Fknrepublicans

[t-pain]

never trust a piece of hardware that does not have a mechanical on/off switch.

this is especially important for vehicles.

remember the 911 call from that family who couldnt turn off their vehicle on the road? scary stuff.

[phaquetoo]

Never trust a politicain!

 

Peace

[Wild Bill]

Same old same old.

 

[GregS]

Tea hee;

 

http://www.mlive.com/lansing-news/index.ssf/2014/03/obamacare_gary_peters_american.html

 

By now, it's well-established that Americans for Prosperity's anti-Obamacare ad plays fast and loose with the facts.

 

The target of the Tea Party group's commercial is U.S. Rep. Gary Peters (D-Bloomfield Twp.), who's running for U.S. Senate against former Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land.

 

AFP's emotional ad features Michigander Julie Boonstra, who has leukemia and claims Obamacare has made her costs "unaffordable" and cost her a "wonderful doctor."

 

But the Washington Post, Detroit News and the Michigan Truth Squad have all analyzed the ad and found those claims aren't true.

 

The News found Boonstra will actually save more than $1,000 a year thanks to her new plan under Obamacare. The Post notes that Boonstra can, in fact, keep her doctor under her plan. 

 

The Truth Squad concludes the ad is "more emotion than fact."

 

And that's precisely why AFP and Republicans are so thrilled with it. 

 

When it comes to the debate over the Affordable Care Act (or any other issue), facts matter less than perception and feelings. 

 

Julie Boonstra feels she's getting ripped off by Obamacare, which Republicans have argued is a big government takeover that will "literally" kill people, in U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann's words. 

 

Obamacare "horror stories" abound, even though most fall apart upon scrutiny.

 

Meanwhile, Democrats have done a lousy job messaging Obamacare, and are paying the price. The law is projected to save the federal government $8 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office. And 4.2 million have signed up for Obamacare so far, shrinking the number of uninsured Americans.

 

But Obamacare remains underwater in most polls.

 

So when journalists have presented Boonstra with the fact that her health care plan under Obamacare will save her money, it makes sense that she replied: "I personally do not believe that."

 

What's important to Boonstra and other voters is that they feel that Obamacare is bad. 

 

There's more good news for AFP and Republicans. The dirty little secret of politics is that most times, there's no penalty for lying. Politicians and groups cite fact-checking sites when they're convenient and deride them as liberal or conservative tools when they're not.

 

But an effective, factually inaccurate ad or sound bite is worth all the "fouls" or "Pinocchios" they ring up. Most voters don't regularly visit Factcheck.org. Even if they do read the Detroit News, they'll likely gloss over the AFP ad analysis if it doesn't support their viewpoint.

 

And AFP is still wielding a powerful hammer, despite the factual dismantling of its ad. 

 

Peters has taken the fact-checks to TV stations to try to get the ad pulled (which doesn't appear to have worked). It's standard operating procedure in politics, but the Democrat has walked right into a trap.

 

Now AFP Michigan Director Scott Hagerstrom has blasted Peters for trying to "muzzle" a "Michigan mother battling cancer."

 

"This attack on her credibility is disgusting, unwarranted and inexcusable," he blustered.

No, it's actually none of those things. It's disheartening that demanding factual accuracy (something we should all support) can be spun as something gravely offensive.

But perception means more than reality. And voila, Gary Peters (and by extension, anyone else who points out lies) is a cancer patient-hating bully.

It takes a lot of stomach-churning chutzpah for a group that's had its ad so thoroughly debunked to go on the attack. But it's also really smart politics.

Susan J. Demas is Publisher and Editor of Inside Michigan Politics, a nationally acclaimed, biweekly political newsletter. She can be reached at susan@sjdemas.com. Follow her on Twitter here.

 

 

Silly girl.

Edited March 20, 2014 by GregS

[t-pain]

boonstra ? is she related to the coa judge?

 

Julie Boonstra was once married to Mark Boonstra

 

haha no bunny muffin!

 

 

Mark T. Boonstra
Judge Boonstra was appointed to the Court of Appeals by Governor Rick Snyder in March, 2012.

 

you remember boonstra from some of those CoA opinions, dont you?

Edited March 20, 2014 by t-pain

[GregS]

She is Judge Boonstra's ex. This dumbazz is a schoolteacher. Our math says $11K ≠ $13K. Tea party math is obviously different. Her students would be better served watching Pee Wee's Big Adventure.

Edited March 20, 2014 by GregS

[Chauncy Gardner]

I hope people wake up to the Republican lies and pure BS before the next election. This is a big one. If those a-holes take over the Senate and keep the house we are in for another decade of downhill sledding for the US. But, it might just serve the stupid, ignorant voters right because they are the ones who are going to pay. I just hate to see a tragedy unfold that could be averted.

[beourbud]

Wake Up?

 

They Fired UP!!!

 

We give discounts to those who bring in their voters registration cards....we give them free stuff if they help others to register to vote.

Very Effective...we call it our grassroots program....hehe

 

Nothin fires up a fknrepublican lynch mob like Sun Grown Organic Meds....Naturally!

Edited March 21, 2014 by beourbud

[t-pain]

you guys know its only like 40% of repubs that hate marijuana?

 

we cant do this without those other 60% of republicans, so try to make some friends huh?

[beourbud]

We dont need no stinkin republicans.

 

republicans dont have friends they have accomplices   

 

They like a turd in the swimming pool...ruin it for everyone

Edited March 21, 2014 by beourbud

[+Malamute]

The last reliable polls i have seen put it at about 36-38% of registered voting Republicans support the devils weed. ;-)

[+Malamute]

Just start electing different republicans.  I find it much easier to convince a republican to vote for a "better" republican than to vote for a democrat.  It's a pendulum swing and every change helps even if it is only going from a drug warrior republican to a neutral on the drug war republican.  It's net effect that will matter in the end.

[Norby]

I'd rather have a neutral rep than a dem who voted for the transfer law.  If we vote in all dems we may get legal mj but we'll fail in other ways which may not make it worth it.  If I can have my grow and not my guns, what have I gained?

[+Malamute]

Whose taking your guns?

 

The NRA doesn't even think we should have guns. Heh.

[mrd]

I'd rather have a neutral rep than a dem who voted for the transfer law.  If we vote in all dems we may get legal mj but we'll fail in other ways which may not make it worth it.  If I can have my grow and not my guns, what have I gained?

A country where the death rate via handguns decreases dramatically. Don't give me no s$hit about it either. One of my relatives got shot and no handgun would have stopped that bullet. The only consolation was that the perp got 12 bucks and 20 years in Jackson. Thats about 60 cents a year. Just look at the death by handgun and the number of handguns increase and try to say there is no correlation. 

 

Remember all the ginning up of paranoia "Obama is going to take away our guns. " So then a lot of people went out and bought a lot of guns and ammo. Raise the paranoia level and you sell more guns. Same as that yellow zone red zone terrorist alert business before elections. People get played and stampede in the direction of those who want to sell the something. 

Edited March 21, 2014 by mrd

[cristinew]

I say 5 % of elected democrats  favor legal cannabis  and 1 % of republicans,  Obama thinks it should be illegal . for the time being , ..he may change his mind  if the polls  keep going in favor,

 

Obama is going to take away our guns.    he tried  but failed,

 

.  If I can have my grow and not my guns, what have I gained?   Both parties do not want you to have guns  and grow,

[Norby]

A country where the death rate via handguns decreases dramatically. Don't give me no s$hit about it either. One of my relatives got shot and no handgun would have stopped that bullet. The only consolation was that the perp got 12 bucks and 20 years in Jackson. Thats about 60 cents a year. Just look at the death by handgun and the number of handguns increase and try to say there is no correlation. 

 

Remember all the ginning up of paranoia "Obama is going to take away our guns. " So then a lot of people went out and bought a lot of guns and ammo. Raise the paranoia level and you sell more guns. Same as that yellow zone red zone terrorist alert business before elections. People get played and stampede in the direction of those who want to sell the something. 

It wasn't Obama, it was Coumo.  You now have to get a background check every time you buy a 50rnd box of .22lr ammo(any ammo any amount) and pay $10 for your background check.  They did it in NYS for "assault rifles" which are involved in less than 1% of all shootings, register them or give them up and no one can buy any from jan of last year forward.  You can't move to NYS with one because registration was cut off april 15th.  In a place where handguns do most of the killing they went after assault rifles and redefined them so they could get rid of more guns.  In a state where repubs run everything outside NYC they still pushed thru a gun law with only 5-6 counties around the city, this is what dems with the power do with it.  It's not paranoia, I just moved away from NY and it happened there.  The places with the strictest gun laws have the highest amount of gun crime because only criminals carry. 

