Skip to content

MSNBC Distorts Debate Poll Results – NAFTA of the Pacific – Abortion Linked to Mental Illness

September 8, 2011

MSNBC distorts post-debate poll results to falsely depict Ron Paul as just barely winning

Comment: I watched part of the debate and some of the “analysis” afterward.  The pundits never mentioned Ron Paul in the 20-30 minutes I watched them.  They talked about Perry, Bachmann even Huntsman but conspicuously ignored Paul.  Just another example proving mainstream media is a joke. Well, really it’s more of a very dangerous and misleading propaganda machine.

  • The Alex Jones Channel Alex Jones Show podcast Prison Planet TV Infowars.com Twitter Alex Jones' Facebook Infowars store

Mike Adams
Natural News
Thursday, September 8, 2011

A post-debate poll shown on MSNBC.com reveals Ron Paul to be the landslide winner of the internet survey, capturing 43.5% of the votes on the question, “Who do you think won the Republican debate at the Reagan library?”

The next closest candidate, Mitt Romney, received just 21.5% of the votes, or almost exactly half the number of votes received by Ron Paul. You might expect Mitt Romney’s graph bar, therefore, to behalf the sizeof Ron Paul’s right? Nope. These poll results, it turns out, have been radically distorted to diminish the apparent lead of Ron Paul in the poll.

Here’s how the mainstream media smears Ron Paul with dishonest survey graphics

The poll results shown on MSNBC.com are depicted with a horizontal bar for each candidate. The bar lengths are proportional for all other candidates except for Ron Paul, whose bar has been shortened by nearly half in order to falsely depict Ron Paul as being just “barely ahead” of Mitt Romney.

See the screen shot picture below to see for yourself. This was taken from the following URL:
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_new…

(Note: The live URL at MSNBC may have changed since I wrote this story, which is why I posted my screen capture below. It was taken at 12:30 a.m. on September 8, 2011, and is not edited in any way other than the make it fit on this page.)

As you can see from the screen shot (below), this deliberate shortening of the Ron Paul bar was reserved solely for him, as all the rest of the candidates have accurate bar lengths. For example Rick Perry, who received 16.4% of the votes, has a bar that’s roughly twice as long as Jon Huntsman, who received 7.8%.

And Huntsman’s bar is roughly twice as long as that of Newt Gingrich, who received 4% of the votes. In fact, all the bars are accurate in the depiction of the pole except for Ron Paul’s. His has been artificially shortened.

It’s yet another example of the malicious dirty tricks being used against Ron Paul by the mainstream media which has gone out of its way to smear this man in every way possible, including distorting survey results in a way that makes them visually misleading. In reality, Ron Paul is the landslide favorite because Americans are waking up and realizing there is no candidate running for President (from either party) that has the integrity and 100% constitutional track record of Rep. Ron Paul.

No wonder the media has to cheat and lie to try to destroy this guy. If given an honest shot at the presidency, without the black box voting fraud and media smear campaigns, Ron Paul would undoubtedly win in a landslide.

Here’s the screen shot I took early in the morning on September 8, 2011:

——————————————————————————–

The NAFTA Of The Pacific Will Soon Allow Millions More American Jobs To Be Shipped Overseas

  • The Alex Jones Channel Alex Jones Show podcast Prison Planet TV Infowars.com Twitter Alex Jones' Facebook Infowars store

Giant Sucking Sound Part 2?

The Economic Collapse
Thursday, September 8, 2011

The United States is negotiating one of the biggest free trade agreements in history and there is barely a peep about it on the news.  Years ago, Ross Perot warned that if NAFTA was implemented there would be a “giant sucking sound” as millions of jobs left this country.  It turns out that he was right.


Starting on Tuesday, the next round of negotiations on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (also known as the “NAFTA of the Pacific”) will beginin Chicago.  We have already seen the Obama administration push hard for free trade agreements with Panama, South Korea and Colombia and the administration is making the Trans-Pacific Partnership a very high priority.  Membership in the “NAFTA of the Pacific” already includes Brunei, Chile, New Zealand and Singapore.  The United States, Australia, Peru, Malaysia and Vietnam are scheduled to join.  Canada, Japan and South Korea are also reportedly considering membership.  So once this “free trade” agreement is ratified, will we hear another “giant sucking sound” as millions more of our jobs are shipped overseas?

Look, it is not really that complicated.  If you are a giant U.S. corporation, you can either make stuff here, or you can make stuff overseas where it is far, far less expensive to do so.

To greedy corporate executives, there are a lot of advantages to moving operations out of the country….

*It is legal to pay slave labor wages in many of these other countries.  After all, why pay an American worker 10 or 20 times as much as a worker on the other side of the globe?

*In many of these other countries you do not have to provide any health care for workers.

*In many of these other countries there are virtually no environmental controls to worry about.

*In many of these other countries there are virtually no labor standards to worry about.

*In many of these other countries you only have to deal with a fraction of the “red tape” that you have to deal with in the United States.

By merging our economies with the economies of societies that are far different from our own, we have created a “race to the bottom” that is incredibly destructive to the U.S. economy.

In Vietnam, one dollar an hour is considered to be a very good wage.

So how do you plan to compete against that?

These “free trade agreements” are direct assaults on the big, juicy paychecks of American workers.

If you do not know about the Trans-Pacific Partnership, you need to get educated.

The following is a basic introduction to the TPP from Wikipedia….

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), also known as the Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership Agreement, is a multilateral free trade agreement that aims to further liberalise the economies of the Asia-Pacific region; specifically, Article 1.1.3 notes: “The Parties seek to support the wider liberalisation process in APEC consistent with its goals of free and open trade and investment.”[1] The original agreement between the countries of Brunei, Chile, New Zealand and Singapore was signed on June 3, 2005, and entered into force on May 28, 2006. Five additional countries – Australia, Malaysia, Peru, United States, and Vietnam – are negotiating to join the group.

Apparently, one of the goals of the TPP is to reduce all trade tariffs among member nations to zero by the year 2015.  The proponents of “free trade” are absolutely thrilled.

We have all enjoyed the flood of cheap products from overseas.  It is nice to pay a little bit less for things.

But these cheap prices have come at a very high cost.  We are literally destroying the American economy.  If you walk into just about any store today and you start turning over products, you will find that almost all of them are made out of the country.

If our middle class jobs keep getting shipped overseas, our prosperity is going to vanish.  If the American people allow this to continue, the standard of living of American workers is going to continue to fall toward the level of workers in third world countries.

Arthur Stamoulis, the executive director of Citizen Trade Campaign recently had the following to say about why he is opposed to this new free trade agreement….

“They’ve shipped our jobs overseas. They’ve reduced the tax base, they’ve driven down the wages and benefits for the jobs that are left. We’ve had enough”

As you can see from the chart below, we have seen a massive decline in manufacturing jobs in the United States over the last few decades….

It is absolutely amazing that the Obama administration continues to tout more “free trade” agreements as a way to increase employment in the United States.

Sadly, nearly half the country is still going to run out and vote for the guy in the next election.

Between December 2000 and December 2010, 38 percent of the manufacturing jobs in Ohio were lost, 42 percent of the manufacturing jobs in North Carolina were lost and 48 percent of the manufacturing jobs in Michigan were lost.

So the answer is to ship even more of our jobs overseas?

Apparently the Obama administration actually believes that we don’t want those jobs.  The following is what U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk told Tim Robertson of the Huffington Post recently….

Let’s increase our competitiveness… the reality is about half of our imports, our trade deficit is because of how much oil [we import], so you take that out of the equation, you look at what percentage of it are things that frankly, we don’t want to make in America, you know, cheaper products, low-skill jobs that frankly college kids that are graduating from, you know, UC Cal and Hastings [don’t want], but what we do want is to capture those next generation jobs and build on our investments in our young people, our education infrastructure.

Can you believe that nonsense?  He believes that there are things that “we don’t want to make in America”?

Why is nobody calling for him to resign immediately?

Manufacturing jobs have traditionally been high paying jobs that can support middle class families.

But now we are losing millions of those jobs and the Obama administration simply does not care.

Back in 1970, 25 percent of all jobs in the United States were manufacturing jobs. Today, only 9 percent of the jobs in the United States are manufacturing jobs.

America is being deindustrialized at warp speed and most Americans don’t even understand what is happening.

Look, even if U.S. firms wanted to stay in the United States and try to compete, they face almost insurmountable obstacles….

