Posted on 09/12/2012 9:51:08 AM PDT by scottjewell
Of course: Their conclusion was implicit in the premises of their study and in the formation of their questions.
Exactly, rigged from the get-go.
Uh hunh.
A study from a “research institute” specifically dedicated to gay issues.
I’ll pass.
Push-studies such as this use the same principles as push-polling. They both are designed to accomplish an end, regardless of the means.
The other night my wife was watching some show called “Military Wives” or something like that. Anyway, there was a scene in which the troops were deploying to Afghanistan. All teh husbands and wives were kissing their spouses. Fine. Then there was a scene where a female Lt Col laid a long, passionate lip-lock on her “partner.” Yep - Hollywood and the liberal news media are pushing the narrative trying to normalize this crap.
BS alert.... has it even BEEN a year yet?
Oops.. forgot to ping you two..
Is that really fair or conservative, to use the Rangers in that manner, “rump ranger”?
“The Williams Institute was founded in 2001 through a generous grant by businessman, academic, and philanthropist Charles R. “Chuck” Williams. Mr. Williams’ inaugural donation of $2.5 million to create the Williams Institute was the largest donation ever given to any academic institution in support of a gay and lesbian academic program in any discipline. Over the past decade, he has given over $13 million to fund the Institute.”
I wonder why CNN did not publish a disclosure that the faux “study” is by a LGBT support institute.
CNN? I don’t have the time to read this today, but I seriously doubt the findings of this ‘study’.
Yes, very illuminating. The LGBTs went crazy over the fact that the Regnerus study may have had some connection to National Organization for Marriage, but when the shoe is on the other foot, its all cool.
I wonder who ended up paying for this goofy and meaningless study. What a waste.
When "our" troops are told to turn their guns against the citizens of the US, they will be only too happy to do so.
(s) obviously this study is true since the military as social engineering protected the ambassador so well.(/s)
I wonder how much “napolitano-ing” has happened in the diplomatic corps?
Excellent point - and a frightening one as well.
Romney wanted to end DADT.
“One issue I want to clarify concerns President Clinton’s “don’t ask, don’t tell, don’t pursue” military policy. I believe that the Clinton compromise was a step in the right direction. I am also convinced that it is the first of a number of steps that will ultimately lead to gays and lesbians being able to serve openly and honestly in our nation’s military. That goal will only be reached when preventing discrimination against gays and lesbians is a mainstream concern, which is a goal we share.”
Sincerely,
W. Mitt Romney
:-(
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.