Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 15 Apr '11 07:51
    So after announcing Planned Parenthood spent over 90 percent of their funds on abortion, it was brought to hjis attention that the total is only 3%. When pressed on this obvious gaffe, Kyl's office claimed that John Kyl's statement "was not intended to be factual." Can you believe it? The man's an idiot.

    So, I'd like to give some breaking news (periodically in this thread).

    John Kyl likes to dress up as a policeman and ride around impersonating an officer in order to intimidate young girls. He also runs naked through the Lincoln Memorial when the mood takes him, and there are reports that he keeps one of his neice's bras in his briefcase for good luck.....#(The preceding comments are not intended to be factual.
  2. 15 Apr '11 08:09
    Makes you wonder how it actually was intended.
  3. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    15 Apr '11 13:32
    Originally posted by PinkFloyd
    So after announcing Planned Parenthood spent over 90 percent of their funds on abortion, it was brought to hjis attention that the total is only 3%. When pressed on this obvious gaffe, Kyl's office claimed that John Kyl's statement "was not intended to be factual." Can you believe it? The man's an idiot.

    So, I'd like to give some breaking ne ...[text shortened]... .#(The preceding comments are not intended to be factual.
    link?
  4. Standard member DrKF
    incipit parodia
    15 Apr '11 16:36
    Originally posted by sh76
    link?
    CNN anchor T.J. Holmes told viewers that the network had received a statement from Kyl’s office saying that the senator’s remark "was not intended to be a factual statement but rather to illustrate that Planned Parenthood, an organization that receives millions in taxpayer dollars, does subsidize abortions."

    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/apr/08/jon-kyl/jon-kyl-says-abortion-services-are-well-over-90-pe/

    Transcript:

    http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1104/08/cnr.07.html
  5. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    15 Apr '11 17:29 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by DrKF
    ...the senator’s remark "was not intended to be a factual statement but rather to illustrate that Planned Parenthood, an organization that receives millions in taxpayer dollars, does subsidize abortions."
    Ouch. Who is going to fight this corner here at RHP? Whodey? You are a kind of 'my statement' was not "intended to be a factual statement" kind of guy. Are you going to fight the corner?
  6. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    15 Apr '11 17:31
    Originally posted by FMF
    Ouch. Who is going to fight this corner here at RHP? Whodey? You are a kind of 'my statement' was not "intended to be a factual statement" kind of guy. Are you going to fight the corner?
    Why would anyone assume that anything a politician says is intended to be factual?

  7. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    15 Apr '11 17:34
    Originally posted by DrKF
    CNN anchor T.J. Holmes told viewers that the network had received a statement from Kyl’s office saying that the senator’s remark "was not intended to be a factual statement but rather to illustrate that Planned Parenthood, an organization that receives millions in taxpayer dollars, does subsidize abortions."

    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements ...[text shortened]... -well-over-90-pe/

    Transcript:

    http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1104/08/cnr.07.html
    Yup. Pretty bad.

    I'd point out though, that the 3% figure is equally bogus, as politifact points out. Only by counting a 15 minute consultation about birth control equal to paying for an abortion can one arrive at the 3% figure.
  8. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    15 Apr '11 17:35
    Originally posted by sh76
    Why would anyone assume that anything a politician says is intended to be factual?
    True. But I am more concerned by our community here being infested by posters who have no qualms about lying for partisan ends. Can't posters here have a higher standard? Do we all have to be like whodey? Whose interests does that kind of deception serve?
  9. Standard member DrKF
    incipit parodia
    15 Apr '11 17:49 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    Makes you wonder how it actually was intended.
    That's probably a more important question. The truth is, probably, not that 'he didn't intend it to be factual question' - he didn't care whether it was factual or not. It's enough that it is indicative of a 'broader truth'. It's enough to get the idea out there, keep the attack in the news, and one can then accept as collateral damage that a small number of people (mainly your political enemies) will gossip about you being caught out lying for a short while. I expect more people, overall, will remember the 90% than remember the retraction in a year's time. He'll get better at this game - and think up better excuses - as time goes by.
  10. Standard member wittywonka
    Chocolate Expert
    16 Apr '11 01:42
    Originally posted by PinkFloyd
    So after announcing Planned Parenthood spent over 90 percent of their funds on abortion, it was brought to his attention that the total is only 3%...
    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/apr/08/jon-kyl/jon-kyl-says-abortion-services-are-well-over-90-pe/

    I was really hoping he'd score a "Pants-on-Fire", but alas...
  11. 16 Apr '11 15:09
    Kyl is retiring. Could be an interesting showdown to replace him, particularly so if Gabby can return to health.