He Won'T Stop.

He never does.

And all of bloody a voice for men can't even take the time to read the study that proves paul elam is a liar about "most women who claim rape just got drunk and then spouted some ****"

http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/the_voice_vol_3_no_1_2009.pdf <- this proves the MRM ishould NOT be given the benefit of the doubt beyond all shadow of a doubt.
it is what you call absolute irrefutable proof. Doesn't matter.

because of THIS story soon they will likely investigate woh the NDAA and is and try to slander and take away IT's credibility. it's a predicable pattern nad those who do it should be rounded into mental health faciltiies and put away until nuerological EXAMS prove they have not just said they let go of their beleifs but let go of them for real at the core of their FMRI scans.

do you guys know about how fox news went out of it's way to believe that Barack obama was using faked statistics? You remember how all of those peopple were SHOCKEd when Obama was reelected?

This is why. Because of people like KR. There's some called a back fire effect when a person believes something on a profoundly emotional level. When shown evidnece ot the countaury it just causes them to double down. People who listen to fox news if fox news were taken out would likely just take to the interne to find someone else. People listen to fox news because they need their reality bubble. That trickle down economics works, etc.


this article more or less not means that no matter what Those who believe KR will stay in his camp if they are not the sort to detach from their emotions

The right has fostered this culture. all truths of the liberal left wing are damnable lies if you dig deep enough. according to them.

So sayeth: whoever they listen to.

This is just one of the many proofs of their lies

not KR in particular but popular right wing politicans who say that that the free market is always more efficient


Privization as it turns out is almost ALWAYS LESS EFFICENT than public sector.

Ronald reagan lied about quite a bit


"Welfare queen" was a term out of many other dumb terms coined by Saint Reagan, this time to refer to people who scam the government through thewelfare system to live easy on taxpayer money without trying to work. Reagan gave a very memorable speech in 1976 which described a welfare queen drawing an easy living by scamming veteran's and Social Security benefits from four (fake) dead husbands, as well as using eighty different aliases. The closest case to the one he described was of a single woman who scammed the government out of $8,000.[1] Whoops.

Today, "welfare queen" has evolved into a more general version of dog whistle politics against the new evil of "entitlements."

It plays very well into pitting people of different classes and races against each other. Race resentments factor into this, since only certain kinds of people (disadvantaged minorities) are portrayed living on welfare.[2] Many opponents of welfare use the welfare queen stereotype as a way to rile up members of the lower middle class and working poor against those on welfare/unemployment/social security/Medicaid benefits. This is by making wild claims that welfare queens are living "high on the hog" while the poor folks have to work hard to barely scrape by.

One argument that popped up in the health care debate[3][4] is that people on Medicaid get free medical care on your dime, using purely the example of the documented rates of "plastic surgery" for Medicaid patients, while poor folks pay an arm and a leg to wait forever to see a general practitioner. What was not said is that the term "plastic surgery" in a hospital contains covered procedures for the replacement of skin for burn patients and rebuilding of parts removed forcancer surgery (such as mastectomies). Medicaid (and every other insurance) has never covered any purely cosmetic surgery.

Stereotyping welfare recipients is an easy way to get voters to get rid of these programs, since many of the more wealthy who pay for the programs throughprogressive taxation are fewer in numbers. It also has the benefit of manipulating the very people who benefit from these programs the most into getting rid of them.


Myth: There are Welfare Queens driving Welfare Cadillacs.

Fact: Reagan made up this story. 


Reagan's story of a Welfare Queen driving a Welfare Cadillac was apocryphal. Even so, there is no evidence that welfare cheating is a significant problem; besides, individual welfare payments are too small for recipients to live well. 


Conservative politicians have a talent for telling memorable anecdotes that capture the essence of their beliefs on any particular issue. One of the most enduring of these came from Ronald Reagan on the subject of welfare. He cited a Chicago "Welfare Queen" who had ripped off $150,000 from the government, using 80 aliases, 30 addresses, a dozen social security cards, and four fictional dead husbands. The country was outraged; Reagan dutifully promised to roll back welfare; and ever since, the "Welfare Queen" driving her "Welfare Cadillac" has become permanently lodged in American political folklore. 

Unfortunately, like most great conservative anecdotes, it wasn't really true. The media searched for this welfare cheat in the hopes of interviewing her, and discovered that she didn't even exist. 

As a bit of class warfare, however, it was brilliant. It diverted public attention from insider traders in their limousines to Welfare Queens in their Cadillacs, even though the former were stealing thousands of times more from the American people than the latter. Just one example of the cost of white collar crime would become apparent a few years later, when President Bush bailed out the Savings & Loans industry with $500 billion of the taxpayer's money -- enough to fund 20 years of federal AFDC. 

Questions of class warfare aside, there is no evidence that there is a significant problem with welfare cheating. In 1991 less than 5 percent of all welfare benefits went to persons who were not entitled to them, and this figure includes errors committed by the welfare agency. (1) 

Nor are people getting rich off welfare. The two largest welfare programs are Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) and food stamps. In 1992, the average yearly AFDC family payment was $4,572, and food stamps for a family of three averaged $2,469, for a total of $7,041. (2) In that year, the poverty level for a mother with two children was $11,186. (3) Thus, these two programs paid only 63 percent of the poverty level, and 74 percent of a minimum wage job. There are other welfare programs, of course, but they either pay a minuscule fraction of these two programs, or, if larger, are collected by only a small percentage of welfare recipients. The typical welfare recipient remains among the poorest members of society. 

 Return to Overview


1. Figures provided to the 1994 Green Book, U.S. House Ways and Means Committee, by the Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 

2. AFDC figures from U.S. Social Security Administration. Food Stamp figures from U.S. Department of Agriculture, "Annual Historical Review of FNS Programs" and unpublished data. 

3. U.S. Bureau of the Census, Poverty in the United States, Series P-60, No. 185, 1993.
ManifestoOfThePhoenix ManifestoOfThePhoenix
31-35, M
Feb 6, 2013