Lies, Damn Lies, and Liberal "Facts"

[ThoughtCrimes]

This is why I call bed wetters "NO INFORMATION" voters.

As I explained in wrongwinger's thread, "low information" voters who get their political influence from celebrities and other pathetic sources are a different category than the "NO INFORMATION" democrooks who obviously endeavor to shut down the dissemination of information.

So you must be talking about people like Political Chica with her girl crush on Ann Coulter as examples of "low information" voters AND their "celebrities and other pathetic sources"!

Since any who read my posts, even if they disagree, know that I am far from 'low information,' the same folks will recognize that you must be smarting over various spankings that I've administered to you to post such drivel.

What spankings? You either reply solely with ad hominem, or you dance like crazy to deflect from responding to the many spears piercing your "arguments" or BOTH! You're a plagiaristic, fabricating flunky to the Big Lie neoconservative fascists to put it in actual terms. You simply emulate a caricature of the pseudo-intellectuals of the far, far right you pretend and wish to be, just so someone will notice and give you some attention, you narcissistic twit! Hey, everybody's gotta be sum'tin, huh Chica!

Have a nice day, Chica!

 

[PoliticalChic]

This is why I call bed wetters "NO INFORMATION" voters.

As I explained in wrongwinger's thread, "low information" voters who get their political influence from celebrities and other pathetic sources are a different category than the "NO INFORMATION" democrooks who obviously endeavor to shut down the dissemination of information.

So you must be talking about people like Political Chica with her girl crush on Ann Coulter as examples of "low information" voters AND their "celebrities and other pathetic sources"!

Since any who read my posts, even if they disagree, know that I am far from 'low information,' the same folks will recognize that you must be smarting over various spankings that I've administered to you to post such drivel.

What spankings? You either reply solely with ad hominem, or you dance like crazy to deflect from responding to the many spears piercing your "arguments" or BOTH! You're a plagiaristic, fabricating flunky to the Big Lie neoconservative fascists to put it in actual terms. You simply emulate a caricature of the pseudo-intellectuals of the far, far right you pretend and wish to be, just so someone will notice and give you some attention, you narcissistic twit! Hey, everybody's gotta be sum'tin, huh Chica!

Have a nice day, Chica!

You must think folks are stupid and can't recognize and place the hostility in your every post.

I kinda like the result: I think I'll keep doing it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

There are so many lies, myths, fairy tales that Liberals are required to pay lip service to, and pass on as fact, "Liberal fact," that's it's difficult to pick the best....



Here's a classic 'Liberal fact' that lots of low information voters believe: women get paid only 77 cents for the same job that men earn $1.


5. And right on a government blog....

" When we examine earnings, we find big differences by the gender of workers. Among people who worked year-round and full-time in 2009, men earned a median of $47,100 and women $36,300 or 77 cents for every dollar earned by men. Earnings actually increased between 2008 and 2009 for both sexes." Income vs. Earnings | Random Samplings



Really?

So....any employer could jack up his bottom line by 23% simply by firing all the men and replacing them with women?

Yet the truly brain-dead accept this government data!

You are correct to say that misleading figures are used to portray the male/female pay gap.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

This is why I call bed wetters "NO INFORMATION" voters.

As I explained in wrongwinger's thread, "low information" voters who get their political influence from celebrities and other pathetic sources are a different category than the "NO INFORMATION" democrooks who obviously endeavor to shut down the dissemination of information.

So you must be talking about people like Political Chica with her girl crush on Ann Coulter as examples of "low information" voters AND their "celebrities and other pathetic sources"!

Since any who read my posts, even if they disagree, know that I am far from 'low information,' the same folks will recognize that you must be smarting over various spankings that I've administered to you to post such drivel.

What spankings? You either reply solely with ad hominem, or you dance like crazy to deflect from responding to the many spears piercing your "arguments" or BOTH! You're a plagiaristic, fabricating flunky to the Big Lie neoconservative fascists to put it in actual terms. You simply emulate a caricature of the pseudo-intellectuals of the far, far right you pretend and wish to be, just so someone will notice and give you some attention, you narcissistic twit! Hey, everybody's gotta be sum'tin, huh Chica!

Have a nice day, Chica!

You must think folks are stupid and can't recognize and place the hostility in your every post.

I kinda like the result: I think I'll keep doing it.

You're projecting again, Chica! And hey, you're the one who posted to me initially, remember little one?

