But he was drunk at the time, so, arguably, he was the one who was raped. At least that's the story he's going to stick to when discussing the whole affair on an internet forum.
But I might be confusing him with someone else, I don't know.
Prohibits transferring detainees from Guantanamo Bay.
Prohibits constructing facilities to house detainees in Guantanamo Bay.
Prohibits funding for hiring new TSA employees.
Prohibits funding for immigrant integration programs.
Prohibits the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives from collecting information on multiple sales of rifles or shotguns to the same person.
I imagine this is more to do with redundancy in government regulations. For instance, if I go purchase a rifle and a hand gun it is likely that I will undergo two background checks, investigations and everything of the like even though truly only one would be needed.
Because of odd regulations and technicalities a lot of bullshit redundancy has to take place, wasting time and money.
But he was drunk at the time, so, arguably, he was the one who was raped. At least that's the story he's going to stick to when discussing the whole affair on an internet forum.
But I might be confusing him with someone else, I don't know.
Eight percent of college men have either attempted or successfully raped. Thirty percent say they would rape if they could get away with it. When the wording was changed to “force a woman to have sex,” the number jumped to 58%. Worse still, 83.5% argue that “some women look like they are just asking to be raped.”
The fuck
Viscount Islands on
I want to do with you
What spring does with the cherry trees.
0
Options
AntimatterDevo Was RightGates of SteelRegistered Userregular
I am pretty stunned that nearly two thirds of men admitted that they would force a woman to have sex if they thought they could get away with it. I mean, how many might think it I don't know, but that seems like a high rate of admittance there.
The shutdown could last for only a day or so, or it could go on for a week. It really could go on longer, but I don't think it ever has. It will continue until they reach a compromise that can be passed.
No I mean isn't this budget bill which has this laundry list of de-funded programs only supposed to be budget for like a week?
So the budget the GOP passed includes funding the DoD through September but the rest of government funding only a week? So these cuts are only for one week?
Eight percent of college men have either attempted or successfully raped. Thirty percent say they would rape if they could get away with it. When the wording was changed to “force a woman to have sex,” the number jumped to 58%. Worse still, 83.5% argue that “some women look like they are just asking to be raped.”
The fuck
What I want to know is - how honest can these results be? I mean if you give someone a fill-out form and ask them 'have you raped someone before', how many rapists would answer that honestly, even when given the opportunity to be anonymous?
I'd really like to know more about the methodology of these studies.
Eight percent of college men have either attempted or successfully raped. Thirty percent say they would rape if they could get away with it. When the wording was changed to “force a woman to have sex,” the number jumped to 58%. Worse still, 83.5% argue that “some women look like they are just asking to be raped.”
The fuck
What I want to know is - how honest can these results be? I mean if you give someone a fill-out form and ask them 'have you raped someone before', how many rapists would answer that honestly, even when given the opportunity to be anonymous?
I'd really like to know more about the methodology of these studies.
Eight percent of college men have either attempted or successfully raped. Thirty percent say they would rape if they could get away with it. When the wording was changed to “force a woman to have sex,” the number jumped to 58%. Worse still, 83.5% argue that “some women look like they are just asking to be raped.”
The fuck
What I want to know is - how honest can these results be? I mean if you give someone a fill-out form and ask them 'have you raped someone before', how many rapists would answer that honestly, even when given the opportunity to be anonymous?
I'd really like to know more about the methodology of these studies.
So the budget the GOP passed includes funding the DoD through September but the rest of government funding only a week? So these cuts are only for one week?
Basically the Republicans want to pass a measure to fund things for a week to keep government open while the big negotiation continues. But the President had said he would veto that because he wants a real budget.
The budget with the big list of things is the proposed budget for the year that they can't agree on.
And a note: Federal fiscal year is October, 1, 2010 - September 30, 2011.
JoeUser on
0
Options
ButtersA glass of some milksRegistered Userregular
So the budget the GOP passed includes funding the DoD through September but the rest of government funding only a week? So these cuts are only for one week?