 

I was saying in general about people possessing guns not so much I can have them although we've seen, if they are locked up they don't seem to be a problem.

[imiubu]

  The places with the strictest gun laws have the highest amount of gun crime because only criminals carry. 

 

[+Malamute]

That is simply not true.  As in not true at all.

[+Malamute]

Here is just one example:

 

http://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/AmericaUnderTheGun.pdf

 

Despite this complex web of factors that influence the rate of gun violence, this report
finds a clear link between high levels of gun violence and weak state gun laws. Across
the key indicators of gun violence that we analyzed, the 10 states with the weakest
gun laws collectively have an aggregate level of gun violence that is more than twice as
high—104 percent higher, in fact—than the 10 states with the strongest gun laws.

 

...

 

Our analysis determined that the following are the 10 states, by rank, that suffer
the highest levels of gun violence:
1. Louisiana
2. Alaska
3. Alabama
4. Arizona
5. Mississippi
6. South Carolina
7. New Mexico
8. Missouri
9. Arkansas
10. Georgia

[beourbud]

" Take away our guns"   not this crap again,  what you must have stock in ATK...Hasnt the nra and gun industry taken enough of our money in inflated prices and shortages these past years?  Mr President is more than a boom for the gun industry he is an Obama.

 

Everyone sit down take a deep breath...and Please, turn OFF FOX

[Highlander]

  The places with the strictest gun laws have the highest amount of gun crime because only criminals carry. 

 

Do a little research on guns laws in Canada and the UK, then please do come back and tell us what you found. 

 

In 2013, the USA had about 20 times more gun deaths per capita than the UK.

 

In Canada, they had about 1/7th the number of gun deaths per capita compared to the USA.

 

The phrase, "If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns" is catchy for the uninformed.  But when you put that phrase up against reality, it fails.

[Norby]

Here is just one example:

 

http://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/AmericaUnderTheGun.pdf

 

Despite this complex web of factors that influence the rate of gun violence, this report

finds a clear link between high levels of gun violence and weak state gun laws. Across

the key indicators of gun violence that we analyzed, the 10 states with the weakest

gun laws collectively have an aggregate level of gun violence that is more than twice as

high—104 percent higher, in fact—than the 10 states with the strongest gun laws.

 

...

 

Our analysis determined that the following are the 10 states, by rank, that suffer

the highest levels of gun violence:

1. Louisiana

2. Alaska

3. Alabama

4. Arizona

5. Mississippi

6. South Carolina

7. New Mexico

8. Missouri

9. Arkansas

10. Georgia

I'd go by cities, states don't really add up.  NYC has a much higher rate of crime than Akron NY and their laws are tougher.

[Norby]

Do a little research on guns laws in Canada and the UK, then please do come back and tell us what you found. 

 

In 2013, the USA had about 20 times more gun deaths per capita than the UK.

 

In Canada, they had about 1/7th the number of gun deaths per capita compared to the USA.

 

The phrase, "If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns" is catchy for the uninformed.  But when you put that phrase up against reality, it fails.

Canada is not the US.  They don't have the drug crime we do.  You can also lower gun crime by legalizing drugs.

[Norby]

" Take away our guns"   not this crap again,  what you must have stock in ATK...Hasnt the nra and gun industry taken enough of our money in inflated prices and shortages these past years?  Mr President is more than a boom for the gun industry he is an Obama.

 

Everyone sit down take a deep breath...and Please, turn OFF FOX

Sorry, I don't watch FOX and it's not Obama I'm worried about.  As I said I just moved from a state where they outlawed guns that kill less than 1% of people in crimes.  Why would the dems take away "assault rifles" and leave the guns alone that do most of the killing?  The only agenda I see is taking away guns, can you show me any different reason to outlaw guns that would be used for protecting your home?  You should have heard what was actually being proposed.  Going door to door the next morning to CONFISCATE weapons.  One of the senators spilled the beans when he said "you think what was passed was bad you should've seen what they were proposing".  Then he had to finish his statement, yes Cuomo wanted to go door to door and confiscate weapons after Sandy Hook.  Dems are emotional and power hungry and would destroy this country if left alone.