Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Congressional Republicans say they are determined to shut Planned Parenthood down, regardless of whether it broke any laws.
In more than two months of investigations, members have yet to turn up evidence that Planned Parenthood acted illegally, the same conclusion reached by a half-dozen state investigations. The Department of Justice has so far declined to launch a formal probe.
Several Republicans acknowledged this week that they may never find proof of wrongdoing at Planned Parenthood — but said it doesn't matter.
“I don’t know whether we’re ever going to be able to answer that question, whether it was illegal for them to do what they were doing,” Rep. Raúl Labrador (R-Idaho) said during the House’s first hearing on the topic Wednesday. "I don’t know if it was illegal … but it was immoral, what was seen on that video."
Republicans have long been fierce critics of Planned Parenthood, which is the nation’s largest provider of abortion services. Under the law, the organization is banned from using federal funding for abortions, except in cases of rape, incest or medical necessity.
Stirred by outrage over secretly recorded videos at Planned Parenthood, Republicans opposed to abortion rights say it’s time to end federal funding for the group once and for all.
“The issue is not whether there’s been a crime committed or not,” Rep. Ted Poe (R-Texas.) told the same group at the hearing. “This issue is whether or not taxpayers should fund Planned Parenthood. That’s the issue before this committee.”
Three House committees and six states have investigated Planned Parenthood since it was first targeted by the undercover videos in July. The Energy and Commerce Committee has interviewed two Planned Parenthood officials as well as officials from three tissue procurement companies that have partnered with the organization: Stem Express, Advanced Bioscience Resources, Inc. and Novogenix Laboratories.
They have always opposed PP funding, the same way they oppose public broadcasting funding.
Let's see...PP popular
Americans back federal funds for Planned Parenthood health services: poll | Reuters
GOP Congress...not popular
Poll: Congressional approval rating dips to 14 percent - POLITICO
Now look how popular they are. LOL.Let's see...PP popular
Americans back federal funds for Planned Parenthood health services: poll | Reuters
GOP Congress...not popular
Poll: Congressional approval rating dips to 14 percent - POLITICO
And yet that un popular congress came to power because the majority of voters preferred them over the Democrats who were in power... Or wait, I'm sure you have a mentally retarded rebuttal somewhere.
And yet that un popular congress came to power because the majority of voters preferred them over the Democrats who were in power... Or wait, I'm sure you have a mentally retarded rebuttal somewhere.
They have always opposed PP funding, the same way they oppose public broadcasting funding.
Not a Republican here but it makes fucking sense....
Like what is wrong with "you people" that you feel it's required that others pay for things simply because you agree with them but you froth at the mouth with hate when you are paying for things you don't agree with?
We are ~($18,000,000,000,000)~ trillion in debt and there is no path even being discussed on how to stop growing that debt, not a discussion on paying it off, just to stop growing it.
Here's why I like Libertarian ideals on how to run Government... Generally it recognized that requiring people to pay for open ended welfare to others leaves a door open for well, more welfare programs to be created. You can sit back and talk about cutting (lol) defense as a way to "pay" for bullshit like PP, but "my side" recognizes that taking money from 1 welfare program to fund another welfare program means no money was cut at all. In fact if you cut from military to pay for PP it's common sense that tells us politicians will simply entrench us in even more debt to re-fund the program they "stole" from to pay for another... Meaning if anything deficit spending will go up, not stay equal or decrease.
To have a place at the table of political theory you should at least be able to be consistent in the application of your theory. Your loose definitions of welfare leaves the door open to a never ending growth in new welfare programs. This means you will find yourself paying for programs generally supported by Republicans, like military, religious "stuff", tax cuts to big biz, tax credits and so on even when you elect the most intelligent President the world has ever seen coupled with a majority in congress. History shows and has proven that YOU CAN'T CUT WELFARE.
The answer should not be to claim welfare for PP is good and that welfare for corporations is bad in defense of keeping PP funded. But rather to realize that wealth redistribution by way of mal-investing in welfare vote buying programs as a whole is poor political structure in general.
The entire purpose of welfare is to secure votes. The higher the dependency on welfare the more votes you get. Dems are seen as the welfare party for Unions, the poor and college students... Republicans are seen as welfare for churches, businesses and military... Reality is side will ever cut any welfare as cutting welfare others are now dependent on will yield you less votes and you will be demonized.
