Carly Fiorina Foundation Gave $467,275 To Planned Parenthood Through Group That Runs It

[Uncensored2008]

I guess I work in serious IT companies.

Infosys?

TCS?

You? I dunno.

I work for an Aerospace company as the IT Director. But in this thread, you're 99% hack, 1% tech.

Like most people in the day, I got most of my information mostly from Ziff Davis, and agreed with Machrone et al. that taking on Compaq was stupid. But that was in procress before Fiorina came on board, so you're just being a partisan hack. Compaq was a premium brand in an era of budget machines, where the PC was transforming to a commodity and there was no room for a high priced entry. I didn't care that a Compaq would last 10 years, it was obsolete in 3. So all your bullshit is just that, as you well know.

Fiorina pushed HP toward blade architecture and network backbone, both critical moves that eventually led to a more profitable company. Stocks fell and the board fired her, that's the way it goes.

 

[Stephanie]

Does this person YOU support bother you with her intolerant and condescending way she treats others? VIDEO of this at the site

(CNSNews.com) – Following House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) refusal to answer whether an unborn baby with a human heart is a human being, Media Research Center President L. Brent Bozell wrote to Pelosi, noting that good reporters “ask tough questions,” that her answer was “disrespectful”; and that she should apologize to the reporter, CNSNews.com’s Sam Dorman.

“You owe the reporter, Mr. Dorman, an unqualified apology," wrote Bozell. "You should also answer his question."

Dorman had asked Minority Leader Pelosi the question at her Capitol Hill press conference last Thursday, Oct. 1. The exchange occurred as follCNSNews.com: “In reference to funding for Planned Parenthood: Is an unborn baby with a human heart and a human liver a human being?”



Pelosi: “Why don't you take your ideological questions--I don't, I don't have—”

CNSNews.com: “If it's not a human being, what species is it?”

Pelosi: “No, listen, I want to say something to you. I don't know who you are and you're welcome to be here, freedom of this press. I am a devout practicing Catholic, a mother of five children. When my baby was born, my fifth child, my oldest child was six years old. I think I know more about this subject than you, with all due respect.”

CNSNews.com: “So it's not a human being, then?”

Pelosi said: “And I do not intend to respond to your questions, which have no basis in what public policy is that we do here.”

(Disclosure: The Media Research Center is the parent organization of CNSNews.com.)

all of it here:
Bozell to Pelosi on ‘Human Being’ Question: You Should Answer and Apologize

 

[g5000]

It is. You claimed Fiorina "gave $467,275 to Planned Parenthood".

That's a lie.

Fake scandal.

"I" didn't claim anything.

That's in the article.

It's in your title. You parroted the lie.

Fake scandal.

Well, if it's a "lie" then it's the same lie Fiorina's been telling about Planned Parenthood.

She's been saying the government is funding abortions. It isn't.

It reimburses medical expenses for things like examinations.

Fiorina's been telling the lie that because that money goes to Planned Parenthood it also goes to abortion services.

So it's kinda her own logic..

Nope. You're using TardLogic™ in your desperation to throw smoke up around your lie.

The fungability of money applies to Planned Parenthood, and so the federal government is funding abortions. If federal money was taken away from PP, it would affect their abortion funding. They would have to make a choice to either divert money from abortions or divert money from other services.

Not so with the Foundation. The fungability of money does not apply to the Foundation since the donor money given to PP is completely independent of other donor money. Whether or not Fiorina gave to the same foundation would have no impact on the the Foundation's total amount given to PP. If Fiorina withdrew her money from the Foundation, no decision would have to be made about money given to PP by another donor.

That is the dumbest thing you've ever said.

Nope. You cannot poke a hole in it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

"I" didn't claim anything.

That's in the article.

It's in your title. You parroted the lie.

Fake scandal.

Well, if it's a "lie" then it's the same lie Fiorina's been telling about Planned Parenthood.

She's been saying the government is funding abortions. It isn't.

It reimburses medical expenses for things like examinations.

Fiorina's been telling the lie that because that money goes to Planned Parenthood it also goes to abortion services.

So it's kinda her own logic..

Nope. You're using TardLogic™ in your desperation to throw smoke up around your lie.

The fungability of money applies to Planned Parenthood, and so the federal government is funding abortions. If federal money was taken away from PP, it would affect their abortion funding. They would have to make a choice to either divert money from abortions or divert money from other services.