 

[PoliticalChic]

This is why I call bed wetters "NO INFORMATION" voters.

As I explained in wrongwinger's thread, "low information" voters who get their political influence from celebrities and other pathetic sources are a different category than the "NO INFORMATION" democrooks who obviously endeavor to shut down the dissemination of information.

So you must be talking about people like Political Chica with her girl crush on Ann Coulter as examples of "low information" voters AND their "celebrities and other pathetic sources"!

Since any who read my posts, even if they disagree, know that I am far from 'low information,' the same folks will recognize that you must be smarting over various spankings that I've administered to you to post such drivel.

What spankings? You either reply solely with ad hominem, or you dance like crazy to deflect from responding to the many spears piercing your "arguments" or BOTH! You're a plagiaristic, fabricating flunky to the Big Lie neoconservative fascists to put it in actual terms. You simply emulate a caricature of the pseudo-intellectuals of the far, far right you pretend and wish to be, just so someone will notice and give you some attention, you narcissistic twit! Hey, everybody's gotta be sum'tin, huh Chica!

Have a nice day, Chica!

You must think folks are stupid and can't recognize and place the hostility in your every post.

I kinda like the result: I think I'll keep doing it.

You're projecting again, Chica! And hey, you're the one who posted to me initially, remember little one?

No...you followed me to this thread.

My rectitude sets you off, huh?

Great!

Let's do this again!

 

[PoliticalChic]

There are so many lies, myths, fairy tales that Liberals are required to pay lip service to, and pass on as fact, "Liberal fact," that's it's difficult to pick the best....



Here's a classic 'Liberal fact' that lots of low information voters believe: women get paid only 77 cents for the same job that men earn $1.


5. And right on a government blog....

" When we examine earnings, we find big differences by the gender of workers. Among people who worked year-round and full-time in 2009, men earned a median of $47,100 and women $36,300 or 77 cents for every dollar earned by men. Earnings actually increased between 2008 and 2009 for both sexes." Income vs. Earnings | Random Samplings



Really?

So....any employer could jack up his bottom line by 23% simply by firing all the men and replacing them with women?

Yet the truly brain-dead accept this government data!

You are correct to say that misleading figures are used to portray the male/female pay gap.

I'm correct about everything- always.....and in this tread, about the lies and myths that pass for 'Liberal facts.'

 

[NYcarbineer]

There are so many lies, myths, fairy tales that Liberals are required to pay lip service to, and pass on as fact, "Liberal fact," that's it's difficult to pick the best....



Here's a classic 'Liberal fact' that lots of low information voters believe: women get paid only 77 cents for the same job that men earn $1.


5. And right on a government blog....

" When we examine earnings, we find big differences by the gender of workers. Among people who worked year-round and full-time in 2009, men earned a median of $47,100 and women $36,300 or 77 cents for every dollar earned by men. Earnings actually increased between 2008 and 2009 for both sexes." Income vs. Earnings | Random Samplings



Really?

So....any employer could jack up his bottom line by 23% simply by firing all the men and replacing them with women?

Yet the truly brain-dead accept this government data!

You are correct to say that misleading figures are used to portray the male/female pay gap.

I'm correct about everything- always.....and in this tread, about the lies and myths that pass for 'Liberal facts.'

No, you are not. I am.

 

[PoliticalChic]

There are so many lies, myths, fairy tales that Liberals are required to pay lip service to, and pass on as fact, "Liberal fact," that's it's difficult to pick the best....



Here's a classic 'Liberal fact' that lots of low information voters believe: women get paid only 77 cents for the same job that men earn $1.


5. And right on a government blog....

" When we examine earnings, we find big differences by the gender of workers. Among people who worked year-round and full-time in 2009, men earned a median of $47,100 and women $36,300 or 77 cents for every dollar earned by men. Earnings actually increased between 2008 and 2009 for both sexes." Income vs. Earnings | Random Samplings



Really?

So....any employer could jack up his bottom line by 23% simply by firing all the men and replacing them with women?

Yet the truly brain-dead accept this government data!

You are correct to say that misleading figures are used to portray the male/female pay gap.

I'm correct about everything- always.....and in this tread, about the lies and myths that pass for 'Liberal facts.'

No, you are not. I am.

Another wannabe.

 

[David_42]

There are so many lies, myths, fairy tales that Liberals are required to pay lip service to, and pass on as fact, "Liberal fact," that's it's difficult to pick the best....



