You’re bumuming their arguments and information are accurate. If they are indeed ‘nuts’, it would stand to reason that they may give biased interpretation of evidence. For example, off the top of my head, I can intuit that Planned Parenthood focuses on minority or low-income areas because groups in these areas may have less money with which to afford abortions. This is simply another possible reason for PP to do what they do, as opposed to some eugenics-derived motivation. As far as the call-in example, it’s not very robust-people accept monetary donations from folks who espouse different views, even those that the recipients find offensive. Generally speaking, it seems disingenuous to present this information without also presenting its slanted background and source, then act as if we just need to ‘decide for ourselves’ as if we’ve been given full disclosure; that’s a Fox News move.

I’m a huge Asimov fan myself- Asimov, Bradbury, Scott Card, the greats are hard to forget. I like Asimov’s work the most, I read all of his stuff in 4th grade… 400 published works… good times…

I thought Dubya was the first Vietnam Vet. He proudly protected Alabama airspace from those dirty slopes. Was it Alabama? I forget. Anyway, he did so at great sacrifice, including missing dental appointments.

my IAT said i had little to no preference between white and black people. suck that, senators.