Planned Parenthood leaked video (1 Viewer)

[SaintsInDome2006]

By the way the prochoice political crowd has now moved to calling prolifers "anti-choice." These are basically word games that politicize us and keep us from discussing rationally. There is a lot of money wrapped up in the political side and in people just being paid to wage media wars and political fundraising campaigns on just this.

In all earnestness, I think you're flipping the two. My understanding was that "pro-choice" came first as a linguistic construct, defining those opposed as "anti-choice," and as a reaction to this, some savvy people decided that "pro-life" needed to be the term of art. The language game works both ways, as you point out in the last clause to your sentence. Massive money. Massive sloganeering involved.

And I'll just say I agree.

 

[Chadstroma]

Mat,, Chad, the $30-100 number is an industry average. There's no reason this one particular clinic shouldn't have a set figure which reflects their actual legal cost and every clinic should have a way to check with the state to ensure they are working with a certified tissue company, and there's also reason why the whole thing should not be handled over lunch and wine. A phone call should be sufficient.

For those defending PP's tone keep in mind they have actually apologized for the tone.

Agreed. And there is no negoitation needed. No "tell me what you think is fair" comments. Your cost is your cost. End of story.

I think in the mind of the PP recorded, they are not 'profiting' because whatever amount they get is helping cover the costs of the entire procedure. So they are not profiting from it in their minds but it is pretty clear to me through negoitation they are trying to get more than simply the cost associated with the donation.

 

[matuski]

Mat,, Chad, the $30-100 number is an industry average. There's no reason this one particular clinic shouldn't have a set figure which reflects their actual legal cost and every clinic should have a way to check with the state to ensure they are working with a certified tissue company, and there's also reason why the whole thing should not be handled over lunch and wine. A phone call should be sufficient.

For those defending PP's tone keep in mind they have actually apologized for the tone.

the cost for fetal tissue specimens was between $30 and $100, “depending on the facility and what’s involved.” She defined “specimen” as, “one case. One patient.”

Also - More business is done over meals than anywhere else. You are really reaching on this.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Ok technically this isn't "business" per PP this is legally recouping costs of preservation and transfer. What you have above says one case, one patient, but it doesn't say at that clinic. That clinic has a cost assigned to preservation and let's face it that's probably a sterile medical refrigerator and the cost of a container and FedEx. The storage cost is fixed over the course of the year and the transport fee is likely a set known amount too. The preservation amount can be as low as $2 per instance when it's figured over a year. I'm not accusing them if evil profiteering on corpses here, I'm just saying if PP is doing it like they claim their doctor shouldn't be doing it this way. They might actually admit that. It's not the most horrible accusation in the world to say their procedures should be formal and fixed but that they are not.

 

[Sand]

Ok technically this isn't "business" per PP this is legally recouping costs of preservation and transfer. What you have above says one case, one patient, but it doesn't say at that clinic. That clinic has a cost assigned to preservation and let's face it that's probably a sterile medical refrigerator and the cost of a container and FedEx. The storage cost is fixed over the course of the year and the transport fee is likely a set known amount too. The preservation amount can be as low as $2 per instance when it's figured over a year. I'm not accusing them if evil profiteering on corpses here, I'm just saying if PP is doing it like they claim their doctor shouldn't be doing it this way. They might actually admit that. It's not the most horrible accusation in the world to say their procedures should be formal and fixed but that they are not.

Hmmm. So one wonders how preservation and storage cost recoup translates into a Lamborghini...

 

[timschochet]

So it's become clear now where all of this is heading. In September, House Republicans are going to threaten to shut down the government (which will happen if they don't sign the budget deal) if Planned Parenthood is not defunded. Obama will likely refuse and we will have yet another government shutdown. But conservatives think that with these videos they can win this fight and make Obama the guy to blame for his extremism. Can they?

 

[rockaction]

So it's become clear now where all of this is heading. In September, House Republicans are going to threaten to shut down the government (which will happen if they don't sign the budget deal) if Planned Parenthood is not defunded. Obama will likely refuse and we will have yet another government shutdown. But conservatives think that with these videos they can win this fight and make Obama the guy to blame for his extremism. Can they?

If a shutdown didn't work in the nineties with a weaker president, it's not working now.

