If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Kos)   Not news: Conservatives hate Planned Parenthood. WTF: 51% of them oppose them for cancer screenings too   (dailykos.com) divider line 376
    More: Asinine, Planned Parenthood, cancer screenings, Komen, Daily Kos, Health Care, International, breast cancer screening, Greasy Grant, Viewing  
•       •       •

3678 clicks; posted to Politics » on 06 Feb 2012 at 6:44 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



376 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-02-06 02:01:14 PM
Sure, let's end the cancer screenings too. I'm sure conservatives won't mind when women go undiagnosed until a later stage, then appear in the ER for last minute cancer treatment that they probably can't pay for. Of course, proper screening could have detected it earlier, leading to less invasive/expensive treatment, but how dare we do that!
 
2012-02-06 02:07:43 PM
I'm only against trickle-down donation handling. It results in the original donation being pilfered away by each organization until the actual 'good' is just pennies on the dollar.
 
2012-02-06 02:08:16 PM
Judging by the primaries, I'm getting the feeling the real problem is with anything that utilizes the word "planned"
 
2012-02-06 02:10:05 PM
That question *had* to be framed differently to elicit that response, right?

Conservatives aren't that friggin' heartless, are they?
 
2012-02-06 02:15:02 PM

BunkyBrewman: That question *had* to be framed differently to elicit that response, right?

Conservatives aren't that friggin' heartless, are they?


I don't think so. I'm guessing a lot of them just automatically go into "no" mode when they hear Planned Parenthood. The question could have been "Do you agree with Planned Parenthood giving ice cream and puppies to orphaned children" and a bunch of them would still say "no."

But people on both side of the aisle find it easier to think that their political opponents are evil, so you're still going to hear this kind of thing.
 
2012-02-06 02:15:04 PM

BunkyBrewman: That question *had* to be framed differently to elicit that response, right?

Conservatives aren't that friggin' heartless, are they?


Ask them. (new window)
 
2012-02-06 02:17:32 PM
Is this the beginning of the death spiral of popular christian conservatism? They are getting pretty screechy, and they are no longer being heard by the party they stalked, bought and owned.
 
2012-02-06 02:18:00 PM
PP spends 97% of its budget on services other than abortion, including education and contraceptive services designed to prevent unplanned pregnancies and subsequent abortions.

Conservative just don't want women to have control of their own bodies. Been that way since forever.
 
2012-02-06 02:18:11 PM
I went to Planned Parenthood for a prostate cancer screening and they gave me 3 abortions instead.
 
2012-02-06 02:20:54 PM

BunkyBrewman: That question *had* to be framed differently to elicit that response, right?

Conservatives aren't that friggin' heartless, are they?


Scroll down the politics tab and look for the Rolling Stone article about the war against gay teens in Minnesota. That will answer your question.
 
2012-02-06 02:23:18 PM
Pro cancer is pro growth.
 
2012-02-06 02:26:24 PM

FloydA: BunkyBrewman: That question *had* to be framed differently to elicit that response, right?

Conservatives aren't that friggin' heartless, are they?

Ask them. (new window)


FloydA is right. Conservatives are just an angry mob at this point.

Their wacky, zany leaders and front runners aren't magical aliens that have come down to corrupt us. They are representative of the sh*theads who support them. And the reason the GOP hates it's own field this time around isn't because "OMG I can't believe Newt/Mitt did this, Bachmann said that, Perry said this", it's because the base is seeing its own reflection in the mirror and isn't happy that they don't have a candidate who can explain the base's bigotry and selfish tendencies in a way that makes them sound like good people.

They don't want a candidate who can fix the economy. Nor do they want one that will exercise reasonable foreign policy. Nor do they really want healthcare to be repaired. They want a person who can explain away the crowds absurd responses at the debates, who can bash gays, who can bash muslims, and who can do all of this while sounding like a wonderful hopeful individual. Because then that very base will have a leader who can feed them talking points that they can tell themselves, as opposed to seeing the field they have now and saying "Holy sh*t, do I sound like that when I talk?"
 
2012-02-06 02:27:08 PM

Aarontology: Pro cancer is pro growth.


[smart][funny]
 
2012-02-06 02:30:48 PM
I bet those numbers would be cut in half if they changed their name.
 
2012-02-06 02:36:25 PM
To be fair, I think the other non-abortion services they provide, don't matter to them. Not as long as abortions are performed - it taints the whole organization. Even if there's no outside funding for abortion.

So they're not de jure against cancer screenings. But by letting abortion taint their other services makes them de facto against cancer screenings.
 
2012-02-06 02:37:45 PM
Conservatives hate gender equality, women's rights, "women's lib", etc..
 
2012-02-06 02:40:14 PM

vernonFL: Conservatives hate gender equality, women's rights, "women's lib", etc..


You could have just stopped there.
 
2012-02-06 02:40:24 PM

Diogenes: To be fair, I think the other non-abortion services they provide, don't matter to them. Not as long as abortions are performed - it taints the whole organization. Even if there's no outside funding for abortion.

So they're not de jure against cancer screenings. But by letting abortion taint their other services makes them de facto against cancer screenings.


That's a lot of taint.
 
2012-02-06 02:40:41 PM
I am not sure if this is an expression of class conflict or Social Darwinism at work.

On the one hand callousness towards the needy to preserve one's own wealth, is a classic expression of class conflict. But outwardly engaging in a belligerent attitude to the detriment of health of the poor is a Social Darwinian construct.

Either way, it does not speak well for the GOP, their future, or the future of the country.
 
2012-02-06 02:42:33 PM

Code_Archeologist: I am not sure if this is an expression of class conflict or Social Darwinism at work.

On the one hand callousness towards the needy to preserve one's own wealth, is a classic expression of class conflict. But outwardly engaging in a belligerent attitude to the detriment of health of the poor is a Social Darwinian construct.

Either way, it does not speak well for the GOP, their future, or the future of the country.


For the rich it's class conflict, and I think most people, even if we disagree with it, understand that.

But most of the GOP base isn't rich. They're just . . . well . . .dicks.
 
2012-02-06 02:50:51 PM

BunkyBrewman: That question *had* to be framed differently to elicit that response, right?

Conservatives aren't that friggin' heartless, are they?


Oh wait, you're serious. Let me laugh even harder.
 
2012-02-06 02:52:03 PM
cache2.artprintimages.com

Aw Jeez, what is it with all you broads and your whining? Shuz up already, eh?
 
2012-02-06 02:52:39 PM

Eddie Adams from Torrance: I went to Planned Parenthood for a prostate cancer screening and they gave me 3 abortions instead.


Slut.
 
2012-02-06 02:53:04 PM
There are some things that I am kinda conservative on, but after seeing these hate filled assholes spewing their stupidity, I feel like a damn dirty hippie.

Peace
 
2012-02-06 02:55:28 PM

R.A.Danny: There are some things that I am kinda conservative on, but after seeing these hate filled assholes spewing their stupidity, I feel like a damn dirty hippie.

Peace


When one end of the spectrum is going off into outer space, the moderate position seems more extreme.
 
2012-02-06 02:59:59 PM

Diogenes: To be fair, I think the other non-abortion services they provide, don't matter to them. Not as long as abortions are performed - it taints the whole organization. Even if there's no outside funding for abortion.

So they're not de jure against cancer screenings. But by letting abortion taint their other services makes them de facto against cancer screenings.


I'd be more inclined to accept this as fact if they weren't 100% comfortable investing in companies that make surgical instruments used in abortion. Giving a tax break to the CEO of Baxter or HCA? It's just fiscal common sense. Helping a terrified 16-year-old girl with an incarcerated father and alcoholic mom figure out why she's bleeding much more than usual? No, because Jesus.

Money only becomes fungible when it's an expense, and core principles only are violated when writing checks, never when cashing them.

If planned parenthood opened up a side venture, a profitable chain of surgical centers offering tummy tucks and cheekbone augmentations, targeted at upper-income teens, the silence would be deafening, and Pope Benny himself would be ringing the bell at NYSE to publicize the IPO, with Romney on one side and Joel Osteen on the other.
 
