What is it with Catholic Priests?
 

I'd be fine with this if they weren't tax exempt.

They've had 2000 years to refine and perfect their scams.

That's pretty wild. In all of my years, I have never heard of such a thing. Mismanagement of parish funds happens sometimes, but not often outright theft like this. Must have been a large parish in order for it to go unnoticed.

That's a lot of escorts.

Fair enough, Saudi Arabia sucks.

America chose Obama, and if you don't like it, you don't have to come here.

See, this is why it's better to tax consumption than earnings [/kuci|KH]

The disapproval rating is ~45%, and "I disapprove" is not necessarily "I think he's terrible".

Come on, Ben. There is NO transparency in fund usage to parishioners in Catholic churches. None. Go ahead, ask your pastor his annual income, and for a balance sheet with pie chart of how all the collections are spent. Our parish did just that.

Give me a break, you pathetic troll. quis est tua pater?

Gallup thinks the disapproval rating is 46%. Rasmussen's results tend to be skewed toward the right.

Yep, Rasmussen is skewed to the right.

Gallup thinks the disapproval rating is 46%. Rasmussen's results tend to be skewed toward the right. America chose Obama, and if you don't like it, you don't have to come here. Rasmussen polls likely voters, Gallup polls adults, including people who didn't vote. How exactly did non-voting Americans 'choose' Obama? Texting on their phone? Telepathy?

Voting Americans chose Obama by a 54/46 margin, IIRC. That was then. This is now. Independents have left him.

Sure, if you cherrypick the one poll that leans to the right. If we are asking the question wrt to voters, then we should use the poll that has likely voters only. I don't see why it's relevant to poll non-voting adults.

Somehow Rasmussen is the only poll where 99+% of the public either approves or disapproves, while the other polls have a significant number of people that neither approve nor disapprove. Somehow I get the impression that Rasmussen is counting people who neither approve nor disapprove as people who disapprove to skew the results. Rasmussen has had Obama underwater for at least a year now. This isn't a new trend.

I could be wrong though. From where I sit, Gallup is required not to show Obama as over 50 percent disapproval. That sword cuts both ways.

My parish publishes their information every year. So... give me a break you pathetic troll.

So to you that strengthens the case of Rasmussen's legitimacy and not having a bias? Here on Earth, if a poll had Obama down consistently while every body else is mixed, the Human assumption would be that there is probably some bias going on at Rasmussen.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/...-does-not.html

The bottom line is this: the sample included in Rasmussen's polling is increasingly out of balance with that observed by almost all other pollsters. This appears to create a substantial house effect, irrespective of whether Rasmussen subsequently applies a likely voter screen. http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_5ieXw28ZUp...400/parti4.png

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_5ieXw28ZUp...400/parti2.png

Rasmussen has a likely voter model, and since republicans vote more consistently than democrats, it will pretty much always be skewed to the right of average public opinion, but people who are too lazy to vote don't matter.

http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...milies/eek.gif