Here's a classic 'Liberal fact' that lots of low information voters believe: women get paid only 77 cents for the same job that men earn $1.


5. And right on a government blog....

" When we examine earnings, we find big differences by the gender of workers. Among people who worked year-round and full-time in 2009, men earned a median of $47,100 and women $36,300 or 77 cents for every dollar earned by men. Earnings actually increased between 2008 and 2009 for both sexes." Income vs. Earnings | Random Samplings



Really?

So....any employer could jack up his bottom line by 23% simply by firing all the men and replacing them with women?

Yet the truly brain-dead accept this government data!

You are correct to say that misleading figures are used to portray the male/female pay gap.

I'm correct about everything- always.....and in this tread, about the lies and myths that pass for 'Liberal facts.'

No, you are not. I am.

Another wannabe.

"I'm correct about everything- always"
Anyone who claims this is dishonest by default.

 

[PoliticalChic]

And, a reminder of this, the grand-daddy of all the Liberal "facts"....."


7." For years, advocates for colleges to do more to prevent and punish sexual assault on campus have cited a 2007 federal statistic that one in five female students experience sexual assault in college. President Obama and members of Congress have used the statistic, as have many others." New survey finds 1 in 5 college women have experienced sexual assault | InsideHigherEd


" It is possible because false claims about male domestic violence are ubiquitous and immune to refutation." Domestic violence myths help no one - USATODAY.com



Could the Liberal liars be after women's votes...and not care how they get 'em?

Could be.



a. " At first glance, one might conclude that the risk of rape victimization for college women is not high; “only” about 1 in 36 college women (2.8 percent) experience a completed rape or attempted rape in an academic year. ... The figures measure victimization for slightly more than half a year (6.91 months). Projecting results beyond this reference period is problematic for a number of reasons, such as assuming that the risk of victimization is the same during summer months and remains stable over a person’s time in college. However, if the 2.8 percent victimization figure is calculated for a 1-year period, the data suggest that nearly 5 percent (4.9 percent) of college women are victimized in any given calendar year. Over the course of a college career—which now lasts an average of 5 years—the percentage of completed or attempted rape victimization among women in higher educational institutions might climb to between one-fifth and one-quarter." https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/182369.pdf

Did you note terms like 'projecting,' and 'problematic,' and 'suggest,' and 'might'? Liberals eat this stuff up.



And, this just in!

b. "A new report on sexual assault released today by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) officially puts to bed the bogus statistic that one in five women on college campuses are victims of sexual assault. In fact, non-students are 25 percent more likely to be victims of sexual assault than students, according to the data. And the real number of assault victims isseveral orders of magnitude lower than one-in-five.

The full study,which was published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, a division within DOJ, found that rather than one in five female college students becoming victims of sexual assault, the actual rate is 6.1 per 1,000 students, or 0.61 percent(instead of 1-in-5, the real number is 0.03-in-5). For non-students, the rate of sexual assault is 7.6 per 1,000 people."
New DOJ Data On Sexual Assaults Students Are Less Likely To Be Raped


"....6.1 per 1,000 students, or 0.61 percent(instead of 1-in-5, the real number is 0.03-in-5)."

Get that??? --> 0.03 in five!!!!

OK....who's gonna tell Obama?

Or the rest of the hand-wringing Liberals?

 

[NYcarbineer]

There are so many lies, myths, fairy tales that Liberals are required to pay lip service to, and pass on as fact, "Liberal fact," that's it's difficult to pick the best....



Here's a classic 'Liberal fact' that lots of low information voters believe: women get paid only 77 cents for the same job that men earn $1.


5. And right on a government blog....

" When we examine earnings, we find big differences by the gender of workers. Among people who worked year-round and full-time in 2009, men earned a median of $47,100 and women $36,300 or 77 cents for every dollar earned by men. Earnings actually increased between 2008 and 2009 for both sexes." Income vs. Earnings | Random Samplings



Really?

So....any employer could jack up his bottom line by 23% simply by firing all the men and replacing them with women?

Yet the truly brain-dead accept this government data!

You are correct to say that misleading figures are used to portray the male/female pay gap.

I'm correct about everything- always.....and in this tread, about the lies and myths that pass for 'Liberal facts.'

No, you are not. I am.

Another wannabe.

