Jon Kyl deletes his lie from the congressional record.

[CADsortaGUY]

Complete bullshit then, gotcha.

is there some part of my post you didn't understand (if you actually read it) ?

 

[dainthