There is no point in attempting discussion with Liberals

[ciplexian]

Before I decide if I want to put a dog in this fight, what specific "states" are we talking about?

The most obvious ones: Texas and Massachusetts (as well as others).

 

[Adam's Apple]

The most obvious ones: Texas and Massachusetts (as well as others).

I read Sullivan's article, and I don't know how he can logically compare Massachusetts statistics to Texas. These statistics are based on state population figures per thousand, and the population of Texas is about four times that of Massachusetts.

Sullivan is also not consistent in his comparison of the divorce rate and the abortion rate. In stating divorce rates he keeps the comparison to the states because Massachusetts has the lowest divorce rate of the 50 states; however, on abortion where Massachusetts does not have the lowest rate of the 50 states, Sullivan compares U.S. abortion rates to abortion rates in other countries. Up to the point where he chooses to discuss abortion figures, his comparisons had been based on state figures. To me this is typical liberal writing--bend the facts to support your thesis. If the facts are not there, then bring in a totally different argument.

 

[ciplexian]

I read Sullivan's article, and I don't know how he can logically compare Massachusetts statistics to Texas. These statistics are based on state population figures per thousand, and the population of Texas is about four times that of Massachusetts. [/quoite]

That's why its per thousand.

Sullivan is also not consistent in his comparison of the divorce rate and the abortion rate. In stating divorce rates he keeps the comparison to the states because Massachusetts has the lowest divorce rate of the 50 states; however, on abortion where Massachusetts does not have the lowest rate of the 50 states, Sullivan compares U.S. abortion rates to abortion rates in other countries. Up to the point where he chooses to discuss abortion figures, his comparisons had been based on state figures. To me this is typical liberal writing--bend the facts to support your thesis. If the facts are not there, then bring in a totally different argument.

Ok, the abortion rates comparison should be across countries not states.

 

[Adam's Apple]

To me Sullivan's comparison would have been more believable if he had compared Texas, not to Massachusetts, but to Florida or New York, states with populations more nearly the size of Texas. And Massachusetts, not with Texas, but with Indiana or Washington State, where population is more nearly the size of Massachusetts.

And I believe the reason Sullivan didn't compare the abortion rate for Massachusetts with Texas was because Massachusetts' rate was higher, so he looked around to see where America's abortion rate could be compared unfavorably. (A favorite tick of the liberals) From the tone of his article, it was clear he wanted to be sure that the reader got the impression that people in the Blue States (who voted for Kerry) were superior to people in the Red States (who voted for Bush). You no doubt noticed that the people he chose to denigrate in this article were all right-wingers.

Just my opinon, but what do I know? I'm just one of those people who live in Red State America where ignorance, closed minds, prejudice, etc., abound--nothing at all like the people living in those enlightened Blue States.

 

[dilloduck]

To me Sullivan's comparison would have been more believable if he had compared Texas, not to Massachusetts, but to Florida or New York, states with populations more nearly the size of Texas. And Massachusetts, not with Texas, but with Indiana or Washington State, where population is more nearly the size of Massachusetts.

And I believe the reason Sullivan didn't compare the abortion rate for Massachusetts with Texas was because Massachusetts' rate was higher, so he looked around to see where America's abortion rate could be compared unfavorably. (A favorite tick of the liberals) From the tone of his article, it was clear he wanted to be sure that the reader got the impression that people in the Blue States (who voted for Kerry) were superior to people in the Red States (who voted for Bush). You no doubt noticed that the people he chose to denigrate in this article were all right-wingers.

Just my opinon, but what do I know? I'm just one of those people who live in Red State America where ignorance, closed minds, prejudice, etc., abound--nothing at all like the people living in those enlightened Blue States.

I would assume only abortions that are admitted to are counted in that number too.

 

[ciplexian]

To me Sullivan's comparison would have been more believable if he had compared Texas, not to Massachusetts, but to Florida or New York, states with populations more nearly the size of Texas. And Massachusetts, not with Texas, but with Indiana or Washington State, where population is more nearly the size of Massachusetts.

And I believe the reason Sullivan didn't compare the abortion rate for Massachusetts with Texas was because Massachusetts' rate was higher, so he looked around to see where America's abortion rate could be compared unfavorably. (A favorite tick of the liberals) From the tone of his article, it was clear he wanted to be sure that the reader got the impression that people in the Blue States (who voted for Kerry) were superior to people in the Red States (who voted for Bush). You no doubt noticed that the people he chose to denigrate in this article were all right-wingers.

Just my opinon, but what do I know? I'm just one of those people who live in Red State America where ignorance, closed minds, prejudice, etc., abound--nothing at all like the people living in those enlightened Blue States.

I dont agree with denigrating views of conservatives. I think its mostly just an expression of frustration. I was just responding to the other person who was denigrating liberals.

 

[Huckleburry]

Sullivan's article demonstrates the fun of curiosity. Most folks read that, shrug and carry on. That people here looked at the comparison and decided that it was bullshit makes the intellectual world go round. Liberal or conservative this kind of analyisis needs to happen. Conservatives should call the NYT on publishing crap and liberals should listen. Liberals should call fox news on airing crap and conservatives should listen. This is the service we provide eachother and our democracy depends on it.

 

[manu1959]

for me.....

i think of liberals as movie critics

i think of conservatives as movie makers

 

[Mariner]

how conservatives and Bush supporters seem to be one and the same here.

How exactly is Bush a great conservative president?

His fiscal policies are completely non-conservative--running up enormous debt is not the way a conservative runs a household. Starting a war and not paying for it isn't the national personal responsibility that conservatives harp on.

His gov't growth policies have not been small-gov't conservative--the gov't has grown 6-7% per year under his management, vs. 3-4% per year under Clinton.

His social policies have been only token-conservative--a hundred million for faith-based initiatives, some restrictions in sex education and abortion--but he's also been liberal, adding a Medicare prescription drug benefit.

His international policy--invading and remaking Iraq in our own image--is so profoundy liberal that even most liberals are against it.

So where are the "conservatives against Bush"?

Mariner.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

how conservatives and Bush supporters seem to be one and the same here.

How exactly is Bush a great conservative president?

His fiscal policies are completely non-conservative--running up enormous debt is not the way a conservative runs a household. Starting a war and not paying for it isn't the national personal responsibility that conservatives harp on.

His gov't growth policies have not been small-gov't conservative--the gov't has grown 6-7% per year under his management, vs. 3-4% per year under Clinton.

His social policies have been only token-conservative--a hundred million for faith-based initiatives, some restrictions in sex education and abortion--but he's also been liberal, adding a Medicare prescription drug benefit.

His international policy--invading and remaking Iraq in our own image--is so profoundy liberal that even most liberals are against it.

So where are the "conservatives against Bush"?

Mariner.

You need to be worrying about your own house. It's in shambles. The core of your party is completely out of touch.