"I'm correct about everything- always"
Anyone who claims this is dishonest by default.

lol, I know. Delusions of grandeur. How boring.

 

[NYcarbineer]

And, a reminder of this, the grand-daddy of all the Liberal "facts"....."


7." For years, advocates for colleges to do more to prevent and punish sexual assault on campus have cited a 2007 federal statistic that one in five female students experience sexual assault in college. President Obama and members of Congress have used the statistic, as have many others." New survey finds 1 in 5 college women have experienced sexual assault | InsideHigherEd


" It is possible because false claims about male domestic violence are ubiquitous and immune to refutation." Domestic violence myths help no one - USATODAY.com



Could the Liberal liars be after women's votes...and not care how they get 'em?

Could be.



a. " At first glance, one might conclude that the risk of rape victimization for college women is not high; “only” about 1 in 36 college women (2.8 percent) experience a completed rape or attempted rape in an academic year. ... The figures measure victimization for slightly more than half a year (6.91 months). Projecting results beyond this reference period is problematic for a number of reasons, such as assuming that the risk of victimization is the same during summer months and remains stable over a person’s time in college. However, if the 2.8 percent victimization figure is calculated for a 1-year period, the data suggest that nearly 5 percent (4.9 percent) of college women are victimized in any given calendar year. Over the course of a college career—which now lasts an average of 5 years—the percentage of completed or attempted rape victimization among women in higher educational institutions might climb to between one-fifth and one-quarter." https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/182369.pdf

Did you note terms like 'projecting,' and 'problematic,' and 'suggest,' and 'might'? Liberals eat this stuff up.



And, this just in!

b. "A new report on sexual assault released today by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) officially puts to bed the bogus statistic that one in five women on college campuses are victims of sexual assault. In fact, non-students are 25 percent more likely to be victims of sexual assault than students, according to the data. And the real number of assault victims isseveral orders of magnitude lower than one-in-five.

The full study,which was published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, a division within DOJ, found that rather than one in five female college students becoming victims of sexual assault, the actual rate is 6.1 per 1,000 students, or 0.61 percent(instead of 1-in-5, the real number is 0.03-in-5). For non-students, the rate of sexual assault is 7.6 per 1,000 people."
New DOJ Data On Sexual Assaults Students Are Less Likely To Be Raped


"....6.1 per 1,000 students, or 0.61 percent(instead of 1-in-5, the real number is 0.03-in-5)."

Get that??? --> 0.03 in five!!!!

OK....who's gonna tell Obama?

Or the rest of the hand-wringing Liberals?

What is your point?

You must learn to have a point. Friendly advice.

 

[PoliticalChic]

And, a reminder of this, the grand-daddy of all the Liberal "facts"....."


7." For years, advocates for colleges to do more to prevent and punish sexual assault on campus have cited a 2007 federal statistic that one in five female students experience sexual assault in college. President Obama and members of Congress have used the statistic, as have many others." New survey finds 1 in 5 college women have experienced sexual assault | InsideHigherEd


" It is possible because false claims about male domestic violence are ubiquitous and immune to refutation." Domestic violence myths help no one - USATODAY.com



Could the Liberal liars be after women's votes...and not care how they get 'em?

Could be.



a. " At first glance, one might conclude that the risk of rape victimization for college women is not high; “only” about 1 in 36 college women (2.8 percent) experience a completed rape or attempted rape in an academic year. ... The figures measure victimization for slightly more than half a year (6.91 months). Projecting results beyond this reference period is problematic for a number of reasons, such as assuming that the risk of victimization is the same during summer months and remains stable over a person’s time in college. However, if the 2.8 percent victimization figure is calculated for a 1-year period, the data suggest that nearly 5 percent (4.9 percent) of college women are victimized in any given calendar year. Over the course of a college career—which now lasts an average of 5 years—the percentage of completed or attempted rape victimization among women in higher educational institutions might climb to between one-fifth and one-quarter." https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/182369.pdf

Did you note terms like 'projecting,' and 'problematic,' and 'suggest,' and 'might'? Liberals eat this stuff up.



And, this just in!

b. "A new report on sexual assault released today by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) officially puts to bed the bogus statistic that one in five women on college campuses are victims of sexual assault. In fact, non-students are 25 percent more likely to be victims of sexual assault than students, according to the data. And the real number of assault victims isseveral orders of magnitude lower than one-in-five.