2012-02-06 03:06:18 PM

MisterTweak: Diogenes: To be fair, I think the other non-abortion services they provide, don't matter to them. Not as long as abortions are performed - it taints the whole organization. Even if there's no outside funding for abortion.

So they're not de jure against cancer screenings. But by letting abortion taint their other services makes them de facto against cancer screenings.

I'd be more inclined to accept this as fact if they weren't 100% comfortable investing in companies that make surgical instruments used in abortion. Giving a tax break to the CEO of Baxter or HCA? It's just fiscal common sense. Helping a terrified 16-year-old girl with an incarcerated father and alcoholic mom figure out why she's bleeding much more than usual? No, because Jesus.

Money only becomes fungible when it's an expense, and core principles only are violated when writing checks, never when cashing them.

If planned parenthood opened up a side venture, a profitable chain of surgical centers offering tummy tucks and cheekbone augmentations, targeted at upper-income teens, the silence would be deafening, and Pope Benny himself would be ringing the bell at NYSE to publicize the IPO, with Romney on one side and Joel Osteen on the other.


I'm not disagreeing with you, but I have to say they're not the only ones that are guilty futile or hypocritical protests and/or boycotts, though. If they were so concerned about the safety of embryos then they should also be trying to ban smoking. Or support stronger regulations against poisoning our environment.
 
2012-02-06 03:06:48 PM

Diogenes: R.A.Danny: There are some things that I am kinda conservative on, but after seeing these hate filled assholes spewing their stupidity, I feel like a damn dirty hippie.

Peace

When one end of the spectrum is going off into outer space, the moderate position seems more extreme.


Were you being literal? Because, thanks to moon bases, you could be.
 
2012-02-06 03:07:34 PM

Diogenes: R.A.Danny: There are some things that I am kinda conservative on, but after seeing these hate filled assholes spewing their stupidity, I feel like a damn dirty hippie.

Peace

When one end of the spectrum is going off into outer space, the moderate position seems more extreme.


You're not kidding. I mean, I'd LOVE to be a rich capitalist pig, I really would, but my jaw drops on a daily basis reading the venom and stupidity coming out of these people's mouths. We can go on and on about how I feel that Obama did a good job on some things and a crap job on other things and how I don't always feel like he represents what I feel I need for my life, but that would be a very tame conversation. The Right has completely spun off the face of the planet though.
 
2012-02-06 03:08:04 PM
It's because all the conservative talk radio show hosts are working together to say that PP doesn't really do cancer screenings. People have been claiming it in the threads too. They're just turning another convenient lie into a talking point so people can let themselves believe it. I don't understand how so many people's ideology is just being lied to, but here we are.

The best thing about the Komen shenanigans is that it brought something that only fringe republicans were talking about into the main stream. Now that there is some sunlight on the issue, it is clearing a lot of this up. Republicans scatter like insects when you move their rock.
 
2012-02-06 03:12:10 PM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Judging by the primaries, I'm getting the feeling the real problem is with anything that utilizes the word "planned"


Planned Parenthood is only one syllable less than Planned Economy! Dirty Commie bastids!!!
 
2012-02-06 03:15:02 PM

Diogenes: I'm not disagreeing with you, but I have to say they're not the only ones that are guilty futile or hypocritical protests and/or boycotts, though. If they were so concerned about the safety of embryos then they should also be trying to ban smoking. Or support stronger regulations against poisoning our environment.


But... but... regulations kill all jobs! You can't regulate anything...
other than the decisions made between women and their health care providers regarding their reproductive health. That, you must regulate the ever-loving shiat out of because um, it creates jobs? I'm not sure how, but that's what all these Republicans ran on. I must be too stupid to make the connection. I am a woman, after all. I'll be in the kitchen, barefoot and making sandwiches.
 
2012-02-06 03:18:10 PM
This just in: conservatives have been programmed to hate Planned Parenthood.
 
2012-02-06 03:23:03 PM
*shakes head*
Once more, proof that the american conservative does not care about life once its left the womb.
 
2012-02-06 03:24:48 PM
Everyone knows Planned Parenthood's main goal is abortions. 99.99% of all their funding goes for free abortions (even for men). The only way you can get a mammogram at PP is if you fill up all 100 slots on your PP abortion punch card. That's why there are so few mammograms. While many try to have 100 abortions and fill up the punch card, it takes its toll on the body.
 
2012-02-06 03:26:24 PM
If you go to Planned Parenthood, you deserve to get cancer.
 
2012-02-06 03:27:47 PM

SilentStrider: *shakes head*
Once more, proof that the american conservative does not care about life once its left the womb.


Until it hits Military age, of course.
 
2012-02-06 03:28:23 PM

Diogenes: To be fair, I think the other non-abortion services they provide, don't matter to them. Not as long as abortions are performed - it taints the whole organization. Even if there's no outside funding for abortion.

So they're not de jure against cancer screenings. But by letting abortion taint their other services makes them de facto against cancer screenings.


Would you eat brownies that I mixed just a teaspoon full of dogshiat into, even if you couldn't taste it?
 
2012-02-06 03:28:34 PM

sweetmelissa31: If you go to Planned Parenthood, you deserve to get cancer.


Damn right!

Back alleys and coathangers or nothing!
 
2012-02-06 03:28:42 PM

Lando Lincoln: This just in: conservatives have been programmed to hate Planned Parenthood.


The average republican has the response mechanism of a pavlovian dog. Say "planned parenthood", "Acorn", "Soros", "Unions", "welfare", or any of the other Liberal keywords and they get all foamy in the mouth.
 
2012-02-06 03:34:51 PM

EvilEgg: Diogenes: To be fair, I think the other non-abortion services they provide, don't matter to them. Not as long as abortions are performed - it taints the whole organization. Even if there's no outside funding for abortion.

So they're not de jure against cancer screenings. But by letting abortion taint their other services makes them de facto against cancer screenings.

Would you eat brownies that I mixed just a teaspoon full of dogshiat into, even if you couldn't taste it?


The funding for abortion services is done separately in order to ensure federal funds to the organization do not go to that service. If we use your analogy, the poop is separated from the brownie. But I think the better analogous question could be: "Would you buy brownies from a baker who can't guarantee he keeps dogshiat from being mixed with the brownies?"
 
2012-02-06 03:35:08 PM

FirstNationalBastard: Damn right!

Back alleys and coathangers or nothing!


That will teach the sluts/rape victims.
 
2012-02-06 03:35:33 PM

Lando Lincoln: This just in: conservatives have been programmed to hate Planned Parenthood.


If they's FERRIT I'm AG'IN it!

As opposed to actually thinking about each issue on it's own merit.

Reactionary Radicalism at it's heart...
 
2012-02-06 03:36:32 PM

sweetmelissa31: FirstNationalBastard: Damn right!

Back alleys and coathangers or nothing!

That will teach the sluts/rape victims.


To be fair, if they'd just gotten married at 14 none of that would have happened...
 
2012-02-06 03:37:52 PM

Dinki: Lando Lincoln: This just in: conservatives have been programmed to hate Planned Parenthood.

The average republican has the response mechanism of a pavlovian dog. Say "planned parenthood", "Acorn", "Soros", "Unions", "welfare", or any of the other Liberal keywords and they get all foamy in the mouth.


Exactly this.... basically you said a "non-starter" to a Fox News watcher. If Planned Parenthood is going to do something, there must be something evil behind it.
 
2012-02-06 03:38:27 PM
Who needs Planned Parenthood? Or cancer screenings?

www.imthebeggar.com

If you're not cured, then you haven't given enough money and therefore Jesus hates you!
 
2012-02-06 03:42:41 PM
51% of them have been told to oppose planned parenthood by their insurance company lobbyists.
 
2012-02-06 03:45:45 PM

Diogenes: EvilEgg: Diogenes: To be fair, I think the other non-abortion services they provide, don't matter to them. Not as long as abortions are performed - it taints the whole organization. Even if there's no outside funding for abortion.

So they're not de jure against cancer screenings. But by letting abortion taint their other services makes them de facto against cancer screenings.

