A new name up for #NE02

Paul Aaron
Paul Aaron (2008 interview)

After asking around and around, there has finally been a whiff of another person (or two) interested in running for the 2nd District Congressional seat.

The latest name floated is…Paul Aaron.

You may recognize that name as the President of Pinnacle Sports — which took over the play-by-play for Nebraska football years back.

Aaron eventually sold Pinnacle years later and was involved in various other ventures, including being founder and Commissioner of the Indoor Football League (of which the Omaha Beef was a member).

Here is an interview back in the early days of the new league in 2008.

His name also pops up as being behind a wedding photo-booth business, and from years and years back, as the original radio guy who hired a young DJ in Sacramento named…Rush Limbaugh.

There currently is NO confirmation about the nearly 70-year-old Aaron’s interest in Congress. At worst, it is a name that Nebraskans know, and now you have just a tiny bit more info about him.

(By the way, good luck on researching Mr. Aaron. You end up with a lot of photos of Jesse Pinkman…)


Moving onto the current holder of the #NE02 seat, Brad Ashford confirmed with the OWH that he is NOT interested in the rigors of retaining political office.

And why won’t Ashford raise money for his campaign?

He is too busy…

“…focusing on policies such as the trade bill and the situation in the Middle East.”

Ah, there it is. Brad has been in the thick of it with the negotiations in Vienna and Japan. You just know that the Mullahs in Iran have been wondering what the Freshman Rep from Omaha was thinking about all this. And now they know that he will be probably reading several of the news stories about it, and such.

Seriously though, if Ashford had just said he was busy with new committee work, or meeting with constituents back home, at least that would sound plausible. But trying to make it sound like he has been huddled with John Kerry and the trade negotiators is just goofy.

His final statement to Joe Morton makes more sense: he just doesn’t feeeeeel like doing it.


Speaking of people who actually will be involved in reviewing the Iran deal, Senators Ben Sasse and Deb Fischer came right out of the box criticizing the proposal.

Sasse was one of the first in Congress to have a statement on it:

In full he said:

“Sadly, the Administration just lit the fuse for a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. We all know Iran’s neighbors will not sit idly as the world’s largest state-sponsor of terror becomes a nuclear-threshold state.

“Congress will thoroughly review it in the coming weeks but this much is immediately clear: this deal abandons ‎‎America’s historic bipartisan commitment to preventing nuclear proliferation, and instead begins the era of managed proliferation—a descent into chaos and an even more dangerous world.”

Deb Fischer was equally strong where she said:

“I have closely followed the reports on U.S. negotiations, and am concerned that the Obama administration has given up too much in order to get a deal, which will now be sent to Congress for review.

“While the president argued that we ‘give nothing up’ by ‘testing’ whether this agreement will constrain Iran’s nuclear ambitions, I disagree. The international sanctions regime took years to assemble and remains the most effective method of imposing costs on Tehran for their destabilizing behavior.

“We cannot undo sanctions for an agreement that is built on the hope that the Iranian government changes its behavior. To recklessly gamble with our only source of leverage would be far worse than signing no deal at all.”

It will be interesting to see how this is debated in the months ahead.
But it just seems a little strange.

Bully continually threatens to firebomb your house.
You make it hard for bully to operate.
So now you take away bully’s economic hardships, bully will only keep a few firebombs (they’re just for my fireplace!) and you can ask to inspect his firebombs every once in a while.
And the deal is only for 10 years.
After which, there is no deal.

And the President calls that a “victory”.


  1. Michael Oren:

    “Back in 1994, American negotiators promised a “good deal” with North Korea. Its nuclear plants were supposed to be frozen and dismantled. International inspectors would “carefully monitor” North Korea’s compliance with the agreement and ensure the country’s return to the “community of nations.” The world, we were told, would be a safer place. . .”

    Our deal with Iran is far more lenient. We’re not dismantling their centrifuges; we’re letting them keep them. We’re letting them build next-generation centrifuges. We’re letting them develop ICBMs. We’re not insisting on anywhere, anytime inspections.

    Iran will go nuclear, sooner rather than later. it’s already a done deal. There will be a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. I give it a better than 50:50 chance of nuclear war in the next 25 years, and a significant chance Iran will figure out a way to detonate one on US soil. And if anyone important to me dies, I reserve the right of Lex Talionis.