If you ever wish to balance the budget and get out of debt, or end military from running around the world blowing shit up, you need to concede your hypocrisy. IE, you defending PP is you defending the Iraq war, you're simply too politically ignorant to see how and why that is.
Bye! =)
Now look how popular they are. LOL.Let's see...PP popular
Americans back federal funds for Planned Parenthood health services: poll | Reuters
GOP Congress...not popular
Poll: Congressional approval rating dips to 14 percent - POLITICO
And yet that un popular congress came to power because the majority of voters preferred them over the Democrats who were in power... Or wait, I'm sure you have a mentally retarded rebuttal somewhere.
I agree, neither party truly wants to limit the government, however, democrats expand/create/maintain programs that benefit working people, republicans utilize the government to impose their moral beliefs..Now look how popular they are. LOL.Let's see...PP popular
Americans back federal funds for Planned Parenthood health services: poll | Reuters
GOP Congress...not popular
Poll: Congressional approval rating dips to 14 percent - POLITICO
And yet that un popular congress came to power because the majority of voters preferred them over the Democrats who were in power... Or wait, I'm sure you have a mentally retarded rebuttal somewhere.
I'm not defending them, simply pointing out that neither party is truly supported by the people. Both parties literally run on cutting massive programs that the party in power has created (over time) and once elected Dems and Republicans simply continue to expand old programs and create new ones.
Basically, Dems and Reps voters both want incredibly smaller Government, but once they elect their side into power they get more Government programs.... So it really does not matter who is unpopular today, vote in a Dem top replace that Republican and in very short time that Dems will let you down as they always have.
They have always opposed PP funding, the same way they oppose public broadcasting funding.
Not a Republican here but it makes fucking sense....
Like what is wrong with "you people" that you feel it's required that others pay for things simply because you agree with them but you froth at the mouth with hate when you are paying for things you don't agree with?
We are ~($18,000,000,000,000)~ trillion in debt and there is no path even being discussed on how to stop growing that debt, not a discussion on paying it off, just to stop growing it.
Here's why I like Libertarian ideals on how to run Government... Generally it recognized that requiring people to pay for open ended welfare to others leaves a door open for well, more welfare programs to be created. You can sit back and talk about cutting (lol) defense as a way to "pay" for bullshit like PP, but "my side" recognizes that taking money from 1 welfare program to fund another welfare program means no money was cut at all. In fact if you cut from military to pay for PP it's common sense that tells us politicians will simply entrench us in even more debt to re-fund the program they "stole" from to pay for another... Meaning if anything deficit spending will go up, not stay equal or decrease.
To have a place at the table of political theory you should at least be able to be consistent in the application of your theory. Your loose definitions of welfare leaves the door open to a never ending growth in new welfare programs. This means you will find yourself paying for programs generally supported by Republicans, like military, religious "stuff", tax cuts to big biz, tax credits and so on even when you elect the most intelligent President the world has ever seen coupled with a majority in congress. History shows and has proven that YOU CAN'T CUT WELFARE.
The answer should not be to claim welfare for PP is good and that welfare for corporations is bad in defense of keeping PP funded. But rather to realize that wealth redistribution by way of mal-investing in welfare vote buying programs as a whole is poor political structure in general.
The entire purpose of welfare is to secure votes. The higher the dependency on welfare the more votes you get. Dems are seen as the welfare party for Unions, the poor and college students... Republicans are seen as welfare for churches, businesses and military... Reality is side will ever cut any welfare as cutting welfare others are now dependent on will yield you less votes and you will be demonized.
If you ever wish to balance the budget and get out of debt, or end military from running around the world blowing shit up, you need to concede your hypocrisy. IE, you defending PP is you defending the Iraq war, you're simply too politically ignorant to see how and why that is.
Bye! =)
You know if you could run that post through the 'short and to the point' converter we might find that we mostly agree,
but I'm not going to wade through the underbrush of unnecessary verbosity you inflict on us to try to figure that out on my own.
Welfare exists because of structural unemployment/disabilities/the elderly/stagnant wages.. It's not a way to get votes, if that were true, all of these red counties would be voting democrats.. They vote republican. Come on now.They have always opposed PP funding, the same way they oppose public broadcasting funding.
Not a Republican here but it makes fucking sense....
Like what is wrong with "you people" that you feel it's required that others pay for things simply because you agree with them but you froth at the mouth with hate when you are paying for things you don't agree with?
