Wrath of Dagon

I did you the courtesy of reading that article despite my well-documented distrust of anything Breitbart says, so trust me when I say I'm making the effort to fact check this story. Do you know their credited source? As you can see in the article, Breitbart got their numbers from Live Action, an anti-abortion lobby run by a James O'Keefe protegé by the name of Lila Rose who claims Planned Parenthood: - is involved in sex-trafficking - performs sex-selective abortion to kill male fetuses - literally trades in used baby parts - somehow gets away with all this and all people working at planned parenthood clinics are in on it and all the government inspections of them as health care institutions somehow missed it or were done by corrupt agencies Lila Rose claims to have proof due to Live Action amateur "sting operations" they performed but refuses to share any demonstrable evidence other than "dude, we totally saw this". It's so ridiculous that the entire organisation is fairly widely regarded as a hoax. Now obviously Planned Parenthood's numbers aren't unbiased either, but that pretty much leaves it as your statement: "Not everyone believes," and no offense, I honestly have a much easier time believing Planned Parenthood's numbers as a government funded organisation than what looks to be a fundamentalist bible-belt hoax site. What about the video they provided? Trading in baby parts is on video. Sex trafficking is on video. What other proof do you require? Edit: http://liveaction.org/what-we-do/investigations/child-sex-trafficking-cover-up/

@Gromnir I did, I don't see the point. Sounds like they looked at some very technical decisions, and concluded what? I know the original list was compiled with the help of the Heritage foundation, so if there are any moderates there, they snuck in in disguise, which certainly did happen in the past. So far as I can see, you're going to claim that anything Trump does is insignificant by definition, even though just the changes to EPA's insane global warming policy will produce hundreds of billions of additional economic growth. To say nothing of illegal immigration, foreign policy, etc.

Fine, call them what you want, but they're not moderates: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/01/24/trump-set-to-make-supreme-court-choice-this-week-several-judges-on-short-list.html

Also, family planning/reproductive health is NOT an abortion budget, in the same way planned parenthood isn't an abortion clinic. Most of it goes to STI prevention. For example, in the case of Planned Parenthood: Gfted1's link even says so about the FP/RH fund: Family Planning (FP): The ability of individuals and couples to anticipate and attain their desired number of children and the spacing and timing of births.2 Reproductive Health (RH): The state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being, and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity, in all matters relating to the reproductive processes, functions, and system at all stages of life.3 And in their case it also includes education for the poor populace, which is a whole extra animal, as well as antenatal and postnatal care for children and mothers. The reason why that goes to foreign places is because the places in question are third world countries where STI's have epidemic proportions and overpopulation and ignorance about these subjects creates chaos, like the "rape a virgin to be cured of aids" myth that some people believe in some African countries. This is called BASIC developmental aid, and it's much more effective than holding a fundraiser and dumping some cash in a governments lap. Of the developmental aid funds that you should question, this probably isn't one of them. Not everyone believes Planned Parenthood's claims: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/01/23/watch-planned-parenthoods-pre-natal-care-deception/

Yes, like these threads were full of polls and analysis that Trump can't possibly win. Also this: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/01/24/rasmussen-president-trumps-approval-index-booms-since-inauguration/ Not that I set any store by daily poll fluctuations. Also Republicans in the Senate and the Republican base don't want a moderate justice, and it'll be a strict constructionist, so shows how much you know.

The Nazgul dog looks just like my dog.

Obamacare is a ticking time bomb that's waiting to explode: https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-01-18/the-once-and-future-obamacare-death-spiral The way I see it, the old and sick will have to be taken care of regardless, so it's far more fair to ask the entire tax paying base to subsidize them rather than only the few healthy young people with generally lower incomes that have to buy insurance on the exchanges, especially since taxes are based on the ability to pay, unlike insurance premiums (some tax reform would help here as well).

He's announcing his Supreme Court nominee next week, how's that for significant? To your broader point, Republicans have to realize either they hang together, or they'll hang apart. So far they seem to be getting the message, even little Marco says he'll vote for Tillerson. Edit: None of these are significant either: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/01/23/donald-trump-executive-orders-kills-tpp-announces-federal-hiring-freeze-restores-mexico-city-policy/ Or the pipelines he just approved.

That's exactly why demos are so rare now. Plus you can't really evaluate an RPG with a short demo in most cases. Demos do make sense for smaller games that wouldn't get much attention otherwise though.