 

[Henry Ford]

So it's become clear now where all of this is heading. In September, House Republicans are going to threaten to shut down the government (which will happen if they don't sign the budget deal) if Planned Parenthood is not defunded. Obama will likely refuse and we will have yet another government shutdown. But conservatives think that with these videos they can win this fight and make Obama the guy to blame for his extremism. Can they?

If Republicans shut down the government this year, they can pretty much kiss the next election goodbye.

 

[timschochet]

So it's become clear now where all of this is heading. In September, House Republicans are going to threaten to shut down the government (which will happen if they don't sign the budget deal) if Planned Parenthood is not defunded. Obama will likely refuse and we will have yet another government shutdown. But conservatives think that with these videos they can win this fight and make Obama the guy to blame for his extremism. Can they?

If Republicans shut down the government this year, they can pretty much kiss the next election goodbye.

It's actually going to be the first of two of these situations coming up. In September, the House Republicans want to hold the budget hostage to Planned Parenthood funding. In October, they want to hold the debt ceiling hostage to repealing Obamacare. Behind the scenes, Boehner and McConnell are trying to prevent these showdowns, but the House Republicans are NOT listening. And yes, I think it will change the dynamics of the election if they go through with either.

 

[shader]

New video today. Haven't seen it.

 

[avoiding injuries]

Something about a bag of baby parts mixed together, followed by an LOL.

 

[tommyboy]

no biggie, they just discuss whole baby sales.

 

[Hang 10]

Yeah and frozen babies. Some 18 weeks old.

 

[spreagle]

Can someone explain why Democrats double down on their favorite people/institutions when they get caught doing something wrong ("I'm donating 200 to PP now rather than my usual 100") but Republicans tend to walk away from their people/institutions when they get caught doing something wrong? Is it because Democrats instinctively circle the waguns and Republicans instinctivley give people the boot? Is it because Republicans have some sort of a moral baseline to give people/institutions a thumbs up or thumbs down, and Democrats don't have any way of measuring such a thing?

 

[Bucky86]

Can someone explain why Democrats double down on their favorite people/institutions when they get caught doing something wrong ("I'm donating 200 to PP now rather than my usual 100") but Republicans tend to walk away from their people/institutions when they get caught doing something wrong? Is it because Democrats instinctively circle the waguns and Republicans instinctivley give people the boot? Is it because Republicans have some sort of a moral baseline to give people/institutions a thumbs up or thumbs down, and Democrats don't have any way of measuring such a thing?

 

[joffer]

Can someone explain why Democrats double down on their favorite people/institutions when they get caught doing something wrong ("I'm donating 200 to PP now rather than my usual 100") but Republicans tend to walk away from their people/institutions when they get caught doing something wrong? Is it because Democrats instinctively circle the waguns and Republicans instinctivley give people the boot? Is it because Republicans have some sort of a moral baseline to give people/institutions a thumbs up or thumbs down, and Democrats don't have any way of measuring such a thing?

yeah, that's why

 

[spreagle]

Can someone explain why Democrats double down on their favorite people/institutions when they get caught doing something wrong ("I'm donating 200 to PP now rather than my usual 100") but Republicans tend to walk away from their people/institutions when they get caught doing something wrong? Is it because Democrats instinctively circle the waguns and Republicans instinctivley give people the boot? Is it because Republicans have some sort of a moral baseline to give people/institutions a thumbs up or thumbs down, and Democrats don't have any way of measuring such a thing?

I think another thing is that Democrats have a very strong "everyone deserves a second chance especially if they are on my side" mentality and sometimes this causes Democrats to make very poor decisions. Sometimes you just have to give someone the boot the very first time they screw up. Some things don't deserve a second chance.

 

[Scoresman]

Can someone explain why Democrats double down on their favorite people/institutions when they get caught doing something wrong ("I'm donating 200 to PP now rather than my usual 100") but Republicans tend to walk away from their people/institutions when they get caught doing something wrong? Is it because Democrats instinctively circle the waguns and Republicans instinctivley give people the boot? Is it because Republicans have some sort of a moral baseline to give people/institutions a thumbs up or thumbs down, and Democrats don't have any way of measuring such a thing?

because republicans (conservatives) usually end up ashamed of their position after someone applies logic to their arguments pertaining to many social issues (see gay marriage, transgender acceptance, religion etc.).

they'll never admit this, and this is rather blunt but you know you're all thinking the same thing.

