Romney: Let's get rid of Planned Parenthood!

[BigSkyBob]

I think the real point is that it hasn't been an issue. Had Gingrich, Santorum or Perry stated in no uncertain terms that they intended defund planned parenthood the outcry would have been deafening. Liberal Democrats would have denounced it as evil. Establishment Republicans would have lectured them about how suburban women were going to leave the party in droves. Romney's stance draws no real attention because noone takes it seriously. Everyone one knows it is just boob bait for fundamentalist bubbas. Sure, Romney is lying in a particularly egregious fashion, but, of what concern is it if he is lying to those people?

[BigSkyBob]

Not everyone who is pro-life is anti-Planned Parenthood. Lots of women, including many pro-life women, for what is the bulk of their work: women's health.

BTW Latino's are not that different than the rest of the country on social issues and as noted, Romney's anti-immigrant talk is much more salient to them.

Getting back to my point that he seems to think there is no price to pay with independents with this hard right pandering to the base.

The interesting observation is that few people whom are "pro-choice" are anti-PP. World PP endorsed China's one-child policies that denies Chinese couples the right to have as many children as they choose. And, that policy is enforced with series of draconian policies such as forced abortion. It would seem any organization committed to "choice" would reject coercion.

[BigSkyBob]

PP often provides financial assistance for abortion. And their infrastructure is funded through the government, which they use in providing and referring abortions.  Their basic mission is in the name, and its not breast cancer screening. There's no reason breast cancer screenings can be provided by an organization with a more appropriate mission. Whether PP's human butchery is legal or not is irrelevant.

FALSE

3% of the services provided by Planned Parenthood are abortions, 3%. 

Well, if that is only "3%," then, PP would only have to abandon "3%" of their business to other "providers" to ensure an uninterupted stream of state and federal funding. Seem PP/WP isn't willing to abandon that "3%" because it considers that "3%" critical to its mission. Well, so do pro-life folk.

[BigSkyBob]

PP often provides financial assistance for abortion. And their infrastructure is funded through the government, which they use in providing and referring abortions.  Their basic mission is in the name, and its not breast cancer screening. There's no reason breast cancer screenings can be provided by an organization with a more appropriate mission. Whether PP's human butchery is legal or not is irrelevant.

FALSE

3% of the services provided by Planned Parenthood are abortions, 3%.  NONE of the government $$$ goes to abortions.  These are the facts and its shown in the financials.  I know Fox News and the talking heads in the GOP (often one in the same) try to get you to believe otherwise, but its false.

Probably been listening to Jon Kyl too much.

Planned Parenthood, as well-informed people know, is strictly a women's healthcare provider that works in multiple fields.

Whether you consider abortion "women's healthcare" or the killing of children before they are born depends mainly on your point of view.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Some "healthcare providers" perform abortions, and others don't. To suggest that pro-life folk don't make that distinction is pathetic.

[BigSkyBob]

Uh, if Planned Parenthood provides abortions, then any federal money going to them could be said to be going to abortions, since funding one of their services frees up other funds which can be spent on providing abortions.  Alternative example: if there's a Mafia-run soup kitchen and the city of Newark decides to subsidize it, then they're subsidizing the criminal activities of the Mafia because they're freeing up funds otherwise spent on the soup kitchen to be spent on criminal activities.  It seems that a lot of people are either unaware of this very basic economic concept (fungibility), or are being deliberately disingenuous.

Women and private insurance companies have to pay for the entire costs of the abortion and they are not backed by federal dollars the way Planed Parenthood's other services are.  Federally-subsidized abortion services are illegal and have been for many years.

And, pro-life folk are as much against medical insurance companies that fund abortion as they are against PP. The desire for a dead baby is simply not a "medical need."

[BigSkyBob]

PP often provides financial assistance for abortion. And their infrastructure is funded through the government, which they use in providing and referring abortions.  Their basic mission is in the name, and its not breast cancer screening. There's no reason breast cancer screenings can be provided by an organization with a more appropriate mission. Whether PP's human butchery is legal or not is irrelevant.

FALSE

3% of the services provided by Planned Parenthood are abortions, 3%.  NONE of the government $$$ goes to abortions.  These are the facts and its shown in the financials.  I know Fox News and the talking heads in the GOP (often one in the same) try to get you to believe otherwise, but its false.

Probably been listening to Jon Kyl too much.

Planned Parenthood, as well-informed people know, is strictly a women's healthcare provider that works in multiple fields.

Whether you consider abortion "women's healthcare" or the killing of children before they are born depends mainly on your point of view.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Some "healthcare providers" perform abortions, and others don't. To suggest that pro-life folk don't make that distinction is pathetic.

Uh, if Planned Parenthood provides abortions, then any federal money going to them could be said to be going to abortions, since funding one of their services frees up other funds which can be spent on providing abortions.  Alternative example: if there's a Mafia-run soup kitchen and the city of Newark decides to subsidize it, then they're subsidizing the criminal activities of the Mafia because they're freeing up funds otherwise spent on the soup kitchen to be spent on criminal activities.  It seems that a lot of people are either unaware of this very basic economic concept (fungibility), or are being deliberately disingenuous.

Women and private insurance companies have to pay for the entire costs of the abortion and they are not backed by federal dollars the way Planed Parenthood's other services are.  Federally-subsidized abortion services are illegal and have been for many years.

And, pro-life folk are as much against medical insurance companies that fund abortion as they are against PP. The desire for a dead baby is simply not a "medical need."

Not even going to respond to these.

Come back when you have real arguments instead of weasel words and emotional appeals.