The full study,which was published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, a division within DOJ, found that rather than one in five female college students becoming victims of sexual assault, the actual rate is 6.1 per 1,000 students, or 0.61 percent(instead of 1-in-5, the real number is 0.03-in-5). For non-students, the rate of sexual assault is 7.6 per 1,000 people."
New DOJ Data On Sexual Assaults Students Are Less Likely To Be Raped


"....6.1 per 1,000 students, or 0.61 percent(instead of 1-in-5, the real number is 0.03-in-5)."

Get that??? --> 0.03 in five!!!!

OK....who's gonna tell Obama?

Or the rest of the hand-wringing Liberals?

What is your point?

You must learn to have a point. Friendly advice.

Let's count this post, your pretense that you didn't understand the PROOF that I've provided of the title, as one of the reasons you are known as the NYLiar.

 

[NYcarbineer]

And, a reminder of this, the grand-daddy of all the Liberal "facts"....."


7." For years, advocates for colleges to do more to prevent and punish sexual assault on campus have cited a 2007 federal statistic that one in five female students experience sexual assault in college. President Obama and members of Congress have used the statistic, as have many others." New survey finds 1 in 5 college women have experienced sexual assault | InsideHigherEd


" It is possible because false claims about male domestic violence are ubiquitous and immune to refutation." Domestic violence myths help no one - USATODAY.com



Could the Liberal liars be after women's votes...and not care how they get 'em?

Could be.



a. " At first glance, one might conclude that the risk of rape victimization for college women is not high; “only” about 1 in 36 college women (2.8 percent) experience a completed rape or attempted rape in an academic year. ... The figures measure victimization for slightly more than half a year (6.91 months). Projecting results beyond this reference period is problematic for a number of reasons, such as assuming that the risk of victimization is the same during summer months and remains stable over a person’s time in college. However, if the 2.8 percent victimization figure is calculated for a 1-year period, the data suggest that nearly 5 percent (4.9 percent) of college women are victimized in any given calendar year. Over the course of a college career—which now lasts an average of 5 years—the percentage of completed or attempted rape victimization among women in higher educational institutions might climb to between one-fifth and one-quarter." https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/182369.pdf

Did you note terms like 'projecting,' and 'problematic,' and 'suggest,' and 'might'? Liberals eat this stuff up.



And, this just in!

b. "A new report on sexual assault released today by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) officially puts to bed the bogus statistic that one in five women on college campuses are victims of sexual assault. In fact, non-students are 25 percent more likely to be victims of sexual assault than students, according to the data. And the real number of assault victims isseveral orders of magnitude lower than one-in-five.

The full study,which was published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, a division within DOJ, found that rather than one in five female college students becoming victims of sexual assault, the actual rate is 6.1 per 1,000 students, or 0.61 percent(instead of 1-in-5, the real number is 0.03-in-5). For non-students, the rate of sexual assault is 7.6 per 1,000 people."
New DOJ Data On Sexual Assaults Students Are Less Likely To Be Raped


"....6.1 per 1,000 students, or 0.61 percent(instead of 1-in-5, the real number is 0.03-in-5)."

Get that??? --> 0.03 in five!!!!

OK....who's gonna tell Obama?

Or the rest of the hand-wringing Liberals?

What is your point?

You must learn to have a point. Friendly advice.

Let's count this post, your pretense that you didn't understand the PROOF that I've provided of the title, as one of the reasons you are known as the NYLiar.

You can pretend that I didn't prove you told a lie in the OP, but that won't change reality.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Her point is that she doesn't understand what a fallacy is, and why her threads fail as a consequence of those fallacies.

The OP's threads fail as a result of one of three fallacies – and often a combination thereof:

Straw man fallacy: “liberals believe/advocate thus and such” - when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

Hasty generalization/composition fallacy: “all liberals.”

False comparison fallacy: “liberals are 'Nazis,' liberals are 'communists,' liberals are 'fascists.'"

 

[David_42]

Her point is that she doesn't understand what a fallacy is, and why her threads fail as a consequence of those fallacies.

The OP's threads fail as a result of one of three fallacies – and often a combination thereof:

Straw man fallacy: “liberals believe/advocate thus and such” - when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

Hasty generalization/composition fallacy: “all liberals.”

False comparison fallacy: “liberals are 'Nazis,' liberals are 'communists,' liberals are 'fascists.'"

The right loves straw men and false comparisons..