 

[CBusAlex]

Can someone explain why Democrats double down on their favorite people/institutions when they get caught doing something wrong ("I'm donating 200 to PP now rather than my usual 100") but Republicans tend to walk away from their people/institutions when they get caught doing something wrong? Is it because Democrats instinctively circle the waguns and Republicans instinctivley give people the boot? Is it because Republicans have some sort of a moral baseline to give people/institutions a thumbs up or thumbs down, and Democrats don't have any way of measuring such a thing?

I think another thing is that Democrats have a very strong "everyone deserves a second chance especially if they are on my side" mentality and sometimes this causes Democrats to make very poor decisions. Sometimes you just have to give someone the boot the very first time they screw up. Some things don't deserve a second chance.

I guess all those Republicans who made a point of eating a Chick Fil-A after they got caught donating to ex-gay conversion therapy groups simply lacked a moral baseline as well.

 

[shader]

Why does this controversy have to be about republicans or democrats. Can't it just be a company doing awful things, without bringing in all the political grandstanding?

 

[shader]

no biggie, they just discuss whole baby sales.

But matsuki said this thread was over

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

So uh [neutral question here] - does anyone understand the current or latest video in terms of the law(s) requiring that procedures not be altered to retrieve tissue in some way?

Learning about the selling of tissue at cost of preservation was a new one, so what is this about?

TIA

 

[urbanhack]

Why does this controversy have to be about republicans or democrats. Can't it just be a company doing awful things, without bringing in all the political grandstanding?

Outside of performing abortions which is less than 5% of their business, which of these other things would you consider "awful?"

Planned Parenthood health centers focus on prevention: 80 percent of our clients receive services to prevent unintended pregnancy.
Planned Parenthood services help prevent approximately 516,000 unintended pregnancies each year.
Planned Parenthood provides nearly 400,000 Pap tests and nearly 500,000 breast exams each year, critical services in detecting cancer.
Planned Parenthood provides nearly 4.5 million tests and treatments for sexually transmitted infections, including 700,00 HIV tests.

 

[shader]

Why does this controversy have to be about republicans or democrats. Can't it just be a company doing awful things, without bringing in all the political grandstanding?

Outside of performing abortions which is less than 5% of their business, which of these other things would you consider "awful?"

Planned Parenthood health centers focus on prevention: 80 percent of our clients receive services to prevent unintended pregnancy.

Planned Parenthood services help prevent approximately 516,000 unintended pregnancies each year.

Planned Parenthood provides nearly 400,000 Pap tests and nearly 500,000 breast exams each year, critical services in detecting cancer.

Planned Parenthood provides nearly 4.5 million tests and treatments for sexually transmitted infections, including 700,00 HIV tests.

Less than 5 percent of their business? I doubt that.If that's true then they won't mind ending the part of their business coming under fire

 

[timschochet]

Why does this controversy have to be about republicans or democrats. Can't it just be a company doing awful things, without bringing in all the political grandstanding?

Outside of performing abortions which is less than 5% of their business, which of these other things would you consider "awful?"

Planned Parenthood health centers focus on prevention: 80 percent of our clients receive services to prevent unintended pregnancy.

Planned Parenthood services help prevent approximately 516,000 unintended pregnancies each year.

Planned Parenthood provides nearly 400,000 Pap tests and nearly 500,000 breast exams each year, critical services in detecting cancer.

Planned Parenthood provides nearly 4.5 million tests and treatments for sexually transmitted infections, including 700,00 HIV tests.

Less than 5 percent of their business? I doubt that.If that's true then they won't mind ending the part of their business coming under fire

You failed to answer his question.

To your point, it's actually around 3%.

 

[tommyboy]

3% is a pittance

 

[raidergil]

I wish everyone who was all fired up about this hated abortion enough to actually want to do something to reduce abortions rather than just whine about PP.

How about some personal responsibility here...that always seems to be missing in this topic...make sure you have birth control...if not than make sure the guy pulls-out...if you can't figure that out than maybe you should keep your pants on because whether it's an abortion, a teen pregnancy or simply an unwanted adult pregnancy these results don't happen magically...