We are ~($18,000,000,000,000)~ trillion in debt and there is no path even being discussed on how to stop growing that debt, not a discussion on paying it off, just to stop growing it.
Here's why I like Libertarian ideals on how to run Government... Generally it recognized that requiring people to pay for open ended welfare to others leaves a door open for well, more welfare programs to be created. You can sit back and talk about cutting (lol) defense as a way to "pay" for bullshit like PP, but "my side" recognizes that taking money from 1 welfare program to fund another welfare program means no money was cut at all. In fact if you cut from military to pay for PP it's common sense that tells us politicians will simply entrench us in even more debt to re-fund the program they "stole" from to pay for another... Meaning if anything deficit spending will go up, not stay equal or decrease.
To have a place at the table of political theory you should at least be able to be consistent in the application of your theory. Your loose definitions of welfare leaves the door open to a never ending growth in new welfare programs. This means you will find yourself paying for programs generally supported by Republicans, like military, religious "stuff", tax cuts to big biz, tax credits and so on even when you elect the most intelligent President the world has ever seen coupled with a majority in congress. History shows and has proven that YOU CAN'T CUT WELFARE.
The answer should not be to claim welfare for PP is good and that welfare for corporations is bad in defense of keeping PP funded. But rather to realize that wealth redistribution by way of mal-investing in welfare vote buying programs as a whole is poor political structure in general.
The entire purpose of welfare is to secure votes. The higher the dependency on welfare the more votes you get. Dems are seen as the welfare party for Unions, the poor and college students... Republicans are seen as welfare for churches, businesses and military... Reality is side will ever cut any welfare as cutting welfare others are now dependent on will yield you less votes and you will be demonized.
If you ever wish to balance the budget and get out of debt, or end military from running around the world blowing shit up, you need to concede your hypocrisy. IE, you defending PP is you defending the Iraq war, you're simply too politically ignorant to see how and why that is.
Bye! =)
You know if you could run that post through the 'short and to the point' converter we might find that we mostly agree,
but I'm not going to wade through the underbrush of unnecessary verbosity you inflict on us to try to figure that out on my own.
The entire purpose of welfare is to secure votes. The higher the dependency on welfare the more votes you get. Dems are seen as the welfare party for Unions, the poor and college students... Republicans are seen as welfare for churches, businesses and military... Reality is neither side will ever cut any welfare as cutting welfare others are now dependent on will yield you less votes and you will be demonized.
SO you have nothing to worry about, also no matter how many Dems hold office (Obama and a super majority) you will never get programs you dislike cut... Even when the cuts are promised to you.
They have always opposed PP funding, the same way they oppose public broadcasting funding.
Not a Republican here but it makes fucking sense....
Like what is wrong with "you people" that you feel it's required that others pay for things simply because you agree with them but you froth at the mouth with hate when you are paying for things you don't agree with?
We are ~($18,000,000,000,000)~ trillion in debt and there is no path even being discussed on how to stop growing that debt, not a discussion on paying it off, just to stop growing it.
Here's why I like Libertarian ideals on how to run Government... Generally it recognized that requiring people to pay for open ended welfare to others leaves a door open for well, more welfare programs to be created. You can sit back and talk about cutting (lol) defense as a way to "pay" for bullshit like PP, but "my side" recognizes that taking money from 1 welfare program to fund another welfare program means no money was cut at all. In fact if you cut from military to pay for PP it's common sense that tells us politicians will simply entrench us in even more debt to re-fund the program they "stole" from to pay for another... Meaning if anything deficit spending will go up, not stay equal or decrease.
To have a place at the table of political theory you should at least be able to be consistent in the application of your theory. Your loose definitions of welfare leaves the door open to a never ending growth in new welfare programs. This means you will find yourself paying for programs generally supported by Republicans, like military, religious "stuff", tax cuts to big biz, tax credits and so on even when you elect the most intelligent President the world has ever seen coupled with a majority in congress. History shows and has proven that YOU CAN'T CUT WELFARE.
The answer should not be to claim welfare for PP is good and that welfare for corporations is bad in defense of keeping PP funded. But rather to realize that wealth redistribution by way of mal-investing in welfare vote buying programs as a whole is poor political structure in general.
The entire purpose of welfare is to secure votes. The higher the dependency on welfare the more votes you get. Dems are seen as the welfare party for Unions, the poor and college students... Republicans are seen as welfare for churches, businesses and military... Reality is side will ever cut any welfare as cutting welfare others are now dependent on will yield you less votes and you will be demonized.