Basically the Republicans want to pass a measure to fund things for a week to keep government open while the big negotiation continues. But the President had said he would veto that because he wants a real budget.
Ok but the budget Obama proposed was horseshit. He completely ignored 99% of the recommendations from the study he commissioned and didn't want to cut anything for like 12 years.
Eight percent of college men have either attempted or successfully raped. Thirty percent say they would rape if they could get away with it. When the wording was changed to “force a woman to have sex,” the number jumped to 58%. Worse still, 83.5% argue that “some women look like they are just asking to be raped.”
The fuck
What I want to know is - how honest can these results be? I mean if you give someone a fill-out form and ask them 'have you raped someone before', how many rapists would answer that honestly, even when given the opportunity to be anonymous?
I'd really like to know more about the methodology of these studies.
It sounds like pure propaganda to me.
Maybe the study was done on prison imates.
actually wait
there is no margo paine who wrote Body Wars, although this factoid with the misspelled name seems to have been reblogged hundreds of times
there is a margo maine though, but aside from people attributing this fact to her, I can't find any excerpts that go into detail
Eight percent of college men have either attempted or successfully raped. Thirty percent say they would rape if they could get away with it. When the wording was changed to “force a woman to have sex,” the number jumped to 58%. Worse still, 83.5% argue that “some women look like they are just asking to be raped.”
The fuck
What I want to know is - how honest can these results be? I mean if you give someone a fill-out form and ask them 'have you raped someone before', how many rapists would answer that honestly, even when given the opportunity to be anonymous?
I'd really like to know more about the methodology of these studies.
It sounds like pure propaganda to me.
Maybe the study was done on prison imates.
actually wait
there is no margo paine who wrote Body Wars, although this factoid with the misspelled name seems to have been reblogged hundreds of times
there is a margo maine though, but aside from people attributing this fact to her, I can't find any excerpts that go into detail
And she seems to largely focus on body image issues for women and eating disorders. I can see how rape figures into body image, but her stuff seems to be geared toward acceptance of self, and I don't really see how that sort of statistic would really help anyone get over their doubts or fears.
"While nothing will be decided until everything is decided, the largest issue is still spending cuts," Michael Steel said. "The American people want to cut spending to help the private sector create jobs -- and the Democrats that run Washington don't."
i love political speak
Squall on
0
Options
Ubikoh pete, that's later. maybe we'll be dead by thenRegistered Userregular
edited April 2011
how does cutting spending help the private sector create jobs?
They still want to block all federal funding to Planned Parenthood regardless. They also want to block D.C. from spending its own, non-federal money on abortions.
Planned Parenthood in Pennsylvania is about women’s health and sound financial planning.
In the end, this really has nothing to do with women’s health and saving money. It is about the hot-button issue of abortion.
OK, but taxpayer dollars are not being used for abortions at Planned Parenthood. It uses private donations for all of its abortion services.
In Pennsylvania, Planned Parenthood clinics saw 122,853 clients in 2009 — nearly the population of Lebanon County. It performed 207,631 sexually transmitted disease tests, 41,313 pap smear tests of which, on average, one in seven came back as abnormal, meaning a woman could be in some stage of cervical cancer.
Another 44,087 breast exams were performed and 96,751 female patients received birth control. Much of this was funded by the taxpayer dollars that go to Planned Parenthood.
Planned Parenthood in Pennsylvania is about women’s health and sound financial planning.
In the end, this really has nothing to do with women’s health and saving money. It is about the hot-button issue of abortion.
OK, but taxpayer dollars are not being used for abortions at Planned Parenthood. It uses private donations for all of its abortion services.
In Pennsylvania, Planned Parenthood clinics saw 122,853 clients in 2009 — nearly the population of Lebanon County. It performed 207,631 sexually transmitted disease tests, 41,313 pap smear tests of which, on average, one in seven came back as abnormal, meaning a woman could be in some stage of cervical cancer.
Another 44,087 breast exams were performed and 96,751 female patients received birth control. Much of this was funded by the taxpayer dollars that go to Planned Parenthood.