Not so with the Foundation. The fungability of money does not apply to the Foundation since the donor money given to PP is completely independent of other donor money. Whether or not Fiorina gave to the same foundation would have no impact on the the Foundation's total amount given to PP. If Fiorina withdrew her money from the Foundation, no decision would have to be made about money given to PP by another donor.

That is the dumbest thing you've ever said.

Nope. You cannot poke a hole in it.

Sure I can. Tell me how much per year Planned Parenthood spends to provide abortions.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Oh man..

Carly Fiorina claims to be against Planned Parenthood. In fact, she has made it a staple of her campaign. She is currently on a mission, urging Republicans to defund the organization and hold the annual fiscal budget hostage. She cites, among other things, that taxpayers and the government shouldn’t have any role in abortions.

Well, that, we already knew. An investigative piece from The Daily Beast has unearthed new information that Carly Fiorina’s Foundation, run by The Ayco Charitable Foundation, has collectively donated $467,275 to various Planned Parenthood’s through 2011 through 2013.


Carly Fiorina Foundation Gave $467,275 To Planned Parenthood Through Group That Runs It

Lets see the things wrong here.

1. You can be against government funding of something, and still fund it.
2. SHE didn't directly donate to them, it was through one of those tax write off funds for the uber rich.

Let's see the things wrong here.

1. When you demonize an organization? You'd better not have ANY connection to it.
2. When you start on the road of personal integrity? You'd better have some.


Carly Fiorina: 'Hillary Clinton has lied'

Good non-response.

Which is all your post warrants.

 

[g5000]

It's in your title. You parroted the lie.

Fake scandal.

Well, if it's a "lie" then it's the same lie Fiorina's been telling about Planned Parenthood.

She's been saying the government is funding abortions. It isn't.

It reimburses medical expenses for things like examinations.

Fiorina's been telling the lie that because that money goes to Planned Parenthood it also goes to abortion services.

So it's kinda her own logic..

Nope. You're using TardLogic™ in your desperation to throw smoke up around your lie.

The fungability of money applies to Planned Parenthood, and so the federal government is funding abortions. If federal money was taken away from PP, it would affect their abortion funding. They would have to make a choice to either divert money from abortions or divert money from other services.

Not so with the Foundation. The fungability of money does not apply to the Foundation since the donor money given to PP is completely independent of other donor money. Whether or not Fiorina gave to the same foundation would have no impact on the the Foundation's total amount given to PP. If Fiorina withdrew her money from the Foundation, no decision would have to be made about money given to PP by another donor.

That is the dumbest thing you've ever said.

Nope. You cannot poke a hole in it.

Sure I can. Tell me how much per year Planned Parenthood spends to provide abortions.

You tell me. And we are talking cost, remember. Not percentages. Abortions cost more than condoms.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Sure I can. Tell me how much per year Planned Parenthood spends to provide abortions.

Last I checked they don't "spend" anything. They make a HUGE profit from their abortion mill racket.

Death Inc. - be sure to visit the spare parts department!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"Carly Fiorina Foundation Gave $467,275 To Planned Parenthood Through Group That Runs It"

Good for her.

And none of this makes any difference given the fact she won't be the nominee.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Sure I can. Tell me how much per year Planned Parenthood spends to provide abortions.

Last I checked they don't "spend" anything. They make a HUGE profit from their abortion mill racket.

Death Inc. - be sure to visit the spare parts department!

Then why are they being accused of using federal money to provide abortions?

 

[g5000]

The group performs about 330,000 abortions a year, or roughly 30 percent of all the abortions in the country. By its own accounting in its 2013-2014 annual report, it provides about as many abortions as Pap tests (380,000). The group does more breast exams and provides more breast-care services (490,000), but not by that much.

The 3 percent figure is derived by counting abortion as just another service like much less consequential services.

So abortion is considered a service no different than a pregnancy test (1.1 million), even though a box with two pregnancy tests can be procured from the local drugstore for less than $10.

Planned Parenthood's pathetic '3 percent' lie

 

[g5000]

Sure I can. Tell me how much per year Planned Parenthood spends to provide abortions.

Last I checked they don't "spend" anything. They make a HUGE profit from their abortion mill racket.

Death Inc. - be sure to visit the spare parts department!

Then why are they being accused of using federal money to provide abortions?