No, not even a drop in the bucket. Obama reversed it though, now Trump put it back. Edit: Democrats' new strategy to win the working class voters they lost: "Shut up, whity!" http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/01/23/idaho-dems-exec-director-dnc-should-train-people-in-how-to-shut-their-mouths-if-theyre-white/

They're not identical, you're confused because the CNN photo is more zoomed out. Again, NYT purposefully used the photo taken 45 minutes before, and Trump was right that the crowd went all the way to the monument, especially from the height he was looking, if you ignore the one empty square, which he wouldn't have seen anyway. Spicer shouldn't have said what he said, I agree.

I never thought Trump was particularly reliable, but his press people should be more careful with the facts. Clearly Spicer got carried away when he claimed the biggest audience ever, both in person and on TV. In total audience he may well be right, since more people have TV's now, there's a lot of interest in Trump in both China and Russia, and in most countries he's been presented as a modern day hitler, which is sure to peak interest. We may not ever know the total TV audience though. The media is definitely very dishonest and out to get him every chance they have, while they were actively covering for Obama and his lies. No question about that either.

At the moment when it stopped timelapse and started to zoom in. Yes, it confused me because they started zooming just when you want to see the whole thing for comparison. So that's at 44 mark, and you can see the last square before the monument is mostly empty, just like it is in the gigapixel.

The gigapixel is clearly not ground level, you can see a platform well above the crowd from above. But OK, may be I'm missing something in the video, can you tell which video time is 12 pm in DC? Edit: And again, my main point is that the picture that NYT used, and the one that's been republished most often, is the one 45 minutes before the swearing in, why is that according to you?

Your point is to argue endlessly while completely ignoring whatever point your opponent is making.

you didn't watch the video, did you? you can see inauguration crowd from start to finish. and again, nielsen ratings, and transit numbers also reinforced what were evident in the aerial images. gotta work hard to believe those alternative facts. come up with conspiracy theories. choose to believe photos from limited angles. ignore transit and nielsen and hotel and dress shop feedback. is what we were talking 'bout 'bove with people wanting to believe the outliers. either a dozen major media outlets, the dc transit authority and the nielsen folks is all in on the fix, Or... why work so hard? HA! Good Fun! I saw it, towards the end of the video it starts zooming and it's hard to tell exactly what time the video ends. I'm not saying Trump's crowds were bigger or anything like that, but you can clearly see in the gigapixel I linked the crowd went all the way back to Washington Monument as Trump said, and why would NYT use a picture from 45 minutes before the swearing in for comparison instead of during, if not to mislead?

So you don't think the press lied by using for comparison a picture taken before the crowd filled in?

I help out at Oxfam. Sadly I can not work a lot, since well child labour and all that. Well, that explains your ideas. I was wondering how anyone can be that naive.

Trump knows that every day the media will try to portray him in the worst possible light, and he needs to push back on that. So that's what they're pushing back on, the media portrayal, not the crowd size itself. Edit: Btw, if you pan all the way back on the gigapixel, it does show that the crowd went all the way to the Washington Monument. So Trump told the truth and NYT once again lied. http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2017/01/politics/trump-inauguration-gigapixel/ https://twitter.com/brithume/status/822975532656685061

I think someone's in love. I'm not sure the penalty has actually been removed. It would have to be authorized in the law for the HHS secretary to remove it, and I'm guessing there would have to be a finding from DOJ to that effect. Unless Trump is just going to flaunt the law the way Obama had. Which would be sad.

Republicans in Congress better realize they either go with Trump's agenda or there won't be any Republicans. It's the last chance they got.

This is actually both funny and sad: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/scenes-from-a-****-riot/article/2612595

Trump should just be happy that he won when no one expected him to. Worrying about the size of the crowds is silly, neither does a tiny percentage of the population protesting affect the validity of the election in any way. Edit: Although what Trump is apparently complaining about is that the media made his crowds look smaller than they actually were.

Probably they were denying access because the protests were violent. Although the one they were going to doesn't seem to be violent, but government tends to paint with a broad brush. In any case foreigners don't have the same rights to free speech in the US that citizens and residents do.

What? This seems amusing, please do elaborate https://mobile.twitter.com/Lee_in_Iowa/status/822634312650649600/photo/1 Also the bee movie, and Bane, apparently. Would love to see an actual in-movie footage for these claims. I do not have such a good memory to films and the quotes are the easiest thing to manipulate... Yeah, the comments for those say it's all fake. Edit: except for Bane, which seems to be true.