  2. Macdaddy says:

    Sasse can criticize the deal all he wants. He and Senator Corker made sure it would go through. Genius boy is not so genius.

  3. Macdaddy says:

    Ashford is too busy trying to get ICE to divert its attention from releasing murderers and rapists back into the U.S. so they can speed up a process already in motion. He’s got no time to campaign because there are huge numbers of immigrants married to LEOs that need an act of Congress to do something. All one of them.

  4. I participate in an online forum for conservative/libertarian leaning scientists and science geeks. After 2008, we had a long-running malice/ignorance discussion. That is, could Obama’s actions best be described as ignorant, or were they the result of deliberate malice? I, and the rest of the ignorance camp, threw in the towel several years ago.

    Whatever lingering doubts were removed today. Obama signed off on a deal that pretty much guarantees a nuclear attack on Israel. And why wouldn’t he? His father was Moslem. His stepfather was Moslem. It’s entirely predictable exterminating the Jewish state would be on the agenda. Could the Iran deal be simply the result of stupidity? No, not hardly, considering we had a stricter deal with North Koera, and they were ready to build a bomb within 8 years. There is no partisan divide on this deal in Israel. Every party, from far right to far left, is deathly scared of it.

    And then there was the Planned Parenthood vampire discussing, chucklingly, over salad and red wine, how to dismemeber babies so the body parts can be best harvested. I’ve spent a lot of time in preemie nurseries, and I’ve seen babies the same gestational age they’re dismemebering survive and grow. Evil. No other word for it.

    The old saw is that conservatives think liberals are wrong, and liberals think conservatives are evil. No mroe, not for me. These people are ghouls.

  5. Macdaddy says:

    RWP, Obama hates Israel more than he hates America. The problem is that Israel’s and America’s futures are enmeshed. I have no doubt that neither Obama or Bernie Sanders will lift a finger when Israel is atracked but when the Middle East’s oil becomes radioactive for the next 1000 years, America becomes Greece. Obama wants to watch Israel burn but just remember that Sasse gave him carte blanche to get it started.

  6. Oh Whatever says:

    “And if anyone important to me dies, I reserve the right of Lex Talionis.”

    Empty threats from a coward without the personal fortitude required to follow through, let alone the actual ability. Save your posturing for people who will be impressed.

  7. TexasAnnie says:

    Well I listened to the talking heads during most of my activities yesterday and I have decided that no deal and a bad deal on nuclear arms proliferation come to about the same end! In either case, we move forward, untrusting and uncertain whether over the next ten years, Iran will procure nuclear arms. Obama didn’t create this quagmire (indeed, it’s been going on all my life!). He simply advocates a different response to the failed responses of his predecessors.

    And all the while, Gerard and his ilk look the other way regarding Israel’s threat to it’s neighbors in the Middle East… Besides, scientists and science geeks are also capable of “malice” and “ignorance.”

  8. TexasAnnie says:

    True liberty lovers should be advocating disarmament in the Middle East and around the world! I just cringe when bullies in my own government go around promoting warfare by “keeping the world safe for democracy.”

  9. Anonymous says:

    Israel has been fighting for its life since 1948. How is that a threat to Israel’s neighbors? Who exactly is threatening who? It’s no part of Israel’s constitution to wipe its neighbors from the earth, unlike some Persian countries I know.

  10. Texas Annie draws an equivalence between a nation that seeks to survive and the nation which seeks its annihilation.

    Unfortunately, they don’t make assistive devices for moral cripples.

  11. KHDS says:

    Before the end of the year, Israel, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and other Arab states will launch a massive bombing attack on Iraq.

  12. Sparkles says:

    Prof Harbison at 9:17pm

    Three points:

    One, no matter how you conceive of a human fetus, medical professionals talking about harvesting parts of them is going to sound cold-hearted and sickening to most ordinary people – myself included. Nevertheless these resources, which would otherwise be destroyed, contribute to vital research and new procedures which ultimately save the lives of living, breathing human beings.
    You would think a man of science, such as yourself, would understand this.

    Second, it’s preposterous to claim that charging nominal fees in the neighborhood of $30 to $100 would conceivably constitute anything other than minimal compensation for storage and transportation. The idea that Planned Parenthood would send a highly compensated MD out to act as a salesperson hawking body parts at fifty bucks a pop is laughable.

