Home > Eureka California > Planned Parenthood to rally at courthouse Friday

Planned Parenthood to rally at courthouse Friday

The never-ending Republican war on abortion rights is casting a wide net this week by going after federal funding for Planned Parenthood.

Abortions account for only a small percentage of services provided by Planned Parenthood, but the GOP loves unborn zygotes sooo much that non-wealthy people outside the womb can be cast aside as collateral damage.  Health services — like early cancer detection — are only for the financially privileged, apparently.

[From Six Rivers Planned Parenthood]

This past week the US House of Representatives has taken steps to eliminate all federal funding for vital reproductive health services including birth control, std testing & treatment, life saving cancer screenings and abortion care – with a very specific attack on Planned Parenthood.

At a time like this, people NEED access to the health services & education that allow them to control their body and plan their family. Planned Parenthood is one of the nation’s leading providers of this care.

WE’RE SHOCKED AND OUTRAGED! Let’s send a message that Humboldt County cares about these issues and that we will not be silent!

JOIN US for a Rally this Friday, February 25th at 4:30 pm at the Eureka Court House, 825 5th Street, Eureka.

We will have signs and information for you.
This is WAY too important to sit by.
Thank you for your support!

  1. huufc
    February 24, 2011 at 10:55 am

    The federal debt is over 14 trillion dollars, the defcit this year is over 1.6 trillion dollars. Cutting has to start somewhere. Defunding planned parenhood, NPR, PBS are good places to start.

  2. Anonymous
    February 24, 2011 at 11:00 am

    fuuhc u, huufc.

  3. tra
    February 24, 2011 at 11:08 am

    huufc,

    Have you considered the possibility that defunding Planned Parenthood will result in more unwanted pregnancies and more unadressed women’s health issues, and that in the long run these things will ultimately cost a lot more than the funding currently allocated to Planned Parenthood? Or is “what happens next” not a question that you consider as you think about policy options?

  4. Anonymous
    February 24, 2011 at 11:10 am

    Aren’t you glad your mother didn’t abort you Tra? What if it had been as simple & easy & free like today?

  5. tra
    February 24, 2011 at 11:16 am

    And I wonder if those who oppose Planned Parenthood simply because it provides some abortion services even realize that without the family planning / contraception services provided by PP, there would be a lot more unplanned and unwelcome pregnancies, and therefore a lot more abortions.

    I guess in their fantasy world, they’d just outlaw all abortions, too. Of course that isn’t going to happen, but even if it did, many women would just end up getting illegal (and dangerous) “back-alley” abortions.

    But it seems like the anti-abortion purists are happy to ignore that little fact, and continue to campaign against PP, despite the fact that PP probably helps prevent more unwanted pregnancies (and therefore helps prevent more abortions) than any other organization on the planet.

  6. tra
    February 24, 2011 at 11:27 am

    One indication of just how radical and potentially dangerous some of these anti-abortion folks are is this bill, just introduced in the Georgia legislature:

    State Rep. Bobby Franklin of Georgia introduced a bill in his state last week that, if enacted, would require proof that a miscarriage occurred naturally. If a woman can’t prove that her miscarriage–or spontaneous abortion–occurred without intervention, she could face felony charges.

    http://thinkprogress.org/2011/02/23/bobby-franklin-miscarriage-naturally/

    That’s right, any woman who has just gone through the trauma of a miscarriage will now have another worry — she will have to prove that the miscarriage was naturally-ocuring, and if she can’t prove that, then she could face felony charges. Hey, that sounds fair and reasonable, right? (Note: if you answered “yes” to that question, you may be an idiot, a right-wing zealot, or probably both).

  7. Born Already
    February 24, 2011 at 11:34 am

    Whoa, tra. You are asking far too much of the “prolife”, pro war, pro assault weapons hypocrites. You are expecting them to think. To use reason and facts. They have demonstrated their inability to do think and unwillingness to be honest.

    Consider this. War causes death of innocent people. War kills children, women, and — OMG -war kills even the unborn. Therefore, federal money spent on war is paying for abortions.

    Strange, isn’t it? Not a whisper of objection about these federally funded abortions from “prolife” hypocrites.

  8. tra
    February 24, 2011 at 11:34 am

    One source I read says that something like 15-20% of pregnancies end in miscarriages. That would mean a whole lot of “investigations” in Georgia.

    Next up, let’s require women to prove that they are not witches, and if they can’t prove that we’ll burn them at the stake. What? That’s been done before? Huh.

  9. High Finanze
    February 24, 2011 at 11:44 am

    You liberals just don’t get it, do you?

    I feel so sorry for you and your socialist fantasies.

    Swarms of poor children are EXACTLY what sent all of your jobs to Mexico, then China, and now Vietnam. Intel and Microsoft just spent their bailout dollars in Vietnam on a state-of-the-art, dust-free component factory 5-football fields long, they will train thousands of Vietnamese…a nation where half the population is under 15 years old.

    This facility would have fit on the Balloon Tract, and our young residents trained by now if you’d just listened to the republicans.

    Get with the program!

  10. tra
    February 24, 2011 at 11:47 am

    Did you post that comment on the wrong thread, HiFi? Because I’m not getting the connection.

  11. Born Already
    February 24, 2011 at 11:58 am

    tra, that was sarcasm. the name of the poster is Finanze, not Finance.

  12. tra
    February 24, 2011 at 12:25 pm

    D’oh!

  13. February 24, 2011 at 12:44 pm

    This is the same argument playing out in Libya right now. Conservative fundamentalists’ war on American working and poor will soon bring the same battle to Eureka streets. The Federal Debt is a red herring – phony issue to justify the war. At least some of the Arab peoples got things figured out and a few in Wisconsin people. So far, so good.

  14. huufc
    February 24, 2011 at 1:14 pm

    Hello! I’m talking about federal funding of planned parenthood, the same federal govnenment that is broke, the same federal government that 43 cents on the dollar is borrowed, the same federal government that is 14 trillion dollars in debt.

    Add to my list of cuts WIC, Department of Education, YCC, Americorps, Peace Corps.

    Oops, I meant the taxpayers all along.

  15. tra
    February 24, 2011 at 1:29 pm

    So, again, if we cut federal funding to Planned Parenthood, which provides contraception and a whole range of women’s health services, the result will be more unplanned and unwanted pregnancies, and more women with health problems that are not detected and addressed in a timely manner (when treatment is both more effective, and less costly).

    If we “save” federal dollars by cutting the PP funding, but then end up paying more taxpayer dollars (federal, state, and local) to pay for increased welfare and social service and health costs that result from the cutoff of PP funding, how are we any better off? Answer: We’re not.

    Face it: The financial argument against PP funding just doesn’t add up. With all the health services that PP provides, including early detection and treatment of women’s health problems, and the preventative approach of contraception, they save the country a whole lot more money than they cost us.

    So this is really about abortion, not about money. Yet, as I mentioned above, PP’s family planning and contraception services probably prevent more unwanted pregnancies (and therefore prevent more abortions) than anybody else.

    So my question is: If you slash funding for Planned Parenthood, and as a result of the decreased access to family planning and contraception the number of abortions sought and performed actually increases, is that really going to be considered a “win” for the anti-abortion movement?