Totally agree here, but of course there's no personal responsibility in US anymore. Without health ed, condom commercials or 'the talk' I somehow figured out condoms would keep me from being a teenage dad or having to come up with money for an abortion.

I also believe this specific issue is not political but moral. PP should open their books and policies to explain their 'donations to research.'

 

[raidergil]

Why does this controversy have to be about republicans or democrats. Can't it just be a company doing awful things, without bringing in all the political grandstanding?

Outside of performing abortions which is less than 5% of their business, which of these other things would you consider "awful?"

Planned Parenthood health centers focus on prevention: 80 percent of our clients receive services to prevent unintended pregnancy.
Planned Parenthood services help prevent approximately 516,000 unintended pregnancies each year.
Planned Parenthood provides nearly 400,000 Pap tests and nearly 500,000 breast exams each year, critical services in detecting cancer.
Planned Parenthood provides nearly 4.5 million tests and treatments for sexually transmitted infections, including 700,00 HIV tests.

According to this article based on PP 2013 Annual Report, abortions were 94% of thier services. And it looks like working for a non-profit pays pretty darn well with Richards making nearly $600K & 50% of their affiliate CEOs making over $300K. But what about CEOs being overpaid & income equality?

 

[shader]

Btw you don't measure what percentage of their business is in abortions by the number of procedures done but by the revenue.

Can anyone prove that it's 3-5%? I find that hard to believe. This should be a fact we should all be able to agree on.

 

[shader]

Brief Google search tells me 3% of their services are abortion, but 50% of their revenue is from abortion. I think it's quite misleading to use the 3% number.

 

[Homer J Simpson]

Brief Google search tells me 3% of their services are abortion, but 50% of their revenue is from abortion. I think it's quite misleading to use the 3% number.

A lot of the stuff they do is free or severely reduced. Kinda makes a difference.

 

[shader]

Brief Google search tells me 3% of their services are abortion, but 50% of their revenue is from abortion. I think it's quite misleading to use the 3% number.

A lot of the stuff they do is free or severely reduced. Kinda makes a difference.

You guys won't give one single inch will you

 

[Homer J Simpson]

Brief Google search tells me 3% of their services are abortion, but 50% of their revenue is from abortion. I think it's quite misleading to use the 3% number.

A lot of the stuff they do is free or severely reduced. Kinda makes a difference.

You guys won't give one single inch will you

Why would we?

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

Brief Google search tells me 3% of their services are abortion, but 50% of their revenue is from abortion. I think it's quite misleading to use the 3% number.

A lot of the stuff they do is free or severely reduced. Kinda makes a difference.

You guys won't give one single inch will you

That's what your wife says.

 

[Sand]

I think another thing is that Democrats have a very strong "everyone deserves a second chance especially if they are on my side" mentality and sometimes this causes Democrats to make very poor decisions. Sometimes you just have to give someone the boot the very first time they screw up. Some things don't deserve a second chance.

Frankly i'm flummoxed on th stubborn defense of PP and the assertion by so many democrats that PP is the only possible provider of these services. I guarantee that if the govt. put out a request for bid on grants.gov for a half billion dollars they would get lots of responses. Lots.

But, then again, the winner of that contract may not give the multi-million dollar donation reach arounds to multitudes of Democratic campaigns.

 

[rockaction]

I think another thing is that Democrats have a very strong "everyone deserves a second chance especially if they are on my side" mentality and sometimes this causes Democrats to make very poor decisions. Sometimes you just have to give someone the boot the very first time they screw up. Some things don't deserve a second chance.

Frankly i'm flummoxed on th stubborn defense of PP and the assertion by so many democrats that PP is the only possible provider of these services. I guarantee that if the govt. put out a request for bid on grants.gov for a half billion dollars they would get lots of responses. Lots.

But, then again, the winner of that contract may not give the multi-million dollar donation reach arounds to multitudes of Democratic campaigns.

This can't be overstated.

The PP issue doesn't come from some sort of nefarious right-wing think tank or issue; it's there because the services and odious way in which they're provided is so ripe for plucking.

Pluck away, R's.

 

[tommyboy]

its just more crony capitalism, and both sides do it, a lot. the difference i guess is they're in teh business of ripping babies apart and selling the organs and limbs. But hey, if you want a whole baby we can do that too! I need a lamborghini.

 

[Amused to Death]

I think another thing is that Democrats have a very strong "everyone deserves a second chance especially if they are on my side" mentality and sometimes this causes Democrats to make very poor decisions. Sometimes you just have to give someone the boot the very first time they screw up. Some things don't deserve a second chance.

Frankly i'm flummoxed on th stubborn defense of PP and the assertion by so many democrats that PP is the only possible provider of these services. I guarantee that if the govt. put out a request for bid on grants.gov for a half billion dollars they would get lots of responses. Lots.

But, then again, the winner of that contract may not give the multi-million dollar donation reach arounds to multitudes of Democratic campaigns.

I think a large part of it is because this isn't about "justice", this is about an agenda. Why isn't the narrative about prosecution instead of defunding? Because the GOP isn't interested in justice. They are interested about stopping abortion. Do you think if another organization was getting the grants the outcry from the right would stop?

 

[Sand]

I think another thing is that Democrats have a very strong "everyone deserves a second chance especially if they are on my side" mentality and sometimes this causes Democrats to make very poor decisions. Sometimes you just have to give someone the boot the very first time they screw up. Some things don't deserve a second chance.

Frankly i'm flummoxed on th stubborn defense of PP and the assertion by so many democrats that PP is the only possible provider of these services. I guarantee that if the govt. put out a request for bid on grants.gov for a half billion dollars they would get lots of responses. Lots.

But, then again, the winner of that contract may not give the multi-million dollar donation reach arounds to multitudes of Democratic campaigns.

I think a large part of it is because this isn't about "justice", this is about an agenda. Why isn't the narrative about prosecution instead of defunding? Because the GOP isn't interested in justice. They are interested about stopping abortion. Do you think if another organization was getting the grants the outcry from the right would stop?

As far as prosecution I think you'll hear a lot more about that part of things after this latest video. On tape she lays out in detail how they are adjusting abortions to keep as much viable, sellable tissue there to be harvested. That is clearly illegal. Prior to this they claim that they're just covering expenses with fetal tissue sales. Accounting is magic and I'm sure they can show this somehow - I don't think that was prosecutable.

And I'll throw this out there. The first GOP candidate to say that Democrats are "getting donation reach arounds" will get my vote.

 

[Amused to Death]

I think another thing is that Democrats have a very strong "everyone deserves a second chance especially if they are on my side" mentality and sometimes this causes Democrats to make very poor decisions. Sometimes you just have to give someone the boot the very first time they screw up. Some things don't deserve a second chance.

Frankly i'm flummoxed on th stubborn defense of PP and the assertion by so many democrats that PP is the only possible provider of these services. I guarantee that if the govt. put out a request for bid on grants.gov for a half billion dollars they would get lots of responses. Lots.

But, then again, the winner of that contract may not give the multi-million dollar donation reach arounds to multitudes of Democratic campaigns.

I think a large part of it is because this isn't about "justice", this is about an agenda. Why isn't the narrative about prosecution instead of defunding? Because the GOP isn't interested in justice. They are interested about stopping abortion. Do you think if another organization was getting the grants the outcry from the right would stop?

As far as prosecution I think you'll hear a lot more about that part of things after this latest video. On tape she lays out in detail how they are adjusting abortions to keep as much viable, sellable tissue there to be harvested. That is clearly illegal. Prior to this they claim that they're just covering expenses with fetal tissue sales. Accounting is magic and I'm sure they can show this somehow - I don't think that was prosecutable.

And I'll throw this out there. The first GOP candidate to say that Democrats are "getting donation reach arounds" will get my vote.

You danced around my question - why defund? Just prosecute and move on.

 

[cubd8]

After seeing some of these video's, are Democrat's pushing for an investigation (at the very least)?

 

[Sand]

I think another thing is that Democrats have a very strong "everyone deserves a second chance especially if they are on my side" mentality and sometimes this causes Democrats to make very poor decisions. Sometimes you just have to give someone the boot the very first time they screw up. Some things don't deserve a second chance.

Frankly i'm flummoxed on th stubborn defense of PP and the assertion by so many democrats that PP is the only possible provider of these services. I guarantee that if the govt. put out a request for bid on grants.gov for a half billion dollars they would get lots of responses. Lots.