    Third, the folks behind this video are known to be associates of the felon filmmaker and all-around circus clown James O’Keefe.

    And, just for fun.. as reported by Gallup on May 29, 2015:
    “Americans Choose “Pro-Choice” for First Time in Seven Years”

  13. Anonymous says:

    “Nevertheless these resources, which would otherwise be destroyed, contribute to vital research and new procedures which ultimately save the lives of living, breathing human beings.”

    It is no exaggeration to say similar words are easily found, over and over, in the Nuremberg Trial transcripts. What a lovely ideology to align yourself with. The Nazis were very efficient, creating lampshades and book covers with “resources.”

    Its like saying “You can enjoy life just like I do through abortion. Better life through abortion, have one today!”

  14. Anonymous says:

    11:16, your analogy is bogus. 100% would agree that Nazis experimented with live people. Only a minority would agree that a fetus less than 3 months from conception is a human being. Developing into one, yes, but not yet close to being one.

  15. Pete @ Sparkles & Anon 1137 says:

    Are you out of your flipping mind?

    Anon: “only a minority would agree that a fetus less than 3 months from conception is a human being”
    While I’m sure there is no reliable data to refute or verify your claim quoted above…. A fetus is absolutely, positively a human. If it weren’t a human, then why are these ghouls at planned parenthood harvesting and selling their organs? When 2 zygotes meet and form a unique sequence of DNA, a human being exists. Plain and simple.

    Sparkles: James O’Keefe has produced some of the best investigative journalism this world has seen, you just don’t like it because he’s very adept at exposing the motivations and operations of the left.

  16. Macdaddy says:

    The abortionists are changing the way they are doing the procedure in order to fulfill the commercial needs of a third party. Does this put the woman at increased risk? Do the abortionists care? That ethical problem still stands even if they give the organs away. If they don’t, let’s do the math. They already get $350 for an abortion and they stand to make an additional 10-30% per organ per abortion. One liver, one heart, two lungs, a pancreas and two kidneys. Do it properly and the abortionist could double their money. For no additional cost. Overhead is already paid for. This is pure profit.

  17. Macdaddy says:

    Texas Annie, Iran won’t just procure nuclear arms either way. With Obama’s way, they will procure a lot of conventional arms now that $140 billion of their assets will be unfrozen and the rest of the world is allowed to sell to them. Also, there is zero chance they will ever revert back to a secular country thanks to this deal on top of Obama inexplicably turning his back on the popular revolution that was crushed his second year in office.

  18. TexasAnnie says:

    Israel fighting for it’s life??? There is no moral equivalence to be drawn here, Gerard. The Muslim, Christian and Jewish religions have all sprung from the same region, and their resulting warfare is incomprehensible to those who are not empathic with supernatural belief. But I do have a problem with my own government policing the situation, now throughout the whole of my life. So I say, let’s try the Obama/Kerrey method of feigning peace. I can’t be more false than the past 67 years of American intervention.

  19. Sparkles says:

    Macdaddy at 12:04 imagines:

    “With Obama’s way, they (Iran) will procure a lot of conventional arms”

    No doubt these challenging negotiations with the Obama Admin and the P5+1 have left the Iranians longing for the halcyon days of Ronnie Raygun and his little henchman Ollie North.
    The days when the ayatollah merely had to whip out the checkbook and soon to appear at his door, via the US Postal service:
    August 20, 1985 – 96 TOW anti-tank missiles
    September 14, 1985 – 408 more TOWs
    November 24, 1985 – 18 Hawk anti-aircraft missiles
    February 17, 1986 – 500 TOWs
    February 27, 1986 – 500 TOWs
    May 24, 1986 – 508 TOWs, 240 Hawk spare parts
    August 4, 1986 – More Hawk spares
    October 28, 1986 – 500 TOWs

    Of course at the same time of these sales to Iran, Ronnie, Rumsfeld and Darth Cheney were also supplying Iraq with the billions of dollars in credits necessary to fund their warfare along with military training and a wide array of modern weaponry, including chemical and biological agents.
    The Reigle Report noted:
    “detailed 70 shipments (including Bacillus anthracis) from the United States to Iraqi government agencies over three years, concluding “It was later learned that these microorganisms exported by the United States were identical to those the UN inspectors found and recovered from the Iraqi biological warfare program.”

    And the US Defense Intelligence Agency reports show:
    “The Reagan administration did not stop aiding Iraq after receiving reports affirming the use of poison gas on Kurdish civilians.”

    But alas, it is a decade long CONTAINMENT of Iran’s nuclear ambitions that has the Right Wing in a frothy rage.
    Go f’ing figure.

  20. anonymous says:

    Sparkles, that PP rep sounds like my local butcher. Sad day when a form of human life becomes a piece of meat that can bought or sold at a whim like its nothing. What does that say about human life, human beings and human rights to you? It says you’re a piece of meat, too, with no more value than what somebody will pay for some part of you, and the rest is chum. Rights? The only civil right left is a right to die. Pray that no one helps you exercise your single, remaining right today.

  21. Anonymous says:

    Do you idiots (1:34) realize that PP is not making a profit? The tissue is used for research that may save real lives someday using fetuses which ARE NOT YET HUMAN LIFE!

  22. Sparkles says:

    anonymous at 1:34

    “It says you’re a piece of meat, too, with no more value than what somebody will pay for some part of you,”

    I respect your right to that view . No doubt it’s a view shared by millions.
    But not by me.
    Abortion has been around nearly as long as mankind has walked the earth. (of course to some on the right, including Presidential wannabe’s, that’s a mere 5000 years).
    It’s a practice that pre-dates the tales, many of them tall, crafted and strung together by man when assembling the book we call the bible.
    It is a practice that has been granted Constitutional protection.
    All this leads to the inevitable conclusion that a choice will ultimately be made; allow science to use the resources in an effort to aid mankind, or discard them.
    By the way, we have the assurance that the science is quite clear –
    “The medical profession produced a rigorous scientific review of the available evidence on fetal pain in Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) in 2005. The review concluded that fetal perception of pain is unlikely before the third trimester. No new studies since the publication of the JAMA paper have changed this dominant view of the medical profession.”
    It’s not cold, it’s not ghoulish, it’s reality.

    If you want to talk ghoulish, let’s talk about shark fin soup, or veal cutlets, or ivory keyboards.

  23. Sparkles: viable human beings, crushed in creative, ultrasound-guided ways so their organs can be ‘harvested’, are not ‘valuable resources’, any more than the rendered fat of concentration camp victims was a ‘valuable resource’. You have no clue what a ‘man of science’ thinks; your view of science is apparently taken from the collected works of Boris Karloff.

    Your bloodthirsty ‘highly compensated MD “crush ’em high, crush ’em low” Deborah “Hannibal” Nucatola admitted that their affiliates were doing a little better than breaking even. And the company to which many of them sell the body parts actively advertises to those affiliates what a valuable money-making opportunity it is.

    I rather admire James O Keefe, so your guilt by association argument is a failure on many levels.


  24. The restraints put on Iran are less stringent than those we put on North Korea in 1994. We know how that worked out. The inspection regime is so weak my grandchild could get around it. This is what Obama said about the 24 days it will take to get access to an Iranian site.

    ““As for the fact that it may take 24 days, this is not something you hide in a closet.”

    So, kiddies, here’s a fun fact. Little Boy, the bomb that incinerated Hiroshima, contained 64 kg of enriched 235U metal. That has a volume of 3.5 L, equivalent to a block approx. 6″ by 6″ by 6″ (though probably better not to have it in one lump :-))

    You don’t need a closet to hide it. A desk drawer will do fine.

    Or you could break it up into twenty seven 2″ X 2″ X 2” paperweights. Decorative, unique, and surprisingly useful.

  25. anonymous says:

    The chief difference between you and I, Sparkles, is that I’d fight for your life even if I’d die, and I don’t even know you or share your stated values.

    Unfortunately, I doubt you’d do the same for me.

    I believe you have value and worth from the earliest instant of your existence and for no other reason, religious, philosophical or scientific. You believe I have value because “The AMA….” I don’t know how to bridge that gap except to be true to goodness of life & existence in the face of…I no longer know what to call it.

  26. Sparkles says:

    Prof Harbison,

    You could have saved us all of lot time reading your hyperbole had you only stated, up front:
    “I rather admire James O Keefe”

    That, paints the complete picture.
    You wouldn’t be sampling anything from the chemistry lab, would ya Prof?