Isn't part of it that the private donations would have to cover what the public funds used to cover, and as such there would be no money for abortions
“This is a Civil War fight,” he said. “I think Time magazine has it right. This is the 150th anniversary of the 1861 Civil War. Now those are determined to shut the federal government down to make their point — their ideological-religious point.”
“You have those who believe in states’ rights and those who believe in a more perfect union,” he said. “States’ right are anti-civil rights, anti-workers’ right to bargain, anti-social justice, pro-rich and significantly insensitive to poor people — that was the great divide 150 years ago and it’s the great divide today in the ideological sense.”
DeaconBlues on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
0
Options
Ubikoh pete, that's later. maybe we'll be dead by thenRegistered Userregular
edited April 2011
is planned parenthood the only place that offers abortions?
can the government constitutionally discriminate against 1 organization while continuing to fund other health organizations?
Posts
Ahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaa
Oh man.
That was so good.
He was tired of getting picked on for being king of fish, so he decided to start impregnating our women with rape for shits and giggles
Steam
But he was drunk at the time, so, arguably, he was the one who was raped. At least that's the story he's going to stick to when discussing the whole affair on an internet forum.
But I might be confusing him with someone else, I don't know.
Dionysus you smooth drunken motherfucker.
I imagine this is more to do with redundancy in government regulations. For instance, if I go purchase a rifle and a hand gun it is likely that I will undergo two background checks, investigations and everything of the like even though truly only one would be needed.
Because of odd regulations and technicalities a lot of bullshit redundancy has to take place, wasting time and money.
Was it Shibby?
So basically, the Justin Bieber position?
This did not get enough love
Thank you!
The fuck
What spring does with the cherry trees.
He just can't wait to be king!
No I mean isn't this budget bill which has this laundry list of de-funded programs only supposed to be budget for like a week?
I think?
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-spending-resolution-20110408,0,2265172.story
So the budget the GOP passed includes funding the DoD through September but the rest of government funding only a week? So these cuts are only for one week?
What I want to know is - how honest can these results be? I mean if you give someone a fill-out form and ask them 'have you raped someone before', how many rapists would answer that honestly, even when given the opportunity to be anonymous?
I'd really like to know more about the methodology of these studies.
It sounds like pure propaganda to me.
Maybe the study was done on prison imates.
Basically the Republicans want to pass a measure to fund things for a week to keep government open while the big negotiation continues. But the President had said he would veto that because he wants a real budget.
The budget with the big list of things is the proposed budget for the year that they can't agree on.
And a note: Federal fiscal year is October, 1, 2010 - September 30, 2011.
Ok but the budget Obama proposed was horseshit. He completely ignored 99% of the recommendations from the study he commissioned and didn't want to cut anything for like 12 years.
actually wait
there is no margo paine who wrote Body Wars, although this factoid with the misspelled name seems to have been reblogged hundreds of times
there is a margo maine though, but aside from people attributing this fact to her, I can't find any excerpts that go into detail
And she seems to largely focus on body image issues for women and eating disorders. I can see how rape figures into body image, but her stuff seems to be geared toward acceptance of self, and I don't really see how that sort of statistic would really help anyone get over their doubts or fears.
is abortion spending even part of the budget?
I know the GOP wants to do things like make it illegal for health insurance companies to cover abortion, stuff like that.
ah i see, i thought it had to do with planned parenthood because im pretty sure theyre already prohibited by law from allocating funds for abortion
not that it's 100% truth that that's the issue holding up the deal, mudslingin every which way
i love political speak
Anyway, the budget problem is solved.
The proposed GOP budget prohibits funding for Planned Parenthood in a misguided attempt to stop abortions.
Here's an editorial from Pennsylvania
Isn't part of it that the private donations would have to cover what the public funds used to cover, and as such there would be no money for abortions
It's reasonable to assume that less abortions will be performed at planned parenthood offices if they don't have any federal funding.
can the government constitutionally discriminate against 1 organization while continuing to fund other health organizations?
They can't pass a law that only applies to one organization, but funding is completely discresionary.
no,
there are limits on congress's spending power
not saying they're very strict though