Republican Representative Jason Chaffetz Was Caught Red-Handed After Shoplifting A Chart From Americans United For Life – An Anti Abortion Group, And Claiming It Was From Planned Parenthood.

 

During her testimony before a congressional committee Tuesday, Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards called out Republican Rep. Jason Chaffetz for displaying a slide that showed a graph created by an anti-abortion group, rather than a neutral source. Richards had good reason to be skeptical of the image, which turns out to be stunningly misleading.

 

As part of a contentious back-and-forth in which Chaffetz repeatedly cut off Richards, the congressman displayed a slide with a graph that looked like this:

 

When Richards said she’d never seen it before, Chaffetz replied: “It comes straight from your annual reports.”

 

Moments later, Richards shot back: “My lawyers just informed me that the source of this information is Americans United for Life, an anti-abortion group. I would check your source.”

 

But the source wasn’t the only problem. A cursory look at the graph, which comes from an Americans United For Life report about Planned Parenthood centers released in June, makes it seem like in 2006, Planned Parenthood performed far more cancer screening and prevention services than abortions, but that by around 2010 it performed an equal number of both, and by 2013 it performed far more abortion services than anti-cancer services.

 

The issue is important because as part of their effort to defund Planned Parenthood, Republicans have portrayed it as primarily an abortion provider, while the group’s defenders have said it mostly performs other women’s health services, like cancer screenings.

 

But look at the actual numbers in the graph. They show that in 2006, Planned Parenthood performed 2,007,371 anti-cancer services and 289,750 abortions. By 2013, the gap had closed slightly, but the group still performed many more anti-cancer services than abortions, 935,573 to 327,000.

 

Why does it seem otherwise? Because the “graph” has no y axis, which allows its creators to simply plot the results wherever they choose in order to create a compelling visual effect. That’s how 327,000 is made to look like a much larger number than 935,573.

 

What the slide actually shows, of course, is that the number of abortions performed by Planned Parenthood rose very modestly between 2006 and 2013, while the number of anti-cancer services it performed did indeed fall by more than half. But Richards said some of the services, like pap smears, dropped in frequency because of changing medical standards about who should be screened and how often.

 

Displaying that information on an actual graph would show the line for abortions rising very slightly over the 7-year time period, and the line for anti-cancer services dropping, but always remaining far above the line for abortions. [MSNBC]

 

Twitter @sheriffali

 

http://on.msnbc.com/1LZM5id

 

 

Republicans And Fox News Are Playing The Victims When In Fact They Indulged Misogynist, Bigot, Racist, Hater And Bankruptcy Shyster Donald Trump To Explode On Others Including President Obama. But Now That Trump Has Become A Liability For Republicans, Fox And The GOP Are Crying Wolf!

The Fox News sponsored Republican Debate was nothing short of a sham and embarrassment. Donald Trump was a regular Guest on several of Fox News shows as he went about with his Birther attack against President Obama. As Fox News is the Republican Mouth Piece, so was Donald Trump, Fox News Mouth Piece until Trump’s MOUTH became a danger to the GRAND OLD PARTY – THE GOP.

 

The Freak Show that was called Fox Sponsored Debate was designed and carried out to put Trump’s Worms back in the can. But once out, the worms crawled everywhere reaping havoc on the Republican Party. Donald Trump was always a Misogynist with a filthy mouth against women that challenged his dominion. Trump has been filing Bankruptcies for years literally “Robbing Investors” of Billions of Dollars and one has to ask, “Why didn’t Fox News ever asked Donald Trump about his abuse to women and being a Bankruptcy Shyster.”

 

Notice for a moment, the first question went to Trump soliciting his commitment not to run as an Independent. When that backfired it was Megyn Kelly turn to go after Trump over his disgraceful attitude towards women that Ms. Kelly and Fox News were always cognizant about. And following Ms. Kelly was Chris Wallace asking Donald Trump about being a Thief. Why didn’t Fox ask these questions before, it is not like it fell out of thin air!

 

It is surprising to see how many of the Corporate Owned Media are calling Ms. Kelly a Hero when she and other Fox Hosts for years participated in Donald Trump’s disgust. So long as it didn’t affect Republicans, everyone else was an open-range target. Well, we always reap what we sow!

 

Twitter @sheriffali

 

 

The New York Times Got Caught Red Handed Over Their Sinister Article About Hillary Clinton Criminal Investigation Have Tried To Weasel Their Way Out of Their Egregiousness.

A Clinton Story Fraught With Inaccuracies: How It Happened and What Next! New York Times For Which I am a Paid Subscriber, I Have Witnessed Over The Past Months, Seems Self Evident Has Become Fox News In Print!

 

 

The New York Times after indulging in nothing short of sinister motives, much later, The Times backed off the startling characterization of a “criminal inquiry,” instead calling it something far tamer sounding: it was a “security” referral.