If you ever wish to balance the budget and get out of debt, or end military from running around the world blowing shit up, you need to concede your hypocrisy. IE, you defending PP is you defending the Iraq war, you're simply too politically ignorant to see how and why that is.
Bye! =)
You know if you could run that post through the 'short and to the point' converter we might find that we mostly agree,
but I'm not going to wade through the underbrush of unnecessary verbosity you inflict on us to try to figure that out on my own.
The entire purpose of welfare is to secure votes. The higher the dependency on welfare the more votes you get. Dems are seen as the welfare party for Unions, the poor and college students... Republicans are seen as welfare for churches, businesses and military... Reality is neither side will ever cut any welfare as cutting welfare others are now dependent on will yield you less votes and you will be demonized.
SO you have nothing to worry about, also no matter how many Dems hold office (Obama and a super majority) you will never get programs you dislike cut... Even when the cuts are promised to you.
I agree, neither party truly wants to limit the government, however, democrats expand/create/maintain programs that benefit working people, republicans utilize the government to impose their moral beliefs..Now look how popular they are. LOL.Let's see...PP popular
Americans back federal funds for Planned Parenthood health services: poll | Reuters
GOP Congress...not popular
Poll: Congressional approval rating dips to 14 percent - POLITICO
And yet that un popular congress came to power because the majority of voters preferred them over the Democrats who were in power... Or wait, I'm sure you have a mentally retarded rebuttal somewhere.
I'm not defending them, simply pointing out that neither party is truly supported by the people. Both parties literally run on cutting massive programs that the party in power has created (over time) and once elected Dems and Republicans simply continue to expand old programs and create new ones.
Basically, Dems and Reps voters both want incredibly smaller Government, but once they elect their side into power they get more Government programs.... So it really does not matter who is unpopular today, vote in a Dem top replace that Republican and in very short time that Dems will let you down as they always have.
They are different, sorry.I agree, neither party truly wants to limit the government, however, democrats expand/create/maintain programs that benefit working people, republicans utilize the government to impose their moral beliefs..Now look how popular they are. LOL.Let's see...PP popular
Americans back federal funds for Planned Parenthood health services: poll | Reuters
GOP Congress...not popular
Poll: Congressional approval rating dips to 14 percent - POLITICO
And yet that un popular congress came to power because the majority of voters preferred them over the Democrats who were in power... Or wait, I'm sure you have a mentally retarded rebuttal somewhere.
I'm not defending them, simply pointing out that neither party is truly supported by the people. Both parties literally run on cutting massive programs that the party in power has created (over time) and once elected Dems and Republicans simply continue to expand old programs and create new ones.
Basically, Dems and Reps voters both want incredibly smaller Government, but once they elect their side into power they get more Government programs.... So it really does not matter who is unpopular today, vote in a Dem top replace that Republican and in very short time that Dems will let you down as they always have.
Your hypocrisy is noted and your poor attempt at pretending welfare programs you support are any different than those you don't support is not convincing.
Welfare exists because of structural unemployment/disabilities/the elderly/stagnant wages.. It's not a way to get votes, if that were true, all of these red counties would be voting democrats.. They vote republican. Come on now.
I agree, neither party truly wants to limit the government, however, democrats expand/create/maintain programs that benefit working people, republicans utilize the government to impose their moral beliefs..Now look how popular they are. LOL.Let's see...PP popular
Americans back federal funds for Planned Parenthood health services: poll | Reuters
GOP Congress...not popular
Poll: Congressional approval rating dips to 14 percent - POLITICO
And yet that un popular congress came to power because the majority of voters preferred them over the Democrats who were in power... Or wait, I'm sure you have a mentally retarded rebuttal somewhere.
I'm not defending them, simply pointing out that neither party is truly supported by the people. Both parties literally run on cutting massive programs that the party in power has created (over time) and once elected Dems and Republicans simply continue to expand old programs and create new ones.
Basically, Dems and Reps voters both want incredibly smaller Government, but once they elect their side into power they get more Government programs.... So it really does not matter who is unpopular today, vote in a Dem top replace that Republican and in very short time that Dems will let you down as they always have.
Your hypocrisy is noted and your poor attempt at pretending welfare programs you support are any different than those you don't support is not convincing.
