You of all people should know that.

I don’t understand how the word “unconvincing” even applies.  “Hey guys, I made a sweet chart by graphing this data set.”  “LIAR!”

It’s based on real data.  Randall isn’t editorializing, he’s literally just making a graphic of data that other people put together with widely used methodologies.

“Left wing” vs. “right wing” is fairly arbitrary and is always an opinion.  That’s not what the chart’s about.  The chart is about which members of congress voted alike rather than their absolute position on some imaginary “left wing v. right wing” spectrum.

Also, if you think Europe’s major parties are “far left” it just goes to show USians have lost all concept of what “far left” actually means.

I think it’s more likely that there’s a difference between everyone and that subset that runs governments, corporations, etc.

and the blocs are extended back such that the ancestral parties stay mostly on the respective sides.

Right, this is what folks are complaining about. It’s just put “Democrat” on the left and “Republican” on the right, regardless of the fact that President Obama and Jefferson Davis were from two completely different political ideologies.

It’s basically similar to the idea that the democrats have a “history” of racism in their party, when really it’s just the name “Democratic Party” and has nothing to do with the ancestors of the current party.

-

I get that he want’s to make the graph in the Minard style (or HistoryShots style) but the flow arcs only serve to confuse things visually. Congresspeople only come from one place (not Congress) and go to one place (not Congress) so you don’t need them. Just by showing the number of each affiliation for each term you know how many of each affiliation was added or subtracted from the previous term.

ETA: as to the left/right thing, I don’t think it was the use of left/right that clevername was objecting to but the way the graph shoehorns previous political dynamics into our modern conception of what democrats/republicans are.

Here is one saying outright that of course eliminating birth control is one of the goals: http://www.npr.org/2011/09/20/140449957/gov-perry-cut-funds-for-womens-health-in-texas

Ok, fine. That one was a yr ago. But Steven King from Iowa is on tape just last week saying that he hasn’t stated a position on whether or not selling BC should be legal.(!) In the fucking year 20-12.

What do you think all those personhood amendments are about? Not just Roe – they would also make BC illegal along with IVF.

What do you think all those “conscience clause” laws in places like the Dakotas, Utah, Texas, Kansas, etc. are about? It allows pharmacists to refuse to sell BC. It allows nurses not to deal with patients who want contraception. It allows BUS DRIVERS to change routes or skip stops because they feel moral superiority over someone who wants contraception or abortions. There are tons more shit, if you are willing to wade through it on Google.

Furthermore, where have you been that you haven’t heard about employers denying health insurance coverage of contraceptives.? This is not just for religious employers as MSM likes to concentrate on, but ALL employers since the law allows exemption for “religious OR moral reasons”. It passed in Arizona, and there are lawsuits in place to make it happen elsewhere. Read up on the Blunt Amendment. I seriously could go on, but I’ll just say this is why it’s a big, giant deal. It’s not just about Roe, it’s about Griswold now, too.

And if I were you, I really, really wouldn’t trust a goddam thing that comes out of that man’s mouth. Saying he wouldn’t repeal Roe with SCOTUS appointees, etc. etc. is not a guarantee. See: 6 yrs. worth of flip-flopping.

SO SORRY, sir!

I will from now on be nice when the man running for the highest office in the country says that he wants to repeal Roe vs. Wade.

I’ll now be nice when the man running for the highest office in the nation says that he thinks I am a sinner. Who believes that my having children with a same-sex partner is wrong. Who thinks my being allowed to marry a woman would end civilization as we know it. He believes these things, and yet I”m supposed to be nice.

All because some patronizing asshole told me to.

You know, this is some ironic bullshit.

Apparently it’s perfectly okay for you to be a patronizing asshole, but heaven forbid I call out the assholes trying to take away my rights.

Do you honestly thing being nice and calm has helped any minority fighting for or fighting to keep their rights?

‘Cuz last I checked, those of us who aren’t as privileged as you are, must fight, and fight hard, to keep our basic rights as human beings.

We also have to fight against being called whores and sinners day in, and day out, by the very people who are supposed to represent us.

So fucking sorry if I don’t feel very nice about it.

Even Martin Luther King, Jr. knew when to call evil shit evil.

Thanks, dude, for the man splainin’.  Clearly you know more about these issues, even though they don’t directly effect you.

Mitt Romney is running for president and has stated that he wants to make repeal Roe vs. Wade.I bet you’re going to just tell me, “but he doesn’t really MEAN IT!  I know he says that *to get elected*, but he doesn’t really mean it!  I swear”Oh, yeah, that TOTALLY makes me feel better.

TOTALLY.

Also, did you gloss over my other points? I am not straight. Mitt Romney does indeed want to take my rights away.

Not that you care. Obviously.

And for Fuck’s Sake, Jan Brewer is my governor. I live in Arizona!

Do you know who Sheriff Joe is?!?!?!

I KNOW WHAT EVIL IS. I live it every day!

1) Limiting birth control by allowing pharmacists to not dispense morning-after drugs if the pharmacist is philosophically opposed to birth control.  

2) Trying to limit birth control availability through the insurance framework – see “religious exemptions”.

3) The flat-out _unconstitutional_ cutting of funding to Planned Parenthood, with some claiming that the vast majority of PP funding goes to abortion (a bald-faced lie)

4)The promise to return to limiting foreign aid if the health care message includes abortions – the so-called Mexico City policy.

This isn’t the libertarian “everyone lives in fre-market utopia-land” party that you seem to favor, this is the fascist Religious Right from puritan assholes like Dobson and Robertson and Falwell who think Jesus should dictate how one makes their body choices.

Since when are the Republicans trying to take away the right to birth control?

For God’s sake, Google it.  Quite a few Republicans, including big names like Mike Huckabee, want to make birth control illegal, or let states make it illegal, or defund it, etc.