 

 

[Public Editor’s Journal Margaret Sullivan] The story certainly seemed like a blockbuster: A criminal investigation of Hillary Rodham Clinton by the Justice Department was being sought by two federal inspectors general over her email practices while secretary of state.

 

It’s hard to imagine a much more significant political story at this moment, given that she is the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination for president.

 

The story – a Times exclusive — appeared high on the home page and the mobile app late Thursday and on Friday and then was displayed with a three-column headline on the front page in Friday’s paper. The online headline read “Criminal Inquiry Sought in Hillary Clinton’s Use of Email,” very similar to the one in print.

 

But aspects of it began to unravel soon after it first went online. The first major change was this: It wasn’t really Mrs. Clinton directly who was the focus of the request for an investigation. It was more general: whether government information was handled improperly in connection with her use of a personal email account.

 

Much later, The Times backed off the startling characterization of a “criminal inquiry,” instead calling it something far tamer sounding: it was a “security” referral.

 

From Thursday night to Sunday morning – when a final correction appeared in print – the inaccuracies and changes in the story were handled as they came along, with little explanation to readers, other than routine corrections. The first change I mentioned above was written into the story for hours without a correction or any notice of the change, which was substantive.

 

And the evolving story, which began to include a new development, simply replaced the older version. That development was that several instances of classified information had been found in Mrs. Clinton’s personal email – although, in fairness, it’s doubtful whether the information was marked as classified when she sent or received those emails. Eventually, a number of corrections were appended to the online story, before appearing in print in the usual way – in small notices on Page A2.

 

But you can’t put stories like this back in the bottle – they ripple through the entire news system.

 

So it was, to put it mildly, a mess. As a result, I’ve been spending the last couple of days asking how this could happen and how something similar can be prevented in the future. I’ve spoken to the executive editor, Dean Baquet; to a top-ranking editor directly involved with the story, Matt Purdy; and to the two reporters, Matt Apuzzo and Michael S. Schmidt.

 

Meanwhile, I heard from readers, like Maria Cranor who wanted clarification and explanation on The Times’s “recent, and mystifying, coverage of the HRC emails. It appears that your reporters relied on leaks from the Gowdy committee to suggest that Clinton was involved in some kind of criminal malfeasance around the emails. The subsequent walk backs have not been effective, or encouraging. Please help us retain our wavering confidence in the Times’ political coverage!” (Her reference is to the Republican congressman, Trey Gowdy.)

 

Another reader, Paul Kingsley, demanded a refund for his Friday paper. “We all deserve one,” he wrote to me. And, complaining about the lack of transparency and the errors, he added:

 

1) Please repost the original reporting;

2) Provide an explanation as to how it made it to press and what was wrong.

3) What are you going to do to prevent such inaccurate bias in the future?

4) Are you going to minimize using unnamed sources?

 

Twitter @sheriffali

 

 

 Open The Link Read The Full Article, You Would Be Amazed How Low Journalism Has Stooped!

 

http://nyti.ms/1JKJgk0

Without Any Fanfare Mexico’s Supreme Court Legalizes Sam Sex Marriage! Why Do SCOTUS Create So Much Commotion That Affects The Lives Of The American People?

MEXICO CITY — His church turned him away, his family discouraged him from a public fight and the government of the state where he lives vowed it would never happen.

 

But it did. Hiram Gonzalez married his boyfriend, Severiano Chavez, last year in the northern state of Chihuahua, which, like most Mexican states, technically allows marriage only between a man and a woman.

 

Mr. Gonzalez and dozens of other gay couples in recent months have, however, found a powerful ally: Mexico’s Supreme Court.

 

In ruling after ruling, the court has said that state laws restricting marriage to heterosexuals are discriminatory. Though the decisions have been made to little public fanfare, they have had the effect of legalizing gay marriage in Mexico without enshrining it in law.

 

“When I heard the judge pronounce us legally married, I burst into tears,” said Mr. Gonzalez, 41. Like nearly all same-sex couples marrying in Mexico, he and his partner needed a court order in order to exchange vows.

 

As the United States awaits a landmark decision on gay marriage by the Supreme Court, the Mexican court’s rulings have added the country to a slowly growing list of Latin American nations permitting same-sex unions.

 

Argentina, Uruguay and Brazil already allow same-sex marriage. Chile plans to recognize same-sex civil unions this year; Ecuador approved civil unions in April; and Colombia grants same-sex couples many of the same rights extended to heterosexual married couples.

 

“It’s a huge change from where things were 10 years ago,” said Jason Pierceson, a professor at the University of Illinois at Springfield who studies gay marriage trends in Latin America.

 

The shift in Mexico, the second-largest country in Latin America after Brazil, is the product of a legal strategy that advocates used to bypass state legislatures, which have shown little inclination, and often hostility, to legalizing gay marriage.

 

In 2009, Mexico City, a federal district and large liberal island in this socially conservative country, legalized gay marriage — a first in Latin America. There have been 5,297 same-sex weddings here since then, some of them couples coming to the city from other states.

 

Twitter @sheriffali

 

 

http://nyti.ms/1dEVhyG

 

An Open Letter To The People Who Hate Obama And Everyone That Disagrees With Them More Than They Love America

[Merriam Webster Said: The True Meaning Of Democracy Is To Respect Others Even When You Disagree With Them]

 

[Source Ministry of Truth]  I meet you all the time. You hate Obama. You hate gay people. You hate black people, immigrants, Muslims, labor unions, women who want the right to make choices concerning their bodies, you hate em all. You hate being called racist. You hate being called a bigot. Maybe if you talked about creating jobs more than you talk about why you hate gay people we wouldn’t call you bigots. Maybe if you talked about black people without automatically assuming they are on food stamps while demanding their birth certificates we wouldn’t call you racist. You hate socialism and social justice. You hate regulations and taxes and spending and the Government. You hate.

 

     You like war. You like torture. You like Jesus. I don’t know how in the hell any of that is compatible, but no one ever accused you haters of being over-committed to ideological consistency. You like people who look like you or at least hate most of the things that you hate. You hate everything else.

 

Now, I know you profess to love our country and the founding fathers (unless you are reminded that they believed in the separation of church and state), but I need to remind you that America is NOT what Fox News says it is. America is a melting pot, it always has been. We are a multi-cultural amalgamation of all kinds of people, and yet you still demonize everyone who is not a rich, white, heterosexual christian male or his submissive and obedient wife.

 

You hate liberals, moderates, hell, anyone who disagrees with Conservative dogma as espoused by Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. You hate em.

 

Well, here are the facts, Jack. If you hate the Government then you are unqualified to manage it. If you hate gay people more than you love America than you should take your own advice and get the hell out. There are several countries that are openly hostile to gay people, but they are full of brown people and you don’t like them much either from what I understand. It looks like you are screwed, but that’s not what I am here to tell you.

 

 

More rant below the fold . . .

 

Now that you have thrown everything and the kitchen sink at President Obama and it still hasn’t worked you are panicking. Obama’s approval ratings are still near 50% despite your best efforts to undermine the economy and America’s recovery at every step you can. You tried to hold the American economy hostage to force America into default on its’ debts, debts that YOU rang up under Bush, so you could blame it on Obama and it failed. You’ve used the filibuster more than any other Congress ever, going so far as to vote against providing health care access to 9/11 first responders. You remember 9/11, don’t you, it’s that thing you used to lie us into a war in Iraq, and then when Obama killed Bin Laden and ended the war in Iraq you told people that he hates America and wants the troops to fail.

 

You monsters. You hate Obama with a passion, despite the fact that he is a tax cutting, deficit reducing war President who undermines civil rights and delivers corporate friendly watered down reforms that benefit special interests just like a Republican. You call him a Kenyan. You call him a socialist. You dance with your hatred singing it proudly in the rain like it was a 1950’s musical.

 

Frankly, you disgust me. Your hatred nauseates me. Your bigotry offends me. Your racism revolts me.

 

Dear haters, I am openly questioning your patriotism.

 

I think you hate gays, Obama, black people, poor people, all of us, women, atheists and agnostics, Latinos, Muslims, Liberals, all of us, I think you hate every one who isn’t exactly like you, and I think you hate us more than you love your country.

 

I think you hate gay soldiers more than you want America to win its wars.

 

I don’t even think you want America to win wars, you just want America to have wars, never ending wars and the war profiteering it generates. You love that kind of spending, you love spending on faith based initiatives and abstinence based sex education (George Carlin would have loved that one), you love spending on subsidies for profitable oil corporations, you spend like drunken sailors when you are in the White House, but if it is a Democrat then suddenly you cheer when America doesn’t get the Olympics because it might make the black President look bad.

 

But oooh you love your country, you say, and you want it back. Well listen here skippy, it isn’t your country, you don’t own it, it is our country, and America is NOT the religiously extremist Foxbots who hate science, elitist professors and having a vibrant and meaningful sex life with someone we love if Rick Santorum doesn’t approve of it. Rick Santorum isn’t running for America’s f**king high school dance chaperone, he should probably just shut the hell up about sex, but he can’t because he has nothing else to run on.

 

Republicans can NOT win on the issues. They’ve got NOTHING. All they have is a divide and conquer class war that pits ignorant racist and bigoted people against the rest of us in a meaningless battle of wedge issues and the already proven to fail George W. Bush agenda again of tax cuts for the rich, deregulation, privatization and war profiteering and nothing else, so all they can do is blame black people, gays the government, anybody and everyone else for their own failings. The party of personal responsibility, my ass.

 

But they love multi-national corporations, just ask a gay hating and racist religious extremist if they think Corporations are people and they will gladly agree, but if you ask them if gay people are people they aren’t so sure.

 

Dear haters, you are the cruel, heartless misinformed assholes who would sell America out to Haliburton in a heartbeat, you would rather pay ZERO taxes than you would see a newly born baby get access to quality health care, you cheer when we discuss denying health care to young people with preventable diseases, and you boo when we discuss the First Ladies plan to cut back on childhood obesity.

 

You are a cross to carry and a flag to wrap yourself in away from being the people who Sinclair Lewis warned us about, but I guarantee that if Fox News told you to dress that way you would, because you are the same blind, ignorant and closed minded dunces who drove this country into a civil war years ago because you are bound to the notion that some men are more equal than others. In short, the reason I proudly wear my union army hat is because of seditious sell outs like you who constantly f*ck over working class Americans so a foreign entrepreneur like Rupert Murdoch can get a bigger tax break. If corporations are people, they are neither American patriots nor capable of love. Just like you.

 

So stop wearing your hate with pride. Stop celebrating your anti-science, anti-math ignorance. Stop using code words to mask your bigotry like “family values”, especially when you hate my family and when you stand on the same stage as a guy who has had three marriages or if you share a seat in the Senate with a guy who cheated on his wife with hookers while wearing diapers. You should be ashamed. I know that you are just doing this to motivate your misinformed hate cult base because if they actually knew that your ideas will make them poorer than they are now, they would never vote for you.

 

You are doing your best to impoverish your countrymen so rich people can get bigger tax breaks and you can keep on delivering corporate welfare to the special interests who have bribed you, and I am disgusted by the way you gleefully parade your hatred with aplomb. I don’t think you do love America. At least, not as much as you hate everyone in America who isn’t exactly like you.

 

You should think about that, and maybe get some help.

 

And for the record, I do not hate you. I am embarrassed by you and nauseated by your cruel and thoughtless behavior and your all consuming greed, but I do not hate you. I forgive you and I hope you can change someday, but I don’t hate you. You have enough hate in you for the rest of us as it is.

 

Twitter @sheriffali

 

http://m.dailykos.com/story/2012/01/09/1053088/-An-open-letter-to-the-people-who-hate-Obama-more-than-they-love-America?detail=facebook_sf

Obama Makes History As First President To Take Questions Only From Women During News Conference December 19, 2014

The first question went to Carrie Budoff Brown of Politico, who asked about cyber attacks.

 

The second question goes to Cheryl Bolen of Bloomberg. Up third, Julie Pace from the AP asked about Cuba and whether or not North Korea was acting with another country. The fourth question goes to Lesley Clark of McClatchy Newspapers. “World news Tonight” anchor David Muir just received a shout out from the president.

 

The fifth question goes to Roberta Rampton of Reuters. Colleen McCain Nelson was up next, asking about executive actions. Juliet Eilperin gets the next question, asking about the Keystone pipeline. April Ryan of Urban Radio Networks gets the last question, asking about the “state of black America.”

 

Twitter @sheriffali

 

Open to link to read or see the Video

http://www.politicususa.com/2014/12/19/obama-isthe-president-history-questions-women-press-conference.html

 

Women! Five Right Wing Justices, Rick Perry and other Republican men, want to control your VAGINA!

Sometimes I think that some women in America are in the same predicament as those in the Arab world, where obnoxious men consider women second class citizens.

 

Republican men have been and continue to want overall control over women’s VAGINA and yet, some of these women continually vote Republican! Why?

 

If the human biology was to change and men began getting pregnant, Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, Alito and Scalia would not have blocked Texas New Abortion Laws.

 

As for Rick Perry who is as dumb as a “door nail,” if his BELLY started swelling he would certainly get a pair of pliers, hacksaw and a bolt cutter and self abort!

 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/20/us/supreme-court-rejects-bid-to-block-texas-abortion-law.html?hp

Virtues of Women! Dedicated to Malala Yousafzai

“There is something in a woman beyond all human delights: a magnetic virtue, a charming quality, and occult and powerful motive of love and caring.

 

A beautiful woman is the perfect workmanship of God and the sole wonder of the world. When I see the elaborate study and ingenuity displayed by women in the pursuit of trifles, I feel no doubt of their herculean undertakings.

 

Man’s sin is that he has not had enough humility; woman’s that she has had too much of it. It is as if, by letting women carry the burden of being humble and pious for them, men have got rid of any need to appropriate these virtues for themselves and so have felt free to visit aggression on the world.”