  16. Anonymous
    February 24, 2011 at 2:12 pm

    “Born Already” said a mouthful. Spread the word far and wide! Say No! to hypocrites spreading lies about Planned Parenthood while selling us on war in every generation!

  17. Bolithio
    February 24, 2011 at 2:43 pm

    Wait isn’t like 60% of discretionary spending for defense and military? Until “conservatives” start talking about cutting that down significantly, they will continue to be full of shit.

  18. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    February 24, 2011 at 3:13 pm

    Abortions, aside from rape, generally SHOULD NOT OCCUR, but for not the unplanned parents’ selfishnesses being bailed-out.

    At some point, parents and their children will have to grow-up with nothing so that the children will learn through experience what nothing is and what nothing was caused by (The Parents). If parents can’t fend for themself when WILLINGLY creating a new life, then parents should not expect to be bailed-out. Abortion sucks in most cases, but since I am a man, well, all I can say is EDUCATION BEFORE GETTING KNOCKED-UP – no need to enslave your child because of greed to create another tax break. Then again though, how many parents (especially females) just want babies no matter what….Ya know, like right now damn it, not yesterday. It is a social disease to just have babies without responsibility or proper representation ….. and we all know how many moms like to use the system of taxpayers to subsidize their poor life decisions (less rape victims).

    Jeffrey Lytle
    McKinleyville – 5th District

  19. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    February 24, 2011 at 3:20 pm

    The news in the past couple weeks exposed a Planned Parenthood under-cover investigation where patients were alleged to be either, raped, molested and abused. I’ll need to find the story again. There are good PPer’s trying to help – I think I know a few – but, even they say education is key. They do what they do to be of help, which is good, but at some point, reality needs to get back in focus. Reality is all that which stems from the origination or point of beginning that the problems of a PP patient created. At some point, there will be no way out for the stupid, selfish and greedy types who just want babies no matter what, even when there exists no financial possibility to raise healthily that child. The family unit is damaged big-time and the runaway train is about headed off the tracks. Being a single parent usually suggests FAILURE!

    JL

  20. Not A Native
    February 24, 2011 at 4:57 pm

    H., I hereby decree the two previous posts are classics and merit being placed on permanent exhibition in the HumCo hall of shame. Compared to them, anything I’ve ever found when turning over a rock was stunningly beautiful and smelled lovely.

  21. February 24, 2011 at 5:12 pm

    “Defunding planned parenhood, NPR, PBS are good places to start.”

    It’s scary to think that there are people as backward as huufc.

  22. High Finance
    February 24, 2011 at 5:22 pm

    Bolithio 2.43pm, you have fallen for the propaganda.

    60% of the DISCRETIONARY budget is not for the military but for “security”. $843 billion out of $1.39 Trillion. This includes a large chunk for Homeland Security.

    But even that figure is misleading. The porkulus bill of Obama’s was almost equal to the entire security budget. But it was reclassified to MANDATORY spending. Military spending last year using more truthful numbers would be closer to 25%.

    And since you people are so shallow you only think in stereotypes like the asshole at 11.44am. You assume all conservatives are opposed to all spending on Planned Parenthood. I don’t.

    However, the deficit should have you all trembling in fear of the destruction it will wrack on our children’s generation. We have to cut and cut big and cut now. Planned Parenthood should not be exempt from the pain.

  23. February 24, 2011 at 5:37 pm

    “Military spending last year using more truthful numbers would be closer to 25%.”

    HiFi, the Republicans were the ones who streamlined the earmark process during the Bush years, so the GOP is even “porkier” than the Democratic party, because they’ve made corruption so efficient. Oh, and your military budget figure is an invention.

  24. Mitch
    February 24, 2011 at 5:45 pm

    Hi Fi,

    Yes, the deficit should have us all, to quote you, “trembling in fear of the destruction it will wreak on our children’s generation.” That’s why the Bush tax cuts should have been repealed.

    If the wealthy were still being taxed at the rates in effect prior to President Reagan’s disastrous trickle-down experiment, there would be no deficit problem.

    If Mr. Bush had insisted on repealing the tax cuts for our wealthiest citizens when he decided the country needed to send our poor off to fight the Iraq war on his behalf, the deficit problem would be much less serious.

    huufc,

    The Corporation for Public Broadcasting received about $0.47 billion last year. The military budget was around $700 billion. So if you cut the Corporation for Public Broadcasting completely, leaving it with zero dollars, you’ve done the equivalent of shaving about 1/1400th of the military budget.

    To get some sense of comparison, if a $42,000 salary represents the military budget, eliminating the Corporation for Public Broadcasting would save $30. Reducing the military budget by just 1% would be equivalent to saving $420.

    But if you cut all federal funding to Planned Parenthood and don’t take into account any increased costs that result that’s equivalent to saving about 1/2000 of the military budget, or 0.05% (one twentieth of a percent).

    Cut both Planned Parenthood and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting to zero, and you’ve done the equivalent of saving about a tenth of a percent of the military budget.

  25. WTF?
    February 24, 2011 at 6:38 pm

    Government handouts for planned parenthood.
    Getting knocked up is a privilege; not a right for government intervention!
    JL you gotta right. Let the parents to the preaching or the teaching…..
    ….if that fails have the local service groups launch curbside condom vending machines designated for convenience stores, liquor stores, motels, hotels, casinos, shopping centers, malls & let them retrieve the profits.
    Drive in theaters were a popular issue in the 50’s, 60’s & the 70’s. In those days it was nothing more than a couple of isolated teacher/student relationships of the close encounters of the second time! …or in the back of the gym or the teachers’ study hall room from retention.

  26. sex education?
    February 24, 2011 at 7:06 pm

    WTF?, get back on your meds and go to bed.

    Try to forget all those trysts in the backseat and in the study hall. How many were there, WTF? How many offspring from your study hall affairs?

  27. Anonymous
    February 24, 2011 at 7:21 pm

    I have a headache from rolling my eyes over High Finance & Hunchman’s posts. It will be impossible for me to every take either one of you seriously after the complete ignorance and lack of understanding of the issues.

    Come on down to tomrorrow’s gathering at 4:30 and feel free to kiss my ass.

  28. SNaFU
    February 24, 2011 at 7:24 pm

    WTF forgot to mention vans & mini vans were great breeding grounds and they still are.
    Blame the auto industries.

  29. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    February 24, 2011 at 8:08 pm

    For the haters (this is just one issue of many services provided) – I am merely pointing out that if society continues down its irresponsible path with regard to bailing-out individuals who create another life (willingly/mistake/ whatever/less rape) carelessly with blind greeds, then we are effectually breeding more parentless or semi-parentless lives who will continue to be treated like political tools. Yes, it is true that many good-hearted people give their worthiness to the cause, but I am not so sure this is a cause to promote so openly. Sure, there are benefits, as well as, impacts, but the general idea is to get people to THINK AGAIN and make wiser choices. This is education; and, some of those good-hearted local folks who help out with this cause have already belabored their points too, as have I. It comes down to education and we all know the family unit is broken and that is a main reason why there are more dysfunctional parents looking for help because they themself were to greedy and did not want to think about others, including a newborn, but could only care about the services that deadbeat adults who irresponsibly have hildren can take advantaqge of.

    Budget Cuts FORCE PP to take a hit too, just like other beneficiaries of such fundings. Government agencies only care in so much that it can be involved when it wants too – kinda like child welfare services and their weird protocols; family court biases and prejudices against non-family units, etc… Society is prejudiced and biased in favor of women and children first because it makes for juicy political funding and continued lobbying. Reality is that those who benefit from the stupid are gaining some sort of lifestyle advantage. Hey, the more people who default on their individual responsibilities and liabilities, the more government agencies can claim them as dependencies to further expand government’s outreaching power.

    Anyhow, Good Luck ladies and gents. BTW, of the PP patient list,

    “What percentage is female and what percentage is male?” Just curious.

    JL

  30. advice for the henchman
    February 24, 2011 at 8:24 pm

    “Society is prejudiced and biased in favor of women and children first”…

    Jeff, write less, think more.

  31. Walt
    February 24, 2011 at 8:37 pm

    “For the haters. . .” Are the political opposites of “haters” “lovers”? Whom do they love and hate?

  32. skippy
    February 24, 2011 at 8:38 pm

    “…Herrmann Spetzler, the chief executive officer for Open Door Community Health Centers, said cuts to SRPP services would also affect Open Door, which may have to shoulder some of the burden…”

    More of today’s Times-Standard article by the diligent Donna Tam, “Six Rivers Planned Parenthood protesting proposed elimination of federal funds” can
    be found here.

    also… “We are writing to alert Times-Standard readers about the most aggressive assault on women’s health in American history…”

    The rest of this Times-Standard in-depth Guest Opinion by Clergy for Choice, “Assault on Women’s Health Cloaked as Deficit Reduction” can be read here for readers, too.

  33. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    February 24, 2011 at 9:17 pm

    8:24 pm – tainted, it is. Do men receive in like kind services? Not to be sexist, but it is just fact that can’t be denied. Is it this way because so many men have unbreakable pride and don’t seek the services? Again, not exactly sure. Yet, what I am sure of is education by the parents and not the tax payers. Often in life, if ya had wanted a better life for your child, you would not have gone and had a child until you knew you could properly raise that child on your own.

    Sure, it is old fashioned thinking, but hey, it is SAFE thinking. Now, what to do about the after-the fact situation…..rape (take care of it); mistake (child only, parent zilch)…..notice how I don’t say axe the whole darned thing????? Yet, to promote by advertising is to recruit – it is a psychological tactic by any entity wanting to recruit a customer/patient base through learned responses (like how a movie can teach a person how to get away with something in a copycat pattern, etc.).

    The sick people are those who learn the information about the service; then, design their life partially or wholely to manipulate and abuse that service knowing that their personal lifestyle choices will be subsidized by another, even if claiming that it is not the greatest lifestyle to have such few choices (yet why complain when you slept in your own bed, now make it)- but being taken care of while doing nothing must not be too bad if more and more people are living that way with children.

    Hmmmm, society being set-up by hormones and desires by such open flauntingnesses of sexualisms? Just a thought with regard to the de-evolution of the marriage structured family unit. Test tube babies next because it is too much trouble for one parent to live with another parent after creating another life.

    Walt: true, lovers included whomever that may be, just like haters.

    JL

  34. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    February 24, 2011 at 9:20 pm

    “American Society” 8:24 pm – I did not think, yup.

    JL

  35. February 24, 2011 at 10:13 pm

    “Jeff, write less, think more.”

    Sorry Anonymous, but the Henchman is too modest to accept sound advice.

  36. anonimeece
    February 25, 2011 at 8:39 am

    PP gets $75 million/year and that money is not directly used for abortions. It is used for family planning, administrative cost, getting into schools and teaching kids how thye can prevent pregnancy.

    Now here are some examples of Outrageous government spending that puts this $7m5il in perspective.

    I don’t imagine that anyone will read through this entire list, but the link is:

    http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2009/10/50-examples-of-government-waste

    The source…..The Heritage Foundation, not exactly a liberal think tank.

    Let’s face it folks, it’s not about the money, it’s a religious doctrine that is being pushed here. These guys probably spend 75 million on toilet paper annually.

    1. The federal government made at least $72 billion in improper payments in 2008.[1]

    2. Washington spends $92 billion on corporate welfare (excluding TARP) versus $71 billion on homeland security.[2]

    3. Washington spends $25 billion annually maintaining unused or vacant federal properties.[3]

    4. Government auditors spent the past five years examining all federal programs and found that 22 percent of them — costing taxpayers a total of $123 billion annually — fail to show any positive impact on the populations they serve.[4]

    5. The Congressional Budget Office published a “Budget Options” series identifying more than $100 billion in potential spending cuts.[5]

    6. Examples from multiple Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports of wasteful duplication include 342 economic development programs; 130 programs serving the disabled; 130 programs serving at-risk youth; 90 early childhood development programs; 75 programs funding international education, cultural, and training exchange activities; and 72 safe water programs.[6]

    7. Washington will spend $2.6 million training Chinese prostitutes to drink more responsibly on the job.[7]

    8. A GAO audit classified nearly half of all purchases on government credit cards as improper, fraudulent, or embezzled. Examples of taxpayer-funded purchases include gambling, mortgage payments, liquor, lingerie, iPods, Xboxes, jewelry, Internet dating services, and Hawaiian vacations. In one extraordinary example, the Postal Service spent $13,500 on one dinner at a Ruth’s Chris Steakhouse, including “over 200 appetizers and over $3,000 of alcohol, including more than 40 bottles of wine costing more than $50 each and brand-name liquor such as Courvoisier, Belvedere and Johnny Walker Gold.” The 81 guests consumed an average of $167 worth of food and drink apiece.[8]

    9. Federal agencies are delinquent on nearly 20 percent of employee travel charge cards, costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars annually.[9]

    10. The Securities and Exchange Commission spent $3.9 million rearranging desks and offices at its Washington, D.C., headquarters.[10]

    11. The Pentagon recently spent $998,798 shipping two 19-cent washers from South Carolina to Texas and $293,451 sending an 89-cent washer from South Carolina to Florida.[11]

    12. Over half of all farm subsidies go to commercial farms, which report average household incomes of $200,000.[12]

    13. Health care fraud is estimated to cost taxpayers more than $60 billion annually.[13]

    14. A GAO audit found that 95 Pentagon weapons systems suffered from a combined $295 billion in cost overruns.[14]

    15. The refusal of many federal employees to fly coach costs taxpayers $146 million annually in flight upgrades.[15]

    16. Washington will spend $126 million in 2009 to enhance the Kennedy family legacy in Massachusetts. Additionally, Senator John Kerry (D-MA) diverted $20 million from the 2010 defense budget to subsidize a new Edward M. Kennedy Institute.[16]

    17. Federal investigators have launched more than 20 criminal fraud investigations related to the TARP financial bailout.[17]

    18. Despite trillion-dollar deficits, last year’s 10,160 earmarks included $200,000 for a tattoo removal program in Mission Hills, California; $190,000 for the Buffalo Bill Historical Center in Cody, Wyoming; and $75,000 for the Totally Teen Zone in Albany, Georgia.[18]

    19. The federal government owns more than 50,000 vacant homes.[19]

    20. The Federal Communications Commission spent $350,000 to sponsor NASCAR driver David Gilliland.[20]

    21. Members of Congress have spent hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars supplying their offices with popcorn machines, plasma televisions, DVD equipment, ionic air fresheners, camcorders, and signature machines — plus $24,730 leasing a Lexus, $1,434 on a digital camera, and $84,000 on personalized calendars.[21]

    22. More than $13 billion in Iraq aid has been classified as wasted or stolen. Another $7.8 billion cannot be accounted for.[22]

    23. Fraud related to Hurricane Katrina spending is estimated to top $2 billion. In addition, debit cards provided to hurricane victims were used to pay for Caribbean vacations, NFL tickets, Dom Perignon champagne, “Girls Gone Wild” videos, and at least one sex change operation.[23]

    24. Auditors discovered that 900,000 of the 2.5 million recipients of emergency Katrina assistance provided false names, addresses, or Social Security numbers or submitted multiple applications.[24]

    25. Congress recently gave Alaska Airlines $500,000 to paint a Chinook salmon on a Boeing 737.[25]

    26. The Transportation Department will subsidize up to $2,000 per flight for direct flights between Washington, D.C., and the small hometown of Congressman Hal Rogers (R-KY) — but only on Monday mornings and Friday evenings, when lawmakers, staff, and lobbyists usually fly. Rogers is a member of the Appropriations Committee, which writes the Transportation Department’s budget.[26]

    27. Washington has spent $3 billion re-sanding beaches — even as this new sand washes back into the ocean.[27]

    28. A Department of Agriculture report concedes that much of the $2.5 billion in “stimulus” funding for broadband Internet will be wasted.[28]

    29. The Defense Department wasted $100 million on unused flight tickets and never bothered to collect refunds even though the tickets were refundable.[29]

    30. Washington spends $60,000 per hour shooting Air Force One photo-ops in front of national landmarks.[30]

    31. Over one recent 18-month period, Air Force and Navy personnel used government-funded credit cards to charge at least $102,400 on admission to entertainment events, $48,250 on gambling, $69,300 on cruises, and $73,950 on exotic dance clubs and prostitutes.[31]

    32. Members of Congress are set to pay themselves $90 million to increase their franked mailings for the 2010 election year.[32]

    33. Congress has ignored efficiency recommendations from the Department of Health and Human Services that would save $9 billion annually.[33]

    34. Taxpayers are funding paintings of high-ranking government officials at a cost of up to $50,000 apiece.[34]

    35. The state of Washington sent $1 food stamp checks to 250,000 households in order to raise state caseload figures and trigger $43 million in additional federal funds.[35]

    36. Suburban families are receiving large farm subsidies for the grass in their backyards — subsidies that many of these families never requested and do not want. [36]

    37. Congress appropriated $20 million for “commemoration of success” celebrations related to Iraq and Afghanistan.[37]

    38. Homeland Security employee purchases include 63-inch plasma TVs, iPods, and $230 for a beer brewing kit.[38]

    39. Two drafting errors in the 2005 Deficit Reduction Act resulted in a $2 billion taxpayer cost.[39]

    40. North Ridgeville, Ohio, received $800,000 in “stimulus” funds for a project that its mayor described as “a long way from the top priority.”[40]

    41. The National Institutes of Health spends $1.3 million per month to rent a lab that it cannot use.[41]

    42. Congress recently spent $2.4 billion on 10 new jets that the Pentagon insists it does not need and will not use.[42]

    43. Lawmakers diverted $13 million from Hurricane Katrina relief spending to build a museum celebrating the Army Corps of Engineers — the agency partially responsible for the failed levees that flooded New Orleans.[43]

    44. Medicare officials recently mailed $50 million in erroneous refunds to 230,000 Medicare recipients.[44]

    45. Audits showed $34 billion worth of Department of Homeland Security contracts contained significant waste, fraud, and abuse.[45]

    46. Washington recently spent $1.8 million to help build a private golf course in Atlanta, Georgia.[46]

    47. The Advanced Technology Program spends $150 million annually subsidizing private businesses; 40 percent of this funding goes to Fortune 500 companies.[47]

    48. Congressional investigators were able to receive $55,000 in federal student loan funding for a fictional college they created to test the Department of Education.[48]

    49. The Conservation Reserve program pays farmers $2 billion annually not to farm their land.[49]

    50. The Commerce Department has lost 1,137 computers since 2001, many containing Americans’ personal data.[50]

  37. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    February 25, 2011 at 9:02 am

    Good citations anonimeece.

    It really helps to show the appropriations battles that are looming big time where so many people got used to the gravy train of funding programs/projects and will now have to do with less or without.

    Afterall, too many leaches in the pond of political fundings. It should not be a religious versus non-religious issue, but it appears it partly is like anonimeece suggested. Funding is a MAJOR part of the issue too lest we forget. Question is what is worse – denying fundings or continue increasing debt? Either way, PP’s goals get slaughtered because there is no money left, period. It is in the pockets of a limited few now, probably in an offshore account. More Federal Printing Press Funny Money ain’t gonna do squat to repair the damage this country is faced with. Lots of programs will get defunded…it is looming.

    JL

  38. High Finance
    February 25, 2011 at 10:55 am

    Yes Joel, 5.37pm, the Reps used to be every bit as bad as the Dems in regards to “earmarks”.

    The Tea Partiers cause some of the old-line Reps to lose their jobs & the rest of the Reps have seen the error of their ways. So to speak.

  39. High Finanze
    February 25, 2011 at 12:20 pm

    High Finance says:
    February 24, 2011 at 5:22 pm

    And since you people are so shallow you only think in stereotypes like the asshole at 11.44am. You assume all conservatives are opposed to all spending on Planned Parenthood. I don’t.

    *************************************************

    Wow, more confirmation from our resident curmudgeon, conceding that it is indeed “conservative” to pay upfront for family planning, including abortion, (same logic behind civilization’s timeless lessons in providing education, shelter, health care, food, and jobs to the poor), rather than paying DEARLY later on.

    “Stereotypes”?

    Welcome to the fold “comrade-asshole”.

    (You’re a laugh-riot!).

  40. You People
    February 25, 2011 at 12:43 pm

    Don’t be lulled by HiFi’s flirtation with logic.

    Retaining respect within his right-wing martini-socials requires unwavering indignity towards “those people”.

  41. February 25, 2011 at 1:57 pm

    “…the rest of the Reps have seen the error of their ways.”

    Where’s the evidence?

  42. High Finance
    February 25, 2011 at 3:12 pm

    So Heraldo, how long do you let the asshole at 12.20pm get away with posing as me ?

    Or is it OK to start posing as other people here ?

  43. anonimeece
    February 25, 2011 at 3:44 pm

    I have no problem telling the two of you apart.

    Hi Finanze is the one who didn’t just call someone as asshole.

  44. High Fiving
    February 25, 2011 at 4:00 pm

    Here’S my impersonation of HiFi………………………………………………………………………..zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

  45. tra
    February 25, 2011 at 4:55 pm

    What’s the big deal about impersonating people?

    Surely you jest?

    I don’t know that impersonation is a “big deal,” but it’s certainly both annoying and childish.

    The person who gets impersonated ends up being expected to answer for things they didn’t actually write, or they have to constantly chime in with “that wasn’t really me posting at 3:42” or whatever.

    So I do think impersonation, even of pseudonymous commenters, is more of an attempt to harrass than an attempt to communicate.

  46. The bottom line...
    February 25, 2011 at 6:34 pm

    The bottom line is that taxpayers should not be paying for the services that PP offers. It’s a fact that by using taxpayer dollars to fund PP, taxpayers are essentially paying for people to have abortions. It pisses you liberals off when you have to pay for wars. Well, it pisses me off when my money is used to kill innocent babies.

  47. Plain Jane
    February 25, 2011 at 6:41 pm

    “The bottom line” sounds Kristen Schaal from the Daily Show.

  48. February 25, 2011 at 6:59 pm
    What’s the big deal about impersonating people?

    Surely you jest?

    That wasn’t me, that was an impersonation. Impostors will be deleted.

    The comment at 12:20 is not an impostor, just someone that lacks originality. The spelling and avatar make it obvious that it’s not High Finance.

  49. Kale Estanoche
    February 25, 2011 at 8:59 pm

    I was proud to be at such a positive rally in support of Planned Parenthood tonight. It was truly amazing to see how many folks rallied to be out, and encouraging with all the support from those passing by.

  50. Anonymous
    February 25, 2011 at 11:21 pm

    Heraldo says:
    February 25, 2011 at 6:59 pm
    “The comment at 12:20 is not an impostor, just someone that lacks originality. The spelling and avatar make it obvious that it’s not High Finance”.

    Little about 12:20 lacks originality, even if that were a physical possibility.

    It was funny, at others expense, stuck between the chuckles Hi-Hypocrite enjoys insulting and stereotyping his opponents…and then complaining when others do the same.

    Always a pleasure to see ’em squirm in their own sad, dark world.

    3:44 said it best.

  51. High Finance
    February 26, 2011 at 8:02 am

    Sad little people like the one (s?) at 12.20pm, 4pm and 11.21pm are threaten by their superiors when disagreed with.

    Stuck with their inability to counter the arguments, they can only respond with personal attacks. Nothing to do about it here but to feel sorry for them.

  52. 06em
    February 26, 2011 at 8:09 am

    their superiors

    Nobody does elitist swine like good old Hifi. ;-)

  53. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    February 26, 2011 at 9:01 am

    <blockquote?Kale Estanoche says:
    February 25, 2011 at 8:59 pm
    I was proud to be at such a positive rally in support of Planned Parenthood tonight. It was truly amazing to see how many folks rallied to be out, and encouraging with all the support from those passing by.

    Response: Sounds like it went well. All those supporters are possible donators too. Did you have a sign-up list like those who seek signatures on ballot initiatives. Let us see all the supporters put their own money and donated time where their support is? (Ya see, Americans are funny because of all the nice words and promises that are conjectured, but when it gets down to it, most Americans are looking for someone else to “deal with it” – talk about a mental bait and switch. Americans have become prone to “looking good” as compared to “being good”. TRUTH!

    So again, what percentage of patients is female versus male? Also, if these services are so needed, then what about homeless services since it seems men are mostly at the bottom of that political issue?

    Just exclaiming, why discriminate based upon future tax collection possibilities?

    It is because that is what effctually is going on – discrimination against certain types of people using fundings as a mechanism to invent such prejudices because gubbamint knows it needs MORE HUMANOIDS TO PAY TAXES AS PART OF the expanding pyramid schemes using increased populations to offset created debt by being added to the sum total of overall taxpayers, manipulatively in an increasing manner, in order to pay for run-away costs based upon financial scams, mega corporate greeds, even small business greeds too, to be fair, that are connected to the over-all greeds of an over-expansive Federal and State structure which is now lobbying to transfer “in-like- kind” the very same scam type actions to the local level. This is what gubbamint does – it gets caught on something, then transfers its liability and responsibility to another jurisdiction, usually lower…..until there exists nothing lower except the people revolting because life’s comforts no longer exist as they once did.

    This funding battle over budget appropriations is going to be HUGE.

    Education should be the goal, not bail-a-nation just to bail-out poor decison-makers and their liabilities. Time for those family unit planners (the actual parents) to “suck it up” and become responsible again by paying 100% for their own mistakes, even if it means years of docked paychecks (if the parents won’t work because they want to scam the system, then they can fend for themself 100%). To create a life is probably the single biggest decision any two companions will have, besides taking a life. The responsibilities and liabilities SHALL FALL FULLY UPON the parents. If the parents are worthless, then take the child away, foster home that child, put a life long lien on those parents until they fully repay back the costs that society would end up subsidizing for the selfish greeds of baby-makers.

    In the end though, indigent and irresponsible people who are baby-makers must be treated as if they are either victims, either stupid or just plain greedy criminals, period. Why? Because it is stupid or criminal to create a life that which the actual parents won’t respect before, during and after the dirty deed! As far as victims to rape, molestations, other crimes etc… – these people deserve the help by taxpayers imo since the Federal Government is responsible for curbing domestic violence as the U.S. Constitution has written within.

    The hard part, and I will agree, is separating the victims of crimes that produces a life from the rest of the irresponsible baby-makers.

    This is a touchy subject to discuss, in’t it?

    Oh, Thank You too “BIGTIME” to ALL the parents, for richer or poorer, who do not force their responsibilities and liabilities upon others in society. Without your support, America would have already been “done-in”. Good thing decent Americans are realizing all the problems created by undecent people, finally. This country is now in a social war with itself….who woulda thunk?

    JL

  54. skippy
    February 26, 2011 at 11:09 am

    “Nearly 200 people gathered outside the Humboldt County Courthouse on Friday to support Planned Parenthood, despite low temperatures and hail. Dozens held signs and chanted at the rally… Across the street, about 20 Humboldt Pro-Life members lined up with signs to protest…”

    More of todays Times-Standard article on the rally, “Planned Parenthood Supporters, Protesters Undeterred by Cold”,
    written by the very busy and diligent Donna Tam can readily be found here.

  55. Anonymous
    February 26, 2011 at 11:14 am

    Hilarious!

    And we’re still waiting for this dimwit’s trademark “comrade” response to Joel’s question @ 1:57!”WHERE”S THE EVIDENCE”?? How many times did this silly little man call “Mitch” names before he finally answered the question, “how will we care for the destitute”?

    High Finance says:
    February 26, 2011 at 8:02 am

    Sad little people like the one (s?) at 12.20pm, 4pm and 11.21pm are threaten by their superiors when disagreed with.

    Stuck with their inability to counter the arguments, they can only respond with personal attacks. Nothing to do about it here but to feel sorry for them.

    Clever writing is no substitute for intelligence or “superiority”, whatever that means….

  56. Annonymous
    February 26, 2011 at 12:03 pm

    The difference being that they have NOTHING else to offer.

