dumbass? You don't indicate any such knowledge with your recent posts. There? Feel better? Until now, I haven't made any cheapshots, the ridiculousness of your claim makes mockery impossible (see Poe's Law). It's still "Nope." despite your subsequent posts. Now to your further failure to support your claim with any evidence whatsoever. I asked you to provide some support for this claim of yours: Quote:
I said your claim is false. You say Ok, you're off to a good start. You've unabiguously reiterated your belief in your original statement. I asked you for a cite, or some other evidence to bolster your claim that Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Whether or not it has ever been disputed before (and I'm skeptical of that one too), I'm disputing it now. Still no evidence. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
At last, a true statement. This should be your signature, or at least your disclaimer Since I'm not a child, I learn from other ways--not just from the pedantic repetition of dogma (or dog crap). I'd be happy to deny your claims responsibly if you would just share some actual facts. Let's see some facts from you. Until you do, your claims remain unsubstantiated. Show us some of the facts and proof you esteem so highly.
__________________
Be Just and Fear Not. |
|||||||||||||
08-31-2012, 12:57 PM | #126 | |
Goon Squad Leader
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Seattle
Posts: 27,063
|
Quote:
Most people already decided, maybe indicating little change in the current state of mind of the electorate. then... Polls put McCaskill far behind, maybe indicating a wide margin of victory for Akin since McCaskill's behind. See? How am I supposed to reconcile your first statement with your third statement? You seem to contradict yourself. Furthermore, McCaskill is not "far behind" in the polls according to my research. She's ahead.
__________________
Be Just and Fear Not. |
|
08-31-2012, 01:12 PM | #127 | ||
We have to go back, Kate!
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 25,964
|
*applauds*
Nicely done V. The men preferring bigger women when stressed is from a recent study that was splashed all over the news a little while ago. Men were put into stresful situations (such as public speaking) and their BMI preferences charted. It was in order to test out at a small scale what tends to be seen at a bigger scale between food secure communities and food poor communities. Quote:
This smacks of the 'well it stands to reason, doesn't it..?' line of arguing. The sort of thing that seems to make sense because of other very looselyrelated stuff. There's a whole library's worth of pseudo-scientific bullshit floating around in our culture about evolutionary aspects of gender. It seems to have a greater grip on our imaginations than the stuff that can actually be proved.
__________________
Quote:
|
||
08-31-2012, 02:09 PM | #128 | |
polaroid of perfection
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 24,185
|
Quote:
__________________
Life's hard you know, so strike a pose on a Cadillac |
|
08-31-2012, 03:24 PM | #129 |
Read? I only know how to write.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 11,933
|
|
08-31-2012, 03:38 PM | #130 |
polaroid of perfection
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 24,185
|
He makes his money on a TV show which seems to exist solely to provide DNA tests.
Or at least those are the only ones we get over here.
__________________
Life's hard you know, so strike a pose on a Cadillac |
08-31-2012, 04:12 PM | #131 | |
Read? I only know how to write.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 11,933
|
Quote:
Now, for McCaskill to win, at least 6% or 7% of voters must change. I see no reason to believe Akins core support really care about his statments. Many apparently agree with him. I suspect most who would vote for Akins are attached to the 'liberal verse conservative' dogma. Don't care about realities. Just want to be told how to think. Based in that suspicion, I suspect many politicians, who called for him to resign publically, were not doing so privately. It was only politically convenient them to do so. We will see. If Akins does lose >6% of those who actually vote, then he did have significant moderate support. But I suspect behind the scenes, the 'powers that be' always knew where his support was coming from. If true, then they were only calling for him to withdrawl for political reasons; not from their hearts. Knowing full well the statement would be quickly forgotten even months later. Rather depressing that so many actually support a political dogma that encourages Akins to make those statements. However even advertising can manipulate well over 50% to believe outright lies. And they deny being manipulated by that propaganda. Akins only made it interesting. |
|
08-31-2012, 04:14 PM | #132 | |
Read? I only know how to write.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 11,933
|
Quote:
BTW, I believe UK was considering laws that banned using someone's DNA to perform a paternity test without their knowledge. Did that become law? |
|
08-31-2012, 05:16 PM | #133 | |
Read? I only know how to write.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 11,933
|
Quote:
Summarized were studies that demonstrated, in people and animals, when a female becomes more likely to conceive. Research that contradicts Akins. Even posted were phrases directly from those studies (ie "copulatory ambushes"). So you post cheapshot denials because phrases used in science are foreign? You were suppose to know this stuff BEFORE making conclusions. If your knowledge is from science, then you knew "forced extramarital liaisons" is an expression found in science. Denying science without even learning the phrases is your emotions saying, well ... I guess we need a new UG. Since your every denial comes without and facts. You even get angry at phrases used by researchers. Facts from many studies throughout the world contradict Akins. Females are more likely to conceive during an event of high emotion such as rape or infidelity. So instead, you get angry at the English used by researchers. Resistance is futile. You must do better to dethrone UG. Fact: women are somewhat more likely to conceive during these events. A fact that has so many Darwinist researchers asking why that is relevant. Fact: animal studies demonstrate higher male fertility rates during "copulatory ambushes" (I believe that conclusion was published by multiple studies about 2001.) Fact: women tend to be more pernicious when they are more likely to conceive. (I believe that study was in a Western US university involving maybe 50 women - 30 who had steady boyfriends - somewhere around 2007.) After how many posts, where do you cite even one science fact? You have yet to support your emotions with one study. Like UG, you posted plenty of cheapshot denials. And a few personal insults. But then I also expect that from UG. Should we conclude you agree with Akins? Based upon your posted facts, that is a real possibility. Are you really a closet Akins supporter? I would have never guessed. I bet his campaign posters are now collector's items. Can't wait to see you on PBS's Antique Roadshow. |
|
08-31-2012, 05:22 PM | #134 | |
We have to go back, Kate!
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 25,964
|
Tdub, just post some evidence or stfu. You can't just say it's a fact because you borrowed some phrasing from scientific papers and expect people to just take your word for its veracity.
__________________
Quote:
|
|
08-31-2012, 05:36 PM | #135 | |||
We have to go back, Kate!
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 25,964
|
How bout some of this?
Quote:
And a little of this: Quote:
It may be the case that women are more likely to conceive if they are experiencing high emotion. Or it may not. You have yet to show a single piece of evidence for it.
__________________
Quote:
|
|||
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|