I see ad hominem is all that you  have.

[BigSkyBob]

PP often provides financial assistance for abortion. And their infrastructure is funded through the government, which they use in providing and referring abortions.  Their basic mission is in the name, and its not breast cancer screening. There's no reason breast cancer screenings can be provided by an organization with a more appropriate mission. Whether PP's human butchery is legal or not is irrelevant.

FALSE

3% of the services provided by Planned Parenthood are abortions, 3%.  NONE of the government $$$ goes to abortions.  These are the facts and its shown in the financials.  I know Fox News and the talking heads in the GOP (often one in the same) try to get you to believe otherwise, but its false.

Probably been listening to Jon Kyl too much.

Planned Parenthood, as well-informed people know, is strictly a women's healthcare provider that works in multiple fields.

Whether you consider abortion "women's healthcare" or the killing of children before they are born depends mainly on your point of view.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Some "healthcare providers" perform abortions, and others don't. To suggest that pro-life folk don't make that distinction is pathetic.

Uh, if Planned Parenthood provides abortions, then any federal money going to them could be said to be going to abortions, since funding one of their services frees up other funds which can be spent on providing abortions.  Alternative example: if there's a Mafia-run soup kitchen and the city of Newark decides to subsidize it, then they're subsidizing the criminal activities of the Mafia because they're freeing up funds otherwise spent on the soup kitchen to be spent on criminal activities.  It seems that a lot of people are either unaware of this very basic economic concept (fungibility), or are being deliberately disingenuous.

Women and private insurance companies have to pay for the entire costs of the abortion and they are not backed by federal dollars the way Planed Parenthood's other services are.  Federally-subsidized abortion services are illegal and have been for many years.

And, pro-life folk are as much against medical insurance companies that fund abortion as they are against PP. The desire for a dead baby is simply not a "medical need."

Not even going to respond to these.

Come back when you have real arguments instead of weasel words and emotional appeals.

I see ad hominem is all that you  have.

I see snootiness is all you have, friend.

See, I don't respond to "arguments" when they're filled with senseless weasel words and emotional appeals that were clearly only posted with the intent of ticking people off or trolling in general.

But by all means, keep trolling.

Again, if ad hominem accusations are all that you have, you have nothing.

I don't have to call you a "troll" when I can simply point out that you are wrong.

[BigSkyBob]

PP often provides financial assistance for abortion. And their infrastructure is funded through the government, which they use in providing and referring abortions.  Their basic mission is in the name, and its not breast cancer screening. There's no reason breast cancer screenings can be provided by an organization with a more appropriate mission. Whether PP's human butchery is legal or not is irrelevant.

FALSE

3% of the services provided by Planned Parenthood are abortions, 3%.  NONE of the government $$$ goes to abortions.  These are the facts and its shown in the financials.  I know Fox News and the talking heads in the GOP (often one in the same) try to get you to believe otherwise, but its false.

Probably been listening to Jon Kyl too much.

Planned Parenthood, as well-informed people know, is strictly a women's healthcare provider that works in multiple fields.

Whether you consider abortion "women's healthcare" or the killing of children before they are born depends mainly on your point of view.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Some "healthcare providers" perform abortions, and others don't. To suggest that pro-life folk don't make that distinction is pathetic.

Uh, if Planned Parenthood provides abortions, then any federal money going to them could be said to be going to abortions, since funding one of their services frees up other funds which can be spent on providing abortions.  Alternative example: if there's a Mafia-run soup kitchen and the city of Newark decides to subsidize it, then they're subsidizing the criminal activities of the Mafia because they're freeing up funds otherwise spent on the soup kitchen to be spent on criminal activities.  It seems that a lot of people are either unaware of this very basic economic concept (fungibility), or are being deliberately disingenuous.

Women and private insurance companies have to pay for the entire costs of the abortion and they are not backed by federal dollars the way Planed Parenthood's other services are.  Federally-subsidized abortion services are illegal and have been for many years.

And, pro-life folk are as much against medical insurance companies that fund abortion as they are against PP. The desire for a dead baby is simply not a "medical need."

Not even going to respond to these.

Come back when you have real arguments instead of weasel words and emotional appeals.

I see ad hominem is all that you  have.

I see snootiness is all you have, friend.

See, I don't respond to "arguments" when they're filled with senseless weasel words and emotional appeals that were clearly only posted with the intent of ticking people off or trolling in general.

But by all means, keep trolling.

Again, if ad hominem accusations are all that you have, you have nothing.

I don't have to call you a "troll" when I can simply point out that you are wrong.

If tough guy talk is all you have for me, then tough guy talk is all I have for you.  It works both ways, see?

You don't seem to realize that I did point out that you were wrong, which simply isn't "tough guy talk."

When Robert Goodloe Harper said, "Millions for defense, but not one penny for tribute" he was taking a stand on principle. It didn't matter to him that settling the war might cost less than "3%" of prosecuting a war. If a school voucher program were passed there would be a principled opposition to the program from the left even if only "3%" of the students opted out of the public school system [and, they would go ballistic if private "religious" schools were covered.]

The simple truth is that PP is adamant about performing abortions because they see it as a matter of principle, while pro-life folks oppose PP because they take a principled stand against using their tax dollars to fund abortion. Whether abortion is 1% or 99% of PP's revenue, both sides would still take the same principled stand. I was right, and you were wrong.

[BigSkyBob]

Just because it supports a woman's access to abortion doesn't mean they're advocating for the procedure itself,

PP is performing abortions on a large scale.