Because the federal money they are given is fungible.

If you need ten dollars for food and cigarettes, and you only have five dollars, you are going to have to go without something. Probably cigarettes, since food is a necessity. It depends how powerful your addiction to abortions cigarettes is.

If I give you five dollars and say, "You can only spend this on women's health services food", you now have ten dollars (your five dollars and the five dollars I gave you) and are able to buy food AND cigarettes.

So my five dollars, even though earmarked by the Hyde amendment for health services by me for food, helped you perform abortions buy cigarettes.

Just so with federal funding of Planned Parenthood. It enables them to perform abortions.

Money is fungible.

If I "defunded" you and took my five dollars back, you would get this fungibility principle the moment your nicotine withdrawals kicked in and you had to decide between buying food or cigarettes. You could no longer buy both.

Take away PP's federal funding, and they will have to decide between abortions and women's health services.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Sure I can. Tell me how much per year Planned Parenthood spends to provide abortions.

Last I checked they don't "spend" anything. They make a HUGE profit from their abortion mill racket.

Death Inc. - be sure to visit the spare parts department!

Then why are they being accused of using federal money to provide abortions?

Because the federal money they are given is fungible.

If you need ten dollars for food and cigarettes, and you only have five dollars, you are going to have to go without something. Probably cigarettes, since food is a necessity. It depends how powerful your addiction to abortions cigarettes is.

If I give you five dollars and say, "You can only spend this on women's health services food", you now have ten dollars (your five dollars and the five dollars I gave you) and are able to buy food AND cigarettes.

So my five dollars, even though earmarked by the Hyde amendment for health services by me for food, helped you perform abortions buy cigarettes.

Just so with federal funding of Planned Parenthood. It enables them to perform abortions. Your argument about the Hyde amendment is a red herring. A red herring that those who vote to fund Planned Parenthood hope the voters don't ever catch onto.

Money is fungible.

If I "defunded" you and took my five dollars back, you would get this fungibility principle the moment your nicotine withdrawals kicked in and you had to decide between buying food or cigarettes. You could no longer buy both.

Take away PP's federal funding, and they will have to decide between abortions and women's health services.

Have you ever heard of segregated funds?

Plus you didn't answer my question. How much does PP spend to provide abortions?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Sure I can. Tell me how much per year Planned Parenthood spends to provide abortions.

Last I checked they don't "spend" anything. They make a HUGE profit from their abortion mill racket.

Death Inc. - be sure to visit the spare parts department!

Then why are they being accused of using federal money to provide abortions?

Because the federal money they are given is fungible.

If you need ten dollars for food and cigarettes, and you only have five dollars, you are going to have to go without something. Probably cigarettes, since food is a necessity. It depends how powerful your addiction to abortions cigarettes is.

If I give you five dollars and say, "You can only spend this on women's health services food", you now have ten dollars (your five dollars and the five dollars I gave you) and are able to buy food AND cigarettes.

So my five dollars, even though earmarked by the Hyde amendment for health services by me for food, helped you perform abortions buy cigarettes.

Just so with federal funding of Planned Parenthood. It enables them to perform abortions. Your argument about the Hyde amendment is a red herring. A red herring that those who vote to fund Planned Parenthood hope the voters don't ever catch onto.

Money is fungible.

If I "defunded" you and took my five dollars back, you would get this fungibility principle the moment your nicotine withdrawals kicked in and you had to decide between buying food or cigarettes. You could no longer buy both.

Take away PP's federal funding, and they will have to decide between abortions and women's health services.

So by your logic a federal employee who uses part of paycheck to pay for an abortion has violated the Hyde Amendment.

 

[g5000]

How much does PP spend to provide abortions?

You tell me.

Remember, cost. Not percentages.

 

[g5000]

Sure I can. Tell me how much per year Planned Parenthood spends to provide abortions.

Last I checked they don't "spend" anything. They make a HUGE profit from their abortion mill racket.

Death Inc. - be sure to visit the spare parts department!

Then why are they being accused of using federal money to provide abortions?

Because the federal money they are given is fungible.

If you need ten dollars for food and cigarettes, and you only have five dollars, you are going to have to go without something. Probably cigarettes, since food is a necessity. It depends how powerful your addiction to abortions cigarettes is.

If I give you five dollars and say, "You can only spend this on women's health services food", you now have ten dollars (your five dollars and the five dollars I gave you) and are able to buy food AND cigarettes.