Would you eat brownies that I mixed just a teaspoon full of dogshiat into, even if you couldn't taste it?

The funding for abortion services is done separately in order to ensure federal funds to the organization do not go to that service. If we use your analogy, the poop is separated from the brownie. But I think the better analogous question could be: "Would you buy brownies from a baker who can't guarantee he keeps dogshiat from being mixed with the brownies?"


I'm pro choice, so, this isn't my fight anyway, but, I've always wondered what that matters, if they are kept separate. Is the money "funding" abortion services coming from people specifically trying to give money for that purpose , or it is just kept separate so that no federal money is used? If it is the second, then, that isn't really separate, it is government money freeing up "other" money the organization gets to perform abortions... if they didn't perform abortions, they'd use that money towards the other services and not need as much federal funds to do the same work.
 
2012-02-06 03:49:05 PM

Diogenes: MisterTweak: Diogenes: To be fair, I think the other non-abortion services they provide, don't matter to them. Not as long as abortions are performed - it taints the whole organization. Even if there's no outside funding for abortion.

So they're not de jure against cancer screenings. But by letting abortion taint their other services makes them de facto against cancer screenings.

I'd be more inclined to accept this as fact if they weren't 100% comfortable investing in companies that make surgical instruments used in abortion. Giving a tax break to the CEO of Baxter or HCA? It's just fiscal common sense. Helping a terrified 16-year-old girl with an incarcerated father and alcoholic mom figure out why she's bleeding much more than usual? No, because Jesus.

Money only becomes fungible when it's an expense, and core principles only are violated when writing checks, never when cashing them.

If planned parenthood opened up a side venture, a profitable chain of surgical centers offering tummy tucks and cheekbone augmentations, targeted at upper-income teens, the silence would be deafening, and Pope Benny himself would be ringing the bell at NYSE to publicize the IPO, with Romney on one side and Joel Osteen on the other.

I'm not disagreeing with you, but I have to say they're not the only ones that are guilty futile or hypocritical protests and/or boycotts, though. If they were so concerned about the safety of embryos then they should also be trying to ban smoking. Or support stronger regulations against poisoning our environment.


I disagree beca... wait, no. actually, I'm pretty much 100% on board with you.

Come to think of it, the same crowd that demanded we "wait for more data" (preferably, wait at least 3-4 decades) on the harm caused by smoking, alcohol, and medication to expectant mothers used pretty much the same arguments - "job-killing regulation", "personal responsibility", "junk science", and, of course, "intellectual elites". How many people would rather have an angioplasty by a graduate* of Bob Jones University*, or a guy with a doctorate from Harvard, board certification (by a bunch of stuffy academics) and a license from an agency committed to limiting our freedom to home surgery?
 
2012-02-06 03:51:41 PM

dletter: Diogenes: EvilEgg: Diogenes: To be fair, I think the other non-abortion services they provide, don't matter to them. Not as long as abortions are performed - it taints the whole organization. Even if there's no outside funding for abortion.

So they're not de jure against cancer screenings. But by letting abortion taint their other services makes them de facto against cancer screenings.

Would you eat brownies that I mixed just a teaspoon full of dogshiat into, even if you couldn't taste it?

The funding for abortion services is done separately in order to ensure federal funds to the organization do not go to that service. If we use your analogy, the poop is separated from the brownie. But I think the better analogous question could be: "Would you buy brownies from a baker who can't guarantee he keeps dogshiat from being mixed with the brownies?"

I'm pro choice, so, this isn't my fight anyway, but, I've always wondered what that matters, if they are kept separate. Is the money "funding" abortion services coming from people specifically trying to give money for that purpose , or it is just kept separate so that no federal money is used? If it is the second, then, that isn't really separate, it is government money freeing up "other" money the organization gets to perform abortions... if they didn't perform abortions, they'd use that money towards the other services and not need as much federal funds to do the same work.


That is the same argument used against faith based initiatives. If 97% of the stuff they do isn't abortions, so the not abortion stuff is paying for the building ,electricity, etc. used for abortions.
 
Displayed 50 of 376 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report