    And regarding your comment on “viable human beings”, a bit of science to leave you with:
    Fetal viability at 21 weeks or less = 0%

  27. Macdaddy says:

    Sparkles, you’re the one with the imagination if you think that the Iranians will hold off for 10 years. Name a single time when the Iranian government could be trusted.

    As for the reference to Iran-Contra, so what? I think that was a big mistake. I also think Reagan’s amnesty was a big mistake. You’re telling me that Obama can’t even learn something easy from Reagan? He’s too stupid or too blind to learn from the past? I know, he’s been smoking too much pot. Any way you slice it, Obama just made the whole world a lot less safe.

    Wait a second! Spike! Is that you? I thought I recognized the deluded thinking.

  28. The Grundle King says:

    @ Sparkles,

    Your 21 week viability, which likely came from Wikipedia, was sourced from another website. Unlike you, I actually went to that website, and they offered the following qualifiers for said statistic:

    1. General estimates of survival for live born infants who receive neonatal intensive care in the USA in the late1990’s are: …

    2. But, no estimate is perfect.

  29. Abortions are legal in most states up to 24 weeks, genius, and up to 40 weeks in some states.

    I’ve seen, i.e. with my own two eyes, firsthand, babies that were born at 22 weeks and lived.

  30. anonymous says:

    I was born at 29 weeks, over 10 weeks early. I weighed 2 lbs 11 oz and dropped to 2 lbs 6 oz my first week alive. It is sobering to think that abortions have been done later than 29 weeks.

  31. Anonymous says:

    Do you really think a woman waits 7 months, then decides to get an abortion because she doesn’t want the kid? Late term abortions are done because the fetus isn’t viable or has very severe defects that would preclude life outside the womb. Are you so cruel as to force a woman to carry it until it is delivered?

  32. Macdaddy says:

    Either the OB delivers it or the abortionist delivers it. Either way it has to come out. Only people who think pregnancy is a disease think it would be cruel to have a woman deliver naturally and keep the baby comfortable until it dies rather than partially delivering it and crushing its skull without using any anesthesia. And yes, thousands of women opt for the latter in America every year.

  33. Anonymous says:

    MD, you obviously don’t care for research that disputes your worldview. Sparkles was correct (and I’ll bold it so you can read it more easily: “The medical profession produced a rigorous scientific review of the available evidence on fetal pain in Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) in 2005. The review concluded that fetal perception of pain is unlikely before the third trimester. No new studies since the publication of the JAMA paper have changed this dominant view of the medical profession.”

    I also recently read a study that viewed brain waves of fetuses after 35 weeks when stimulated with increasing pressure to the point that would be considered pain in a newborn. However there was no difference in brain waves for the close to term fetuses. Seems like pain awareness doesn’t occur until birth or very close to it. So quit your emotional (and faulty) argument that pain is felt by a fetus during an abortion. It’s really disgusting the way your side plays on people’s emotions rather than dealing with facts.

  34. Anonymous says:

    By the way, more facts for you: In 2003 1.4% of abortions were after 21 weeks. The rate in 2011 was the same.

  35. anonymous says:

    But I was born at 29 weeks. Are you saying I didn’t feel pain until the moment of my premature birth? No pain at 28 weeks 6 days 23 hours, but yes pain an hour later – 29 weeks – when I was delivered? How does that fit in with the whole 35 weeks pain/no-pain meme?

  36. @ 5:41 pm Only 2% of late term abortions are because of fetal problems. So why don’t you fabricate something more plausible?

    (Most are because of what can broadly be summed up as stupidity)

  37. Macdaddy says:

    From a 2008 article in Reproductive Health Matters arguing that fetuses don’t feel pain during abortions:
    “…neuroanatomical pathways necessary for processing pain, similar to those observed in adults and older children, could be in place by 23 weeks gestation. The stereotypical stress response of an adult or older child reporting pain is also observable in the fetus at 18 weeks gestation. Behavioural reactions to noxious stimulation, comparable to the adult or older child, can be observed from 26 weeks gestation. These and other observations support the suggestion that the capabilities of the fetal mind include an experience of pain from at least 26 weeks gestation.”

    Sounds to me like fetuses can feel pain and at an age when they are viable which is 22 weeks or later (maybe earlier as the technology advances). And yet every year in America, thousands of these fetuses get partially pulled out of their mothers’ wombs and get their skulls crushed. But since you don’t see the looks on their faces, it’s all good. BTW, when your definition of pain insists that it is an “emergent property of social awareness,” then all sorts of people don’t feel pain, despite what their cries say. Just maybe, though, we can get back to a definition of pain that isn’t so self-serving and exists solely to protect the abortion industry, before get too far over the line, even though rushing headlong into a brave new world seems all the rage these days.

  38. The Grundle King says:

    “By the way, more facts for you: In 2003 1.4% of abortions were after 21 weeks. The rate in 2011 was the same.”

    According to the CDC, in 2011 there were 730,322 legal induced abortions…1.4% of that number would be about 10,200.

    According to 2010 U.S. Census data, that’s equivalent to killing a city the size of Lexington every year. Of course, if you discount the 2% of late term abortions performed due to fetal problems, you’re down to right at 10,000…such an improvement!

  39. Oracle says:

    It’s easy to cherry pick a study, but: A 2005 study in the Journal of the American Medical Association, for instance, reviewed all known articles on fetal pain. “Evidence regarding the capacity for fetal pain is limited, but indicates that fetal perception of pain is unlikely before the third trimester.

    (Wait for posters to denigrate the AMA….)

    GH, you had to dig back to a 1988 survey (almost 30 years ago!) to find your 2% figure. And those figures were for abortions taking place after 16 weeks, not after the point one would consider them late-term abortions. For a scientist you sure can be dishonest in your arguments, but I’ve always found you an “end justifies any means” person which it comes to “winning” an argument.

  40. “H, you had to dig back to a 1988 survey (almost 30 years ago!) to find your 2% figure.”

    Has anything changed since 1988? There’s certainly no better data since. If there were, ‘Oracle’ would have posted it.

    There is no commonly-accepted definition of ‘late term’, but the post-16-week definition is what the survey I cited referred to as ‘late term’.

    ‘Oracle’, I regard you as a charlatan who makes use of anonymity to post personal insults, a practice I regard as despicably cowardly. You also have absolutely no standing to rule on what a scientist should or shouldn’t do. I expect you couldn’t pass a freshman science class.

    Just while we’re sharing. 🙂

  41. Let me just add that I’m not impressed by arguments on fetal pain, for or against. There is a rare condition where people are born without functional pain receptors. They are incapable of feeling pain (it’s actually not a good thing).

    Is it OK to do anything we like to them, because we can’t hurt them?

  42. Macdaddy says:

    Actually, I got my statistics about late term abortions from Slate in an article written by a cardiologist trying to justify partial birth abortion.

  43. Oracle says:

    Wow, GH. Another reason I’m thankful my daughter attended Stanford and was able to leave this state, giving her a 0% percent chance of taking a Chemistry class from you. First, you post a 30 year old data point without noting its age. (No I didn’t have time to search for more current data, but I also wouldn’t use such rusty data to make a point. At least not without acknowledging its age. You really believe that this stat hasn’t changed in 30 years? Dishonest!) Secondly, most references to late-term mean after 20 weeks. And your comparison to those born without pain receptors is faulty as their state remains unchanged, unlike a developing fetus.

  44. If she’s anything like you Oracle, and a lot of things are heritable, I’m equally delighted I didn’t have to teach your daughter.

    There is absolutely no reason to believe — and you certainly have provided no argument — that the percentage of late abortions for fetal abnormality has increased substantially since 1988. And you’re too goddamn lazy to dig out any statistics of your own (though not too lazy to post anonymous insults). So all you can do is whine you don’t like my stats, while providing nothing yourself. You do this every time you lose an argument, which is to say every time we argue. “Oooh, I don’t have time to dig up the numbers, but I don’t like yours. ” Grow up, and grow a pair.

    Amniocentesis, which is the primary means to detect fetal defects, is typically done between 14 and 16 weeks. So measuring the percentage of abortions due to fetal abnormality after 16 weeks is entirely rational.

  45. Oracle says:

    Typical GH response. Don’t address the points I made. By your standards 100 year old data would also be valid for your argument. My point is that you can’t use 30 year old data and reliably expect it to be unchanged. You’re exactly right that there is no reason to believe the the percentage has changed. But there is also no reason to believe it hasn’t, and since most things change over time, probability is on my side.