So my five dollars, even though earmarked by the Hyde amendment for health services by me for food, helped you perform abortions buy cigarettes.

Just so with federal funding of Planned Parenthood. It enables them to perform abortions. Your argument about the Hyde amendment is a red herring. A red herring that those who vote to fund Planned Parenthood hope the voters don't ever catch onto.

Money is fungible.

If I "defunded" you and took my five dollars back, you would get this fungibility principle the moment your nicotine withdrawals kicked in and you had to decide between buying food or cigarettes. You could no longer buy both.

Take away PP's federal funding, and they will have to decide between abortions and women's health services.

Have you ever heard of segregated funds?

What part of, "So my five dollars, even though earmarked by me for food, helped you buy cigarettes" do you not understand?

 

[whitehall]

Why don't democrats support her if she donated to PP through her foundation and wasn't responsible for anybody being killed at Benghazi?

 

[NYcarbineer]

How much does PP spend to provide abortions?

You tell me.

I don't need to tell you. You either know, or I have proven what I told you earlier, regarding your stupidity.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Sure I can. Tell me how much per year Planned Parenthood spends to provide abortions.

Last I checked they don't "spend" anything. They make a HUGE profit from their abortion mill racket.

Death Inc. - be sure to visit the spare parts department!

Then why are they being accused of using federal money to provide abortions?

Because the federal money they are given is fungible.

If you need ten dollars for food and cigarettes, and you only have five dollars, you are going to have to go without something. Probably cigarettes, since food is a necessity. It depends how powerful your addiction to abortions cigarettes is.

If I give you five dollars and say, "You can only spend this on women's health services food", you now have ten dollars (your five dollars and the five dollars I gave you) and are able to buy food AND cigarettes.

So my five dollars, even though earmarked by the Hyde amendment for health services by me for food, helped you perform abortions buy cigarettes.

Just so with federal funding of Planned Parenthood. It enables them to perform abortions. Your argument about the Hyde amendment is a red herring. A red herring that those who vote to fund Planned Parenthood hope the voters don't ever catch onto.

Money is fungible.

If I "defunded" you and took my five dollars back, you would get this fungibility principle the moment your nicotine withdrawals kicked in and you had to decide between buying food or cigarettes. You could no longer buy both.

Take away PP's federal funding, and they will have to decide between abortions and women's health services.

Have you ever heard of segregated funds?

What part of, "So my five dollars, even though earmarked by me for food, helped you buy cigarettes" do you not understand?

You are absurdly claiming that PP has no other sources of funding other than the federal government.

 

[g5000]

According to Planned Parenthood, an abortion in their clinics costs up to $1,500.

PP performed 327,653 abortions in 2014.

$491,479,500. Give or take.

About the amount they received in federal funds.

 

[g5000]

Last I checked they don't "spend" anything. They make a HUGE profit from their abortion mill racket.

Death Inc. - be sure to visit the spare parts department!

Then why are they being accused of using federal money to provide abortions?

Because the federal money they are given is fungible.

If you need ten dollars for food and cigarettes, and you only have five dollars, you are going to have to go without something. Probably cigarettes, since food is a necessity. It depends how powerful your addiction to abortions cigarettes is.

If I give you five dollars and say, "You can only spend this on women's health services food", you now have ten dollars (your five dollars and the five dollars I gave you) and are able to buy food AND cigarettes.

So my five dollars, even though earmarked by the Hyde amendment for health services by me for food, helped you perform abortions buy cigarettes.

Just so with federal funding of Planned Parenthood. It enables them to perform abortions. Your argument about the Hyde amendment is a red herring. A red herring that those who vote to fund Planned Parenthood hope the voters don't ever catch onto.

Money is fungible.

If I "defunded" you and took my five dollars back, you would get this fungibility principle the moment your nicotine withdrawals kicked in and you had to decide between buying food or cigarettes. You could no longer buy both.

Take away PP's federal funding, and they will have to decide between abortions and women's health services.

Have you ever heard of segregated funds?

What part of, "So my five dollars, even though earmarked by me for food, helped you buy cigarettes" do you not understand?

You are absurdly claiming that PP has no other sources of funding other than the federal government.

Nope.

You have a serious reading comprehension problem. Read the allegory again. I made it as simple to understand as possible.