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

So you must be talking about people like Political Chica with her girl crush on Ann Coulter as examples of "low information" voters AND their "celebrities and other pathetic sources"!

Since any who read my posts, even if they disagree, know that I am far from 'low information,' the same folks will recognize that you must be smarting over various spankings that I've administered to you to post such drivel.

What spankings? You either reply solely with ad hominem, or you dance like crazy to deflect from responding to the many spears piercing your "arguments" or BOTH! You're a plagiaristic, fabricating flunky to the Big Lie neoconservative fascists to put it in actual terms. You simply emulate a caricature of the pseudo-intellectuals of the far, far right you pretend and wish to be, just so someone will notice and give you some attention, you narcissistic twit! Hey, everybody's gotta be sum'tin, huh Chica!

Have a nice day, Chica!

You must think folks are stupid and can't recognize and place the hostility in your every post.

I kinda like the result: I think I'll keep doing it.

You're projecting again, Chica! And hey, you're the one who posted to me initially, remember little one?

No...you followed me to this thread.

My rectitude sets you off, huh?

Great!

Let's do this again!

So you must be talking about people like Political Chica with her girl crush on Ann Coulter as examples of "low information" voters AND their "celebrities and other pathetic sources"!

Since any who read my posts, even if they disagree, know that I am far from 'low information,' the same folks will recognize that you must be smarting over various spankings that I've administered to you to post such drivel.

What spankings? You either reply solely with ad hominem, or you dance like crazy to deflect from responding to the many spears piercing your "arguments" or BOTH! You're a plagiaristic, fabricating flunky to the Big Lie neoconservative fascists to put it in actual terms. You simply emulate a caricature of the pseudo-intellectuals of the far, far right you pretend and wish to be, just so someone will notice and give you some attention, you narcissistic twit! Hey, everybody's gotta be sum'tin, huh Chica!

Have a nice day, Chica!

You must think folks are stupid and can't recognize and place the hostility in your every post.

I kinda like the result: I think I'll keep doing it.

You're projecting again, Chica! And hey, you're the one who posted to me initially, remember little one?

No...you followed me to this thread.

My rectitude sets you off, huh?

Great!

Let's do this again!

Chica, you just lied through your teeth! I peruse many threads, so disavow yourself of your self centered notion that I landed on this thread gunning for ya, you narcissistic twit. The world DOES NOT revolve about you.

My first post on this thread was #35 to Pete7469. Then YOU piggybacked my post to him with your usual screed! So your claim addressing me that, "...you followed me to this thread." Is FALSE...a LIE. Your alleged rectitude is nothing more false bravado and bullshit hype! You mirror precisely what you allege to detest! What hypocrisy!!!!

Did I mention that you are a liar...yeah, I did! What will be your excuse to pardon yourself from that example of your perfidy this time, Chica!

 

[PoliticalChic]

And, a reminder of this, the grand-daddy of all the Liberal "facts"....."


7." For years, advocates for colleges to do more to prevent and punish sexual assault on campus have cited a 2007 federal statistic that one in five female students experience sexual assault in college. President Obama and members of Congress have used the statistic, as have many others." New survey finds 1 in 5 college women have experienced sexual assault | InsideHigherEd


" It is possible because false claims about male domestic violence are ubiquitous and immune to refutation." Domestic violence myths help no one - USATODAY.com



Could the Liberal liars be after women's votes...and not care how they get 'em?

Could be.



a. " At first glance, one might conclude that the risk of rape victimization for college women is not high; “only” about 1 in 36 college women (2.8 percent) experience a completed rape or attempted rape in an academic year. ... The figures measure victimization for slightly more than half a year (6.91 months). Projecting results beyond this reference period is problematic for a number of reasons, such as assuming that the risk of victimization is the same during summer months and remains stable over a person’s time in college. However, if the 2.8 percent victimization figure is calculated for a 1-year period, the data suggest that nearly 5 percent (4.9 percent) of college women are victimized in any given calendar year. Over the course of a college career—which now lasts an average of 5 years—the percentage of completed or attempted rape victimization among women in higher educational institutions might climb to between one-fifth and one-quarter." https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/182369.pdf

Did you note terms like 'projecting,' and 'problematic,' and 'suggest,' and 'might'? Liberals eat this stuff up.