    But you knew that.

  57. Auntie Arkley
    February 26, 2011 at 12:10 pm

    Abort Republicans. They are trying to destroy our world.

  58. February 26, 2011 at 3:18 pm

    There are a lot of Republicans who support Planned Parenthood, I just wish that they were as loud as the anti-choice nuts who seem to be in the driver’s seat in the GOP.

  59. Born Already
    February 26, 2011 at 3:57 pm

    Questions for The Bottom Line, who said: “Well, it pisses me off when my money is used to kill innocent babies.”

    What are you doing to prevent the killing of innocent babies by our military?

    Where have you directed your protest against this killing?

    Have you asked for defunding of the military to prevent more killing of innocent babies? If not, why not?

  60. High Finance
    February 26, 2011 at 4:14 pm

    Actually Joel, you’re right. But it is more than just “a lot”, I would guess a sizable majority do.

    And if you remove the topic of abortions, the vast majority of Republicans support the rest of what Planned Parenthood does.

  61. The bottom line...
    February 26, 2011 at 4:36 pm

    Born Already – you just proved my point. Thanks!

    I have no problem with the services (other than abortion) that PP provides. I just don’t want to be FORCED to pay for them. What part of this don’t you understand? If what PP does is SO important, then they should be able to easily find PRIVATE funding.

  62. robash141
    February 26, 2011 at 4:48 pm

    I think a huge part of it about cheap labor. That’s something the extreme corporate righties love even more than war. It is in their interest ,they believe,to have Millions of desperately poor women with no chance of social advancement having lots and millions of desperately poor children. Moms Kids and Dads with no alternative but to work long grueling shifts in Uncle HiFi’s sweatshop for peon wages.

    How else can you explain the right wingers over wrought concern for the rights of the unborn with their almost equally fanatic opposition to many of the institutions that might allow that child to have a decent life.

    So when HiFi get’s upset about aborted fetuses it’s because the kid never had a chance to get worked to death the in the sweatshop.

  63. Owltotem
    February 26, 2011 at 5:24 pm

    Hi-Fi does not run a sweat shop, no way, he is an introvert, one man show, maybe maybe he has an office assistant but not subordinate employees. He probably has a a service commitment on a board of some sort to emphasis his stature of someone important in the community. He also probably belongs to a service organization, the chamber likely This reinforces his belief that profit is good and do-gooders are fools. I doubt if Hi-Fi is an Ingomarmalade. He is too fiscally conservative to justify that expense. More likely he hob nobs with those guys at Rotary, but a check book rotary not a hands dirty rotary.

    He is a neo-con businessman for sure (but owl thinks hi fi has a soft spot, owl thinks inside hi fi cares like the grinch with his heart 5 sizes too small)

  64. tra
    February 26, 2011 at 5:33 pm

    Unfortunately the era of the moderate Republican seens to be coming to an end, as the extremists purge the moderates and the wingnuts who remain become the new mainstream of the party.

    Nevertheless, I think Joel and HiFi are right that there are still quite a few Republicans out there (at least at the rank-and-file level) who do support PP and the vital services PP provides. Which raises the question of why these allegedly pro-contraception, pro-family planning Republican leaders and elected officials have largely remained silent as the anti-abortion zealots in their party push to de-fund Planned Parenthood?

    Perhaps these moderates are afraid of the hard-right, fundamentalist base of the Republican Party, for whom Planned Parenthood basically represents evil personified. Unfortunately for these moderate Republicans, their silence only reduces their ranks further, as moderates flee the formerly respectible party of Lincoln and Eisenhower and instead register as Decline-to-State.

  65. robash141
    February 26, 2011 at 5:34 pm

    Well he could be just a stockholder in some company that exploits kiddie labor.

  66. Born Already
    February 26, 2011 at 5:45 pm

    The Bottom Line, your first post made several points. You believe that:

    1. Taxpayers should not be paying for the services that PP offers.

    2. Dollars to fund PP are essentially paying for abortions.

    3. It pisses you liberals off when you have to pay for wars.

    4. It pisses me off when my money is used to kill innocent babies.

    Then I asked you to clarify your position by asking you to think about, and then answer, several questions:

    1. What are you doing to prevent the killing of innocent babies by our military?

    2. Where have you directed your protest against this killing?

    3. Have you asked for defunding of the military to prevent more killing of innocent babies? If not, why not?

    Which of your points did I “prove” by asking these questions?

    To continue this dialogue, you are obliged to respond to the relevant question posed to you. Then, we might discuss your concept of private funding for activities opposed by taxpayers.

    Food for thought, should you choose to engage in that sometimes difficult and often discouraged activity:

    What might a privately funded military be like?

  67. The bottom line...
    February 26, 2011 at 7:50 pm

    Gosh, Born Already, I love your condescending attitude.

    I reject your premise that our military kills innocent babies deliberately. There is no doubt that abortion does so.

    Why do you think it’s OK to kill babies but not go to war to protect the interests of our country or our allies? Where would we be if we hadn’t fought the civil war? What would Europe look like if we hadn’t fought Germany? Not all wars are justified. Some abortions are, as in the case of rape or incest.

  68. Anonymous
    February 26, 2011 at 8:09 pm

    It’s a personal, traumatic decision between a doctor and patient, but then, women have had their lives dictated to them for centuries.

    As written earlier, merely returning a nation’s investments in its human resources and social safety net, would lessen abortions dramatically.

  69. tra
    February 26, 2011 at 8:31 pm

    Just because our politicians and generals refer to the innocent babies they kill in war as “collateral damage” and just because they cluck their tongues about how “regrettable” it all is, well that doesn’t make the killing unintentional, and it doesn’t result in babies that are any less dead.

    When our military (acting under the orders of our civilian politicians) bombs or sends in a missile or armed drone to “target” some enemy in the midst of a populated, civilian area, yes, they fully realize that as a result of that action, innocent bystanders, including babies, children, and pregnant women will very likely be killed along with (hopefully) the actual “target” of the attack. To say that you know someone will very likely be killed if you take a certain action, and then you go ahead and take that action anyway, well it’s just ridiculous to then say that you didn’t “intend” for them to be killed.

    So you can argue whether or not the desire to take out the “target” is worth the intentional killing of innocent bystanders, and I suppose if the target was Hitler or Pol Pot or Osama Bin Laden, I could be persuaded to agree. Problematic as it is morally and ethically, at least from a pragmatic standpoint it can be argued that targeting a bloodthirsty dictator, genocidal maniac or terrorist mastermind will save many thousands more lives in the long run.

    But let’s at least be honest about what we’re talking about: The loss of the bystander’s lives (“collateral damage”)is predictable, expected, and often the likely numbers of such causalties are actually calculated in advance. So when they go ahead and launch the attacks, yes they certainly do “intend” to kill innocent babies. They may also deeply regret doing it, but that’s little consolation to the dead baby or its parents.

  70. Born Already
    February 26, 2011 at 8:37 pm

    Bottom Line, I do not condescend, I only attempt to engage honestly.

    Isn’t the real “bottom line” the killing of innocents, deliberately or inadvertently (collateral damage), and who should be forced to pay for that killing?