    Not lazy but busy as I have a real world job, unlike you in the utopian, socialist, tax-payer supported world of tenured faculty, and have spent too much time researching and posting this morning.

    Subtle, but circular when it comes to defending the decades old survey at16 weeks and applying it the commonly accepted 20+ weeks for later term abortions. Just shift the markers, and one can prove anything. You are the master!

  46. Anonymous says:

    Well Oracle, somebody pays you – be grateful. You’ve wasted some measurable amount of your employers time & money mouthing off here. I bet your boss would be thrilled to review your work here and discuss it in your next, overdue evaluation.

  47. Oracle says:

    Don’t worry about me, 1:31. I’ll make up my time working Saturday, and my bosses are very happy with my work. You should be more concerned about your tax money going to a professor that spends many more hours than I posting to this site and many others. (With the minimal amount of time he’s required to actually do something for the University, I’m sure he’ll say it’s all done on “his” time.)

  48. Abortion was illegal 100 years ago, ass.

    In fact, there is a recent study you were too lazy to find. Or maybe you did, and hoped I wouldn’t 🙂

    Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health
    Volume 44, Issue 2
    June 2012
    Pages 117–124
    Attitudes and Decision Making Among Women Seeking Abortions at One U.S. Clinic
    Authors Diana Greene Foster, Heather Gould, Jessica Taylor, Tracy A. Weitz

    They found that 0.6% (that’s six abortions in a thousand) performed after 20 weeks were because a fetal anomaly was present.

    A later 2013 study by the same group found that 65% postponed the decision for financial reasons, 40% didn’t even know they were pregnant until after 12 weeks, and 40% had postponed because they had difficulty deciding. Fetal abnormalities weren’t even considered in the second study; as the authors said “data suggest that most women seeking later terminations are not doing so for reasons of fetal anomaly or life endangerment”

    You may now apologize.

  49. “Not lazy but busy as I have a real world job, unlike you in the utopian, socialist, tax-payer supported world of tenured faculty, and have spent too much time researching and posting this morning.”

    The only money I make May through August is in the stock-market. You ain’t paying me a dime. In fact, the computer I’m using, bought by me, is used most of the time to do work for the University of Nebraska, in whose name I just submitted a paper.

    You’re welcome.

  50. Oracle says:

    Attitudes and Decision Making Among Women Seeking Abortions at One U.S. Clinic

    A statistician you are not. Basing a conclusion on a universe of 1!

    Wish I had 4 months off every year, but was paid an annualized salary.

    I probably should have included health of the mother as another “justified” (not flippant) reason for a late term abortion. Most likely the late-term rate will increase because of the difficulty of many to find a place not 100s of miles away where a safe, early abortion can be obtained, due to draconian laws being passed in many red states.

  51. The second study was a randomized sample over a large number of abortion clinics. You’re now officially desperate.

    My salary is annualized only in the sense that UNL hangs on to it so they can collect a little more interest. I am officially paid for 9 months, August through May, and can earn a full salary for teaching and research for three months over the summer, precisely because I’m not being paid by them. Those are the facts Jack; like ’em or lump ’em.

    I knew you wouldn’t have the cojones to apologize.

  52. Oracle says:

    What to apologize for? You’re shifting the markers again. Though it’s not clear, I assume the second study was abortions after 12 weeks. Earlier than what we are talking about.

    I will say that after studying this issue in more detail today, fetal abnormalities were not as high as a reason I had expected. In many cases the abortion was put off because of affordability. A US news survey in 1998 determined 9.4% of “late-term” (weeks not given) abortions were for medical reasons. A clinic worker in the survey said of many of these women They don’t lead organized, routine lives.

    Unlike you, GH, I’ll admit when I’m wrong and won’t make dishonest arguments for the sake of “winning”.

  53. Anonymous says:

    Hmmmm, just a guess, but if the reason many women choose a late-term abortion is because of financial reasons, I would surmise that to be because many so-called “men” disappear and take no responsibility for the developing human being.

  54. The Grundle King says:

    “I would surmise that to be because many so-called “men” disappear and take no responsibility for the developing human being.”

    Probably true…but how would one go about remedying that problem?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.