But, then again, the winner of that contract may not give the multi-million dollar donation reach arounds to multitudes of Democratic campaigns.

I think a large part of it is because this isn't about "justice", this is about an agenda. Why isn't the narrative about prosecution instead of defunding? Because the GOP isn't interested in justice. They are interested about stopping abortion. Do you think if another organization was getting the grants the outcry from the right would stop?

As far as prosecution I think you'll hear a lot more about that part of things after this latest video. On tape she lays out in detail how they are adjusting abortions to keep as much viable, sellable tissue there to be harvested. That is clearly illegal. Prior to this they claim that they're just covering expenses with fetal tissue sales. Accounting is magic and I'm sure they can show this somehow - I don't think that was prosecutable.

And I'll throw this out there. The first GOP candidate to say that Democrats are "getting donation reach arounds" will get my vote.

You danced around my question - why defund? Just prosecute and move on.

Why reward a company that has a culture of detestable, illegal actions with half a billion dollars of support? Prosecuting the company or a few executives won't achieve squat as far as company culture.

I'd think both would be appropriate.

 

[tommyboy]

I think another thing is that Democrats have a very strong "everyone deserves a second chance especially if they are on my side" mentality and sometimes this causes Democrats to make very poor decisions. Sometimes you just have to give someone the boot the very first time they screw up. Some things don't deserve a second chance.

Frankly i'm flummoxed on th stubborn defense of PP and the assertion by so many democrats that PP is the only possible provider of these services. I guarantee that if the govt. put out a request for bid on grants.gov for a half billion dollars they would get lots of responses. Lots.

But, then again, the winner of that contract may not give the multi-million dollar donation reach arounds to multitudes of Democratic campaigns.

I think a large part of it is because this isn't about "justice", this is about an agenda. Why isn't the narrative about prosecution instead of defunding? Because the GOP isn't interested in justice. They are interested about stopping abortion. Do you think if another organization was getting the grants the outcry from the right would stop?

As far as prosecution I think you'll hear a lot more about that part of things after this latest video. On tape she lays out in detail how they are adjusting abortions to keep as much viable, sellable tissue there to be harvested. That is clearly illegal. Prior to this they claim that they're just covering expenses with fetal tissue sales. Accounting is magic and I'm sure they can show this somehow - I don't think that was prosecutable.

And I'll throw this out there. The first GOP candidate to say that Democrats are "getting donation reach arounds" will get my vote.

You danced around my question - why defund? Just prosecute and move on.

Do both

 

[spreagle]

Can someone explain why Democrats double down on their favorite people/institutions when they get caught doing something wrong ("I'm donating 200 to PP now rather than my usual 100") but Republicans tend to walk away from their people/institutions when they get caught doing something wrong? Is it because Democrats instinctively circle the waguns and Republicans instinctivley give people the boot? Is it because Republicans have some sort of a moral baseline to give people/institutions a thumbs up or thumbs down, and Democrats don't have any way of measuring such a thing?

because republicans (conservatives) usually end up ashamed of their position after someone applies logic to their arguments pertaining to many social issues (see gay marriage, transgender acceptance, religion etc.).

they'll never admit this, and this is rather blunt but you know you're all thinking the same thing.

I'm quite firm in my anti gay marriage position, it makes absolutely no sense from a historical, religious or constitutional perspective and I don't see liberal "logic" arguments ever changing my view there. Transgender acceptance, sure go ahead and do it, but I won't like it, and don't make me pay for it ... religion ... I applied logic myself to that one when I left the parents house and have not had anything to do with religion since then. This was a tough decision but as an engineer who needs to make decisions based on facts and logic it needed to be made. No room for faith in engineering*. Not all of us conservative need to be lectured to by democrats to arrive at the right decision.

I was actually in the "don't care" camp regarding abortion until about age 25 when I started thinking about it.

* I actually saw a van with "Faith Technologies" embossed on the side on the ride home from up north today. WTF. Thats like a rocket company calling themselves "Faith Rocket Services" or a birth control company calling themselves " Faith Contraceptive Services". Some words just dont go together.