    I agree with you that not all wars are justified. One could argue that the most recent wars are the most unjustified, but that is another debate.

    In the spirit of peace, I ask you to reflect on your rationalization for the killing of innocents in cases of…

    “war to protect the interests of our country or our allies”

  71. High Finance
    February 26, 2011 at 8:39 pm

    Owltotem, you’re guilty of projection.

    Tra, the pro-life movement is dominated by zealots and there is no reasoning, no middle ground with a lot of them. Sort of like trying to reason with the Jefferson group.

    Tra, terrorists just like the Nazis before them hide behind civilians. Your attitude would assure that they would always win. Far more lifes would be lost if we always backed away. I do not consider that we killed the innocents, the terrorists & Nazis did by deliberatly putting them in harm’s way.

  72. tra
    February 26, 2011 at 8:47 pm

    And if Planned Parenthood was shut down entirely, tomorrow, women would still be getting raped, incest would still be taking place, desperately poor women and young teens would still be getting pregnant, and women in those and other circumstances would still be getting just as many abortions — but many more of these women would be forced into the shadows to seek unsafe, unsanitary “back-alley” abortions.

    And as I’ve pointed out above (with no response, I notice) shutting down Planned Parenthood would drastically reduce access to family planning and contraceptive services, resulting in MORE unwanted pregnancies, and therefore, in the long run, many MORE abortions.

    If that were to happen, would the shuttering of Planned Parenthood still be considered a “victory” by the anti-abortion movement? And if so, what does that say about the moral compasses of those leading that movement, and of those following those leaders?

    I know it’s hard for the anti-choicers to face these facts, but the truth is that Planned Parenthood is probably responsible for preventing more unwanted pregnancies, and thereby preventing more abortions, than any other organization in this country.

    So, be careful what you wish for, because if you get it you may not like the results.

  73. Anonymous
    February 26, 2011 at 8:59 pm

    How do you feel about condoms, bottom line? Do they kill innocent babies too?

  74. tra
    February 26, 2011 at 9:09 pm

    the pro-life movement is dominated by zealots and there is no reasoning, no middle ground with a lot of them. Sort of like trying to reason with the Jefferson group.

    Well, I agree with the first sentence, and I’m glad to see that there are still at least a few mainstream conservatives out there who recognize the mindless zealotry of the anti-abortion extremists for what it is. But I think it’s a pretty big exaggeration to compare the Jefferson school project proponents to the anti-abortion zealots. Yes, the Jefferson project proponents hold strong opinions, but it’s not like they are trying to exert control over the bodies and private lives of every person on the planet, in service to their own particular religious dogma. At least to me, that’s on a whole different level.

    terrorists just like the Nazis before them hide behind civilians. Your attitude would assure that they would always win. Far more lifes would be lost if we always backed away.

    Perhaps you didn’t read my comment all the way through? I specifically stated that sometimes killing innocent bystanders may be justified by the need to stop even more killing by a bloodthirsty dictator, genocidal maniac or terrorist mastermind (and of course by extension, those who protect and serve those sick fucks). My point was that it’s a corruption of language and reason to say that the killing of those innocent bystanders is “unintentional.” Yes, it’s intentional, and yes, in some cases it’s justified.

    I do not consider that we killed the innocents, the terrorists & Nazis did by deliberatly putting them in harm’s way.

    I understand that argument, and I agree that the bloodthirsty dictator, genocidal maniac or terrorist mastermind is certainly culpable. Another, more blunt, and I think more honest way of summarizing the situation would be to say “yes, we killed innocent people, but we had to or else more innocent people would have been killed.”

    But when we “sanitize” the language to take ourselves out of the equation altogether, I think that can start to make it a bit too easy to support the killing of innocents through “collateral damage” even when the “target” may be less than crucial, the certainly that the target is even present may be less than robust, and the risk to the innocent bystanders may be quite high.

    So, again, my point wasn’t to make a case for pure pacifism (as my earlier post should have made clear), it was to make the case for being intellectually and morally honest about the life-and-death tradeoffs that we’re talking about, in the hope that this kind of honest and blunt recognition of the horrors of killing innocent bystanders, even for justifiable reasons, will make us think twice before overusing that almost god-like power.

  75. Walt
    February 26, 2011 at 9:09 pm

    “Far more lifes would be lost if we always backed away.” I knew a woman who used to sing “If I knew you were comin’ I’d have backed away, backed away, backed away. . .”

  76. Anonymous
    February 26, 2011 at 11:18 pm

    HiFi’s is the logic of the tyrant, the slave owner, another delusional sycophant for empire parroting the same irrational justifications of exploitation used for millennium.

    What do these nations have in common:

    Congo, Korea, Indonesia, Iran, El Salvador, China, Cuba, Grenada, Kuwait, Cambodia, Vietnam, Laos, Lebanon, Peru, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, Guatemala, Iraq, Nicaragua, Panama, Bosnia, Afghanistan??

    Yes, over half their populations are under the age of 18, their people are mostly impoverished, we were told there were “terrorists” among them, and each one was bombed by the U.S. since WWII without declarations of war.

    Civilians always represent the largest number of casualties in war…and in nations of youths it means LOTS of children, over and over and over again.

    What’s astounding is how many fools think they can keep peddling such crap; “lives saved by war”, “Chinese and Mexican children need the work”, or, “we treat our slaves good”…(Ronald Reagan is responsible for the murder of countless children who had the misfortune of living amid various land reform movements the U.S. couldn’t abide by)

    Terrorists indeed.

    “When a poor and ignorant people possess something desired by an enlightened and powerful one, it is to be offered up peaceably”.

    Mark Twain on the U.S. invasion of the Philippines, and 1 million civilian casualties.

    Hi-Liar thinks he’s the first one to wrap the exploitation, destruction and tyranny of empire in reasonable sounding rhetoric.

    It’s wrong, pathetic, and sad, because it sews the seeds of its own ultimate destruction.

    There are no historical exceptions preceding us.

  77. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    February 27, 2011 at 12:10 am

    I dunno who thought it was a good idea to compare war and PP, but moving on…….,

    here is some 2009 PP stats/#’s

    JL

  78. Auntie Arkley
    February 27, 2011 at 12:03 pm

    In the Bible, you weren’t a human until you took “the breath of life” (the first breath after exiting the uterus).

  79. Uncle Duncle
    February 27, 2011 at 12:13 pm

    The Bible. Right. Convenient to use it now.

  80. Mitch
    February 27, 2011 at 12:25 pm

    12:03,

    So you’re saying the Pope’s been lying all this time?

  81. Born Already
    February 27, 2011 at 12:52 pm

    Henchman said: “I dunno who thought it was a good idea to compare war and PP, but moving on…….,”

    I noted that the people who want to eliminate funding for PP are the same people who support funding for war, which also kills born and unborn innocent lives.

    Why they support killing innocents “to protect the interests of our country or our allies” (as the Bottom Line put it), but are vehemently against abortions is the fundamental question.

    I asked Bottom Line to consider this question, but he has not checked back in with a response.

    Another hypocrisy from the “pro lifers” is their support for assault weapons, which result in thousands of preventable deaths every year.