And, this just in!

b. "A new report on sexual assault released today by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) officially puts to bed the bogus statistic that one in five women on college campuses are victims of sexual assault. In fact, non-students are 25 percent more likely to be victims of sexual assault than students, according to the data. And the real number of assault victims isseveral orders of magnitude lower than one-in-five.

The full study,which was published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, a division within DOJ, found that rather than one in five female college students becoming victims of sexual assault, the actual rate is 6.1 per 1,000 students, or 0.61 percent(instead of 1-in-5, the real number is 0.03-in-5). For non-students, the rate of sexual assault is 7.6 per 1,000 people."
New DOJ Data On Sexual Assaults Students Are Less Likely To Be Raped


"....6.1 per 1,000 students, or 0.61 percent(instead of 1-in-5, the real number is 0.03-in-5)."

Get that??? --> 0.03 in five!!!!

OK....who's gonna tell Obama?

Or the rest of the hand-wringing Liberals?

What is your point?

You must learn to have a point. Friendly advice.

Let's count this post, your pretense that you didn't understand the PROOF that I've provided of the title, as one of the reasons you are known as the NYLiar.

You can pretend that I didn't prove you told a lie in the OP, but that won't change reality.

Right you are, NYLiar!

Reality is my stock in trade.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Since any who read my posts, even if they disagree, know that I am far from 'low information,' the same folks will recognize that you must be smarting over various spankings that I've administered to you to post such drivel.

What spankings? You either reply solely with ad hominem, or you dance like crazy to deflect from responding to the many spears piercing your "arguments" or BOTH! You're a plagiaristic, fabricating flunky to the Big Lie neoconservative fascists to put it in actual terms. You simply emulate a caricature of the pseudo-intellectuals of the far, far right you pretend and wish to be, just so someone will notice and give you some attention, you narcissistic twit! Hey, everybody's gotta be sum'tin, huh Chica!

Have a nice day, Chica!

You must think folks are stupid and can't recognize and place the hostility in your every post.

I kinda like the result: I think I'll keep doing it.

You're projecting again, Chica! And hey, you're the one who posted to me initially, remember little one?

No...you followed me to this thread.

My rectitude sets you off, huh?

Great!

Let's do this again!

Since any who read my posts, even if they disagree, know that I am far from 'low information,' the same folks will recognize that you must be smarting over various spankings that I've administered to you to post such drivel.

What spankings? You either reply solely with ad hominem, or you dance like crazy to deflect from responding to the many spears piercing your "arguments" or BOTH! You're a plagiaristic, fabricating flunky to the Big Lie neoconservative fascists to put it in actual terms. You simply emulate a caricature of the pseudo-intellectuals of the far, far right you pretend and wish to be, just so someone will notice and give you some attention, you narcissistic twit! Hey, everybody's gotta be sum'tin, huh Chica!

Have a nice day, Chica!

You must think folks are stupid and can't recognize and place the hostility in your every post.

I kinda like the result: I think I'll keep doing it.

You're projecting again, Chica! And hey, you're the one who posted to me initially, remember little one?

No...you followed me to this thread.

My rectitude sets you off, huh?

Great!

Let's do this again!

Chica, you just lied through your teeth! I peruse many threads, so disavow yourself of your self centered notion that I landed on this thread gunning for ya, you narcissistic twit. The world DOES NOT revolve about you.

My first post on this thread was #35 to Pete7469. Then YOU piggybacked my post to him with your usual screed! So your claim addressing me that, "...you followed me to this thread." Is FALSE...a LIE. Your alleged rectitude is nothing more false bravado and bullshit hype! You mirror precisely what you allege to detest! What hypocrisy!!!!

Did I mention that you are a liar...yeah, I did! What will be your excuse to pardon yourself from that example of your perfidy this time, Chica!

Now, don't you worry, Old Timer.....I'll be right here to get under you skin, and teach you right from wrong.

You can't stay away....but neither can you win.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Her point is that she doesn't understand what a fallacy is, and why her threads fail as a consequence of those fallacies.

The OP's threads fail as a result of one of three fallacies – and often a combination thereof:

Straw man fallacy: “liberals believe/advocate thus and such” - when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

Hasty generalization/composition fallacy: “all liberals.”

False comparison fallacy: “liberals are 'Nazis,' liberals are 'communists,' liberals are 'fascists.'"

I'm always correct, and the threads are always well documented, linked and supported.

And that's what gets you you dunces, isn't it.

And there will be more!