 

[Fennis]

its just more crony capitalism, and both sides do it, a lot. the difference i guess is they're in teh business of ripping babies apart and selling the organs and limbs. But hey, if you want a whole baby we can do that too! I need a lamborghini.

Weren't you in this thread earlier pretending you were pro choice?

 

[Amused to Death]

I think another thing is that Democrats have a very strong "everyone deserves a second chance especially if they are on my side" mentality and sometimes this causes Democrats to make very poor decisions. Sometimes you just have to give someone the boot the very first time they screw up. Some things don't deserve a second chance.

Frankly i'm flummoxed on th stubborn defense of PP and the assertion by so many democrats that PP is the only possible provider of these services. I guarantee that if the govt. put out a request for bid on grants.gov for a half billion dollars they would get lots of responses. Lots.

But, then again, the winner of that contract may not give the multi-million dollar donation reach arounds to multitudes of Democratic campaigns.

I think a large part of it is because this isn't about "justice", this is about an agenda. Why isn't the narrative about prosecution instead of defunding? Because the GOP isn't interested in justice. They are interested about stopping abortion. Do you think if another organization was getting the grants the outcry from the right would stop?

As far as prosecution I think you'll hear a lot more about that part of things after this latest video. On tape she lays out in detail how they are adjusting abortions to keep as much viable, sellable tissue there to be harvested. That is clearly illegal. Prior to this they claim that they're just covering expenses with fetal tissue sales. Accounting is magic and I'm sure they can show this somehow - I don't think that was prosecutable.

And I'll throw this out there. The first GOP candidate to say that Democrats are "getting donation reach arounds" will get my vote.

You danced around my question - why defund? Just prosecute and move on.

Why reward a company that has a culture of detestable, illegal actions with half a billion dollars of support? Prosecuting the company or a few executives won't achieve squat as far as company culture.

I'd think both would be appropriate.

Was there evidence of illegal activity before the edited and leaked videos? And there are investigations in progress, so why the push to defund before they are complete?

 

[Sand]

Was there evidence of illegal activity before the edited and leaked videos? And there are investigations in progress, so why the push to defund before they are complete?

Not that I know of and the push to defund now due to the visceral reaction of a huge number of Americans to (IMO) pretty horrific and illegal actions.

 

[Amused to Death]

Was there evidence of illegal activity before the edited and leaked videos? And there are investigations in progress, so why the push to defund before they are complete?

Not that I know of and the push to defund now due to the visceral reaction of a huge number of Americans to (IMO) pretty horrific and illegal actions.

So prosecute the guilty, if the investigations warrant it and let PP operate within the laws of the Nation. Otherwise, they're just pushing an agenda. Which is what this about anyway. I'm all for guilty people being punished and I'm also for keeping PP operating within the law. Unfortunately, there are those mainly on the right that do not agree with the law and are being obstructionists rather that legally changing the law.

 

[Amused to Death]

I won't vouch for it's accuracy, but pretty interesting if correct:

"I think most Americans don't want their tax dollars going to this," presidential candidate Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., a co-sponsor of the bill to defund Planned Parenthood, told CNN. "When something is so morally repugnant to so many people, why should tax dollars go to this?"

Just one problem: This isn't about fetal tissue or even abortion at all.

Not a single dollar of federal money pays for elective abortions at Planned Parenthood (or anywhere else). While Planned Parenthood does provide abortion services at some of its clinics (again, never paid for with federal dollars), more than 90 percent of the services the organization renders are things like Pap smears, birth control prescriptions, breast exams, sexual health education, and treatment and testing for sexually transmitted infections, including HIV. Across the United States, 2.7 million patients visit a Planned Parenthood clinic every year. One in five American women has gone to Planned Parenthood for health care (this writer included). Unsurprisingly, a 2012 poll showed that Americans overwhelmingly oppose defunding Planned Parenthood.

Planned Parenthood also serves some of the poorest and most vulnerable women in America. The majority of their federal funding comes in the form of Medicaid reimbursements, and nearly 80 percent of Planned Parenthood patients live on incomes 150 percent below the federal poverty line. About half of Planned Parenthood's patients receive care through funding under Title X, the federal program dedicated to funding family planning — and that, again, does not fund elective abortion services.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

FTR:

I'm totally for abortion but I'm real uncomfortable when it comes to women having choices.