    And still another hypocrisy – they support the death sentence (state funded killing), which also results in killing of innocent people.

    Will anyone provide a cogent response to this question?

  82. Disgusted
    February 27, 2011 at 5:50 pm

    Imagine that, if the right-wing were equally offended by the perpetual, illegal U.S. wars of empire, costing millions of innocent lives, would they be targeting U.S. soldiers and generals for execution as they have the abortion doctors?

  83. The bottom line...
    February 27, 2011 at 7:31 pm

    A baby is the result of a conscious choice of two people to have sex. They know that pregnancy is a possibility yet choose not to do anything to prevent it – like use a condom. (Of course, accidents happen sometimes, too) Thus, the result is a baby. I believe a baby is a human when it is conceived. Others believe differently. Regardless, the baby is aborted and pays the price for irresponsibility. Sometimes abortion is justified such as in the case of rape or incest. I would prefer not to fund this activity as a taxpayer.

    War is something that takes place between two or more countries to protect their interests. Innocent people die. I would prefer that countries didn’t go to war. But at times, it just can’t be avoided. In fact, I don’t believe the US could opt out of war altogether even if they wanted to.

    The death penalty is the result of a conscious disregard of the law. Sometimes innocent people get convicted. I am not sure where I stand on the death penalty. Sometimes the crime is so heinous it seems like a no brainer. Other times, I wonder if the state should be seeking the ultimate justice.

    It’s clear that we come at these issues from completely different sides of the aisle. So, let me flip this…how can you justify abortion, yet be against war and the death penalty?

  84. tra
    February 27, 2011 at 7:58 pm

    That’s pretty easy. Many of us just don’t believe that a fertilized egg or a blastocyst or an embryo have the same rights as a fully-formed human being. It’s a fundamental difference of opinion, and not likely to be resolved anytime soon.

    I respect people’s rights to their own beliefs on this question, but I will not acquiesce to their desire to impose those beliefs on everyone else. That’s the essence of the pro-choice position. Not pro-abortion by any means, just pro-choice.

  85. Born Already
    February 27, 2011 at 9:03 pm

    “War is something that takes place between two or more countries to protect their interests”

    In many cases the interests of our country are not decided by the citizens, by the people who pay for the wars. We must pay (even if we object, as some object to PP); we pay with our tax money, the lives and limbs of our troops. Families pay the long-term toll of trauma and mental illness that linger and destroy lives. Our society pays the cost of these broken lives.

    The interests of this country are decided by the oil industry, by the military-industrial complex that Eisenhower warned us against. For their profits, you rationalize the death of innocents.

    It is a conscious choice to accept war without end, without doing anything, or enough, to prevent war. Until I see a change in the attitude you express, Bottom Line, I can not believe your true motives for eliminating Planned Parenthood.

    Real bottom line? The issue is not saving lives. The real issue is sex. If a woman has sex, she must pay. If a woman controls her own body and reproduction, she has a level of independence from men, and from the religious dogma that subjugates women.

    Imagine a world where all the professed “pro life” activists committed themselves to actually protecting all life. Not just embryos, but already born people. Not just people, but all life on earth. Now that would be paradise.

  86. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    February 27, 2011 at 9:07 pm

    Born Already says:
    February 27, 2011 at 12:52 pm
    Henchman said: “I dunno who thought it was a good idea to compare war and PP, but moving on…….,”

    I noted that the people who want to eliminate funding for PP are the same people who support funding for war, which also kills born and unborn innocent lives.

    Why they support killing innocents “to protect the interests of our country or our allies” (as the Bottom Line put it), but are vehemently against abortions is the fundamental question.

    I asked Bottom Line to consider this question, but he has not checked back in with a response.

    Another hypocrisy from the “pro lifers” is their support for assault weapons, which result in thousands of preventable deaths every year.

    And still another hypocrisy – they support the death sentence (state funded killing), which also results in killing of innocent people.

    Will anyone provide a cogent response to this question?

    Response: O.k., let me gmo….

    Paragraph one – somehow, I am failing to believe that all the people that support one, support the other. Maybe it is me and my inability to see children as tools for both PP or the military complex and its casualties. I certainly feel PP needs to be defunded like many other program fundings, organizational fundings, etc…. I feel that donations are what society must rely upon until our tax dollars can get properly appropriated and not wasted – no money left. So, for PP, if not now, it will be worse later due to debt and total social break-down due to debt.

    2nd Paragraph – your right about hypocracy. I am still in thought on that which means you posed a very, very good question or thought to THINK ABOUT. I am not so sure support is linked to intentional; yet, a casualty kept as quiet as possible in order to write-off, diminish or devalue a life taken does show a de-humanizing side of a person.

    Assault weapons – unless the manufacturer has created a faulty product, it still is a human being which finger fracks the trigger no matter what type of ammo is used. So, the only connection is that evil people will do evil things, sinister things. I can’t imagine any firearm so intellectually advanced or gifted that it could bio-mechanically operate itself and pull someone’s finger for them. I know, a bit of lippy sarcasim.

    Death Sentence – Hmmm, many people do and don’t support the DP. I don’t personally. Rather, an island out in the middle of nowwhere is a better option AFTER freeing the innocent citizens imprisoned for political reasons which are much broader in scope and spectrum than most Americans could ever realise.

    JL

  87. Disgusted
    February 28, 2011 at 2:12 pm

    I concur with TRA.

    It’s a HUGE, unscientific, illogical, fantastical and wholly spiritual leap of faith to place species-centric values on a human embryo as if the fertilized chicken embryo I ate for breakfast is all that different.

    We are living in the sixth largest extinction event in life’s history on Earth, the result of a lifestyle of over-consumption and over-population, when there’s not a “right” to either!

    Unless, of course, you consider a bacteria destroying its host part of “God’s Plan” for humans to destroy our host too, in which case, no one can dispute it…and that’s the point, there’s no debate…it’s pure religious fantasy!

    I too, am deeply offended by my tax dollars spent killing millions of children, (who already knew their names), for this nation’s (“unavoidable”?) perpetual wars to seize the natural resources and child-labor of poorer nations.

    I feel your pain.

    Join me and Mother Earth in calling for a $2,000 annual tax deduction for NOT having a child, this will lessen some of the grief we all share.

  88. tra
    February 28, 2011 at 4:26 pm

    Of course it would be great if they could come up with a version of the GPU that all 5 Supervisors could agree to, but that does seem pretty unlikely.

    So the discussion often posits a 3-vote majority of Lovelace, Clendenan and Smith for a compromise plan that leans more toward Option A, or Smith, Sundberg and Bass for a compromise that leans more toward Option C.

    But I’d be interested in some discussion of what kind of compromise might be able to attract the votes of Clendenan, Smith, and Sundberg. Lovelace and Bass both strike me as more or less representing the two extremes in the GPU debate. Not that those voices shouldn’t be heard, but if the idea is to get a plan that the majority of Humboldt residents can live with, it might be the “middle three” of Clendenan, Smith, and Sundberg that can get us the closest to that goal.

  89. tra
    February 28, 2011 at 4:26 pm

    Oops, wrong thread.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s