*Many foreign nations deeply and directly subsidize national industries and the U.S. government lets them get away with it.  That puts our industries at a vast disadvantage.

*The United States has the highest corporate tax rate in the world.  That puts our corporations at a vast disadvantage.

*Many foreign nations do not require businesses to provide health care for their employees.  That puts our businesses at a vast disadvantage.

*Many foreign nations impose very little regulation on businesses.  That puts businesses in the United States at a vast disadvantage.  In the U.S., we have some of the most restrictive regulations in the world.

The truth is that even the “next generation jobs” and the “green jobs” that Obama keeps talking about are rapidly leaving the country.

For example, the third-largest producer of solar panels in the United States, Evergreen Solar, is leaving America.

Evergreen is shutting down its factory in Massachusetts, laying off 800 American workers and moving production over to China.

A recent New York Times article explained why Evergreen is making this move….

Evergreen, in announcing its move to China, was unusually candid about its motives. Michael El-Hillow, the chief executive, said in a statement that his company had decided to close the Massachusetts factory in response to plunging prices for solar panels. World prices have fallen as much as two-thirds in the last three years — including a drop of 10 percent during last year’s fourth quarter alone.

Chinese manufacturers, Mr. El-Hillow said in the statement, have been able to push prices down sharply because they receive considerable help from the Chinese government and state-owned banks, and because manufacturing costs are generally lower in China.

We are losing the “jobs of the future” and Obama is doing nothing about it.

Last year, more than half of all the solar panels in the world were made in China.

China is absolutely killing us on the global economic stage and Obama does not even seem to think that it is a problem.

The U.S. trade deficit with China in 2010 was 27 times larger than it was back in 1990.

Not only that, the United States now spends more than 4 dollars on goods and services from China for every one dollar that China spends on goods and services from the United States.

So don’t listen to any of the nonsense that Obama is spouting about creating jobs.

Not that most of the Republicans are putting forward any good ideas either.

The reality is that our politicians have lied to us.  Globalism is absolutely destroying our economy.

Do you remember when the United States was the dominant manufacturer of automobiles and trucks on the globe?  Well, in 2010 the U.S. ran a trade deficit in automobiles, trucks and parts of $110 billion.

We are losing ground in almost every industry that you could name.  Even the “jobs of tomorrow” are mostly being created overseas.

Andy Grove, the former CEO of Intel, says that our advanced technology companies are creating far more jobs overseas than they are in the United States….

Some 250,000 Foxconn employees in southern China produce Apple’s products. Apple, meanwhile, has about 25,000 employees in the U.S. That means for every Apple worker in the U.S. there are 10 people in China working on iMacs, iPods, and iPhones. The same roughly 10-to-1 relationship holds for Dell, disk-drive maker Seagate Technology (STX), and other U.S. tech companies.

When is someone going to wake up America?  If we are even losing “advanced technology” jobs, then what kind of jobs are going to be left?

In 2002, the United States had a trade deficit in “advanced technology products” of $16 billion with the rest of the world.  In 2010, that number skyrocketed to $82 billion.

Needless to say, that is not a good trend.

Our politicians promised us that the “global economy” would mean more jobs and more prosperity for us.

Well, that was obviously a giant lie.

Today, if you gathered together all of the unemployed people in the United States, they would make up the 68th largest country in the world.

If we allow all of this “free trade” nonsense to continue, our unemployment nightmare is going to continue to get worse and even more of our formerly great cities will end up looking like total hellholes just like Detroit does.

Sadly, virtually all of our politicians in both political parties are in favor of these “free trade” agreements.  In fact, most of them are pushing these kinds of agreements as one of the “solutions” to our problems.

The U.S. economy is being dismantled and deindustrialized right in front of your eyes.

If you plan on speaking out, you better do it now because it is almost too late to stop what is being done.

It is up to you America.

————————————————————————————

Study Links Abortion to Mental Health Problems, Suicide

| Print |  
Written by Dave Bohon
Wednesday, 07 September 2011 12:47
A recent U.S. study has confirmed that women who have abortions increase the likelihood of suffering from severe mental health issues. The study by Dr. Priscilla Coleman of Bowling Green State University, published in the prestigious British Journal of Psychiatry, found that women who opt to abort their babies nearly double their risk of mental health problems, compared to women who deliver their babies. “Coleman’s study is based on an analysis of 22 separate studies which, in total, examine the pregnancy experiences of 877,000 women, with 163,831 women having an abortion,” reported the pro-life news site LifeNews.com. “The study also indicated abortion accounts for one in ten of every adverse mental health issue women face as a whole.”

Coleman explained that the purpose of the study was “to produce an unbiased analysis of the best available evidence addressing abortion as one risk factor among many others that may increase the likelihood of mental health problems.” She said the research confirmed that there are “some real risks associated with abortion that should be shared with women as they are counseled prior to an abortion.” She added that the study “offers the largest estimate of mental health risks associated with abortion available in the world literature. The results revealed moderate to high increased risk of mental health problems after abortion. Consistent with evidence-based medicine, this information should be used by health care professionals.”

Coleman pointed out that other “less systematic reviews of the scientific literature on abortion and mental health … are prone to bias, and as a result actively mislead the public.” Once such study cited by Coleman came from the American Psychological Association (APA), which in 2008, reported CBS News, “charged a task force to review scientific evidence on the link between abortion and mental health. They acknowledged women may experience sadness, grief, depression, and anxiety following an abortion, but could not find evidence abortions—and not other factors—caused these effects.”

In a 2008 written statement Dr. Brenda Majors, chair of the APA task force declared: “The best scientific evidence published indicates that among adult women who have an unplanned pregnancy, the relative risk of mental health problems is no greater if they have a single elective first-trimester abortion or deliver that pregnancy. The evidence regarding the relative mental health risks associated with multiple abortions is more uncertain.”

Coleman said that the connection between abortion and mental health has often been “shrouded in political controversy,” preventing it from receiving the objective academic scrutiny it deserves. She advised that professionals conducting such research have a responsibility “to set aside personal ideological commitments, objectively examine all high-quality published data, and conduct analyses of the literature that are based on state-of-the-art data analysis procedures….”

Janet Morana of the Silent No More Awareness Campaign, a group that reaches out to women who have suffered through an abortion, told LifeNews that the study is a confirmation of what millions of women around the world already know. “This report is devastating to those who try to deny the hurt and anguish women suffer from abortion,” she said. “The cruelty of those who lie to pregnant women about abortion’s impact is compounded by the heartlessness of abortion industry propagandists who dismiss post-abortive women’s pain as non-existent. After this enormous scientific study, abortion’s apologists should apologize to the millions of women they’ve tried to marginalize.”

Fr. Frank Pavone of Priests for Life said that he hoped the study would prompt more women who are suffering because of abortion to step forward for help from groups like Silent No More. “What I pray will be one of the major results of this study is that more women will realize that they are not alone,” he said. “The pain they’ve been internalizing, perhaps for years or decades, is not uncommon; in fact, it’s quite normal. There is help and there is healing.”

Jeanne Monahan, director of the Center for Human Dignity at the Family Research Council, said that as a result of the study “doctors now have a valid and unbiased synthesis of the current research available on the relationship between abortion and women’s mental health. Because it is a meta-analysis, the research is much more thorough and reliable than any other single study or review to date.”

Writing in NationalReview.com, Michael J. New, a political science professor at the University of Michigan-Dearborn, said that the appearance of Coleman’s research “in a top psychiatry journal indicates that it was carefully critiqued and evaluated by respected public-health scholars.” He added that hopefully, “the prestige of the journal, the volume of studies included, and the consistency of the findings will encourage the mainstream media to give a second look to this important issue.”

Dr. Mary Davenport of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists said that the study has global implications. “For example,” she wrote in the American Thinker, “South Korea not only has had a major increase in suicide, but also holds the world record for the highest rate of female suicide. This country is also called ‘the abortion paradise’ because at least 43.7% of pregnancies end in abortion.”

Davenport wrote that the “most sobering” aspect of Coleman’s report had to do with the Population Attributable Risk (PAR) for suicide, which was a dramatically high 34.9 percent. Explained the pro-life physician: “PAR estimates the proportion of deaths in an entire population that could be prevented if the cause of death is eliminated (in this case abortion as the cause of suicide in women). By so powerfully linking abortion to mental health problems, the Coleman study helps us comprehend the magnitude of the damage done to entire nations by reckless, permissive abortion policies.”

—————————————————————————–

No comments yet

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: