Yeah, liberals are stupid.
By the way, in case you conservatives don't know, you don't need to take more birth control pills the more you have ***, it's a once a day thing. But I can't blame Rush for thinking that more pills = better.
While I think calling her a **** was childish (it's something liberals would do and Rush is better than that) the "funny" thing has been watching liberals come unglued over this (while trying not to trip over their own hypocrisy)rubbing their hands together in hopes of making her another "victim" they can come to the rescue of (The Huffingtonpost has now started referring to her as the "Limbaugh's Victim") and of course Barry never missing a chance to pander (His poll numbers have been down with women so the only thing that could have made this better for him is if Sandra Fluke had been a illegal immigrant)made sure to give her a call (and made sure the media knew about it as soon as he picked the phone up) to tell her that he is there for her.
And yes we are aware that you don't need to take more birth control pills the more you have *** but that is not what Sandra Fluke who volunteered to testify before congress testified about. Sandra went before congress to state that her and her classmates could not afford the $3,000 worth of contraceptives
they were using a year. (You see contraceptives is more than just birth control pills)and so despite the religious objections of the school she choose to go to they should give her and her friends "free" access to it.
A study by US researchers suggests that the wealthier you are the more likely you are to lie, cheat and break the law.
Paul Piff is a researcher at the University of California Berkeley.
Paul Piff: We looked at whether someone was driving a Mercedes or a less fancy car like a Corolla or a Civic from the 80s and used that to see whether drivers of more expensive vehicles were actually more inclined to break the law while driving by, for instance cutting off other cars at a four way intersection and indeed they were.
They were four times more likely to do that than drivers of less expensive vehicles.
His study found the upper class are more likely than poorer people to break road rules. They are also more likely to pinch lollies from children and lie for financial gain.
We had participants play a game where we said the computer's going to virtually roll a die for you five times and please keep track of your score because the higher your score is, the better your chances are of winning a cash prize and you're going to have to report your total score at the end of the game. Now what participants didn't know that we knew is that the game was rigged so everyone’s score would equal 12. So anyone who over-reported their score, by reporting a total score of more than 12, we knew was cheating.
Wealthier individuals, who, by definition have more money, are also more likely to afford lawyers or to be able to pay for the downstream consequences of unethical behaviour.
They're also less likely to see the kinds of risks that are associated with acting unethically. But what we highlight in this paper is that individuals from the upper echelons of society are more likely to think that the pursuit of self-interest and greed is a moral and positive thing.
And it's as a result of those more favourable attitudes towards greed that they're actually more inclined to behave unethically.
SIMON LONGSTAFF: It's always been more than just money; I mean it's anything that gives you a special status to say that you are beyond the pack. So it can be celebrity, it can be an inherited title. I think it’s something which is conditioned. I think, we're not talking about monsters here. We're talking about you know moderately decent people who just lose touch I think with where they stand in the world.
LMAO I knew it just a matter of time before one of you posted this joke of a story. (And btw thank you for posting this in here as it proves my point. Liberals are stupid)
Did you read this whole article? Do you know how these "top" researchers came up with this society shattering conclusion?
They took the answers from about 450 people who filled out a questionnaire on craigslist about how much money they made a year (and of course everyone answered the question truthfully because nobody ever lies on craiglist especially about how much money they make)and then watched them play a dice game.
After exhausting research like the research done above I'm sure they didn't need anymore data to confirm their theory but being the "top" researches they were (I'm sure they went to Harvard and MIT just like Smash did)they wanted to be sure of their claim (So that the Nobel prize committee would have no doubt of their brilliance) they then watched traffic cam footage and watched how nice of a car you drove and if you had a nice car and broke a traffic law or cut someone off then you must be rich and therefore more likely to cheat and break the law.
And my favorite part of the whole article? This bit of brilliant observation. "Wealthier individuals, who, by definition have more money"
You guys make this too easy.