U.S. Pays $2.6Mil to Train Chinese Hookers

[SamSpade]

Originally Posted by Beaver-Cleaver

Show me where Congress has absolute control over what NIH grants are spent on.

Point taken. Neither of them do.

On the other hand, I didn't lay this issue at their feet - but YOU put the onus on Bush, and I disputed it. Then you suggested the story was a fake. So I'm thinking you're not really trying to approach this rationally.

Originally Posted by SamSpade

Point taken. Neither of them do.

On the other hand, I didn't lay this issue at their feet - but YOU put the onus on Bush, and I disputed it. Then you suggested the story was a fake. So I'm thinking you're not really trying to approach this rationally.

I never said this story was a fake. Kain did.

I put it right out and said CNS is legit. Very bias (just like every "news" site Mike and CWO link) but legit. I also pointed out that MRC was hypocritical to complain about media bias but run a bias news service of their own.

for SamSpade:

Originally Posted by Beaver-Cleaver

But CNS is legit, just like The Huff Puff. But, like the Huff Puff, don't expect the whole story from them either.

[Mike (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Beaver-Cleaver

Care to show us these "4000+ hits from all kinds of news sources."

I just googled it and got hits from Freeper, and several other conservative opinion sites/forums that link to this same article.

Here is several of the many that come up when I google it - first one from your people at Media Matters some of the others are humorous, too. Real or fake? I'm hoping for fake.

NewsBusters' Huston falsely claims Obama responsible for funding "Chinese hookers" study | Media Matters for America

Obama Pays to Treat Alcoholism in Chinese Hookers : Stop The ACLU

US Will Pay $2.6 Million to teach Chineese hookers to drink

$2.6 million of your tax money going to China to teach prostitutes how to drink....no joke - Debate Both Sides

Hot Air » Blog Archive » Your tax dollars at work: Teaching Chinese hookers to drink responsibly

I googled the phrase "2.6 billion to train Chinese prostitutes"

We all know it is total BS no matter who is supporting it, requesting it, and the only ones getting screwed are those of us that are funding it.

[This_person]

Originally Posted by Beaver-Cleaver

Show me where Congress has absolute control over what NIH grants are spent on.

Is your point that the whole process is flawed in that Congress writes bills that provide too much leeway into how money is spent, and then president's sign it?

Do you know what a Code of Federal Regulations is, and who produces those, and how little interaction there is in the construct of those with the executive branch?

Originally Posted by Mike

Here is several of the many that come up when I google it - first one from your people at Media Matters some of the others are humorous, too. Real or fake? I'm hoping for fake.

NewsBusters' Huston falsely claims Obama responsible for funding "Chinese hookers" study | Media Matters for America

Obama Pays to Treat Alcoholism in Chinese Hookers : Stop The ACLU

US Will Pay $2.6 Million to teach Chineese hookers to drink

$2.6 million of your tax money going to China to teach prostitutes how to drink....no joke - Debate Both Sides

Hot Air » Blog Archive » Your tax dollars at work: Teaching Chinese hookers to drink responsibly

I googled the phrase "2.6 billion to train Chinese prostitutes"

We all know it is total BS no matter who is supporting it, requesting it, and the only ones getting screwed are those of us that are funding it.

The only actual news source in there is digg, which just links to CNS. All the others are blogs, and opinion sites.

As I stated, CNS is the only news service to report on this story.

Originally Posted by Mike

first one from your people at Media Matters

My people?

Fool, I've criticized Media Matters many times before. For example, when they said the media was demonizing Hillary Clinton when, in reality, they were giving her a free pass. Or for when they attacked Chris Matthews for saying Hillary only got in the Senate because Bill cheated on her.