addressalign-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbackbellblockcalendarcameraccwcheckchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-small-leftchevron-small-rightchevron-small-upchevron-upcircle-with-checkcircle-with-crosscircle-with-pluscrossdots-three-verticaleditemptyheartexporteye-with-lineeyefacebookfolderfullheartglobegmailgooglegroupshelp-with-circleimageimagesinstagramFill 1linklocation-pinm-swarmSearchmailmessagesminusmoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1ShapeoutlookpersonJoin Group on CardStartprice-ribbonShapeShapeShapeShapeImported LayersImported LayersImported Layersshieldstartickettrashtriangle-downtriangle-uptwitteruserwarningyahoo

Join or login to comment.

  • Kim

    Sorry I will have to miss this most interesting topic this week. See you all next week. Have a good discussion. :)

    August 27, 2014

  • Dan L.

    I have an issue with using Heritage Foundation articles. Their "data" is highly biased, which they even admit to in the citations for their figures. "Source: Heritage Foundation calculations based on [original data source]"

    In other words, "Source: Real statistics deliberately altered to support our agenda"

    1 · August 25, 2014

    • Kim

      Yes, good point. That is the purpose of those links when discussing such a topic. This is a human rights crisis being highly politicized by both parties. I assume it is important to know what the political pundits are feeding the masses in addition to the real data. Hence the Heritage post. Yeah, they are unsavory folk IMO too. ;)

      1 · August 25, 2014

    • Kim

      Of course, I am assuming that most know that Heritage is an ultra right wing think tank when posting their article as I would assume if posting Fox News that most people know their biases. But I should have perhaps made that clear anyway.

      1 · August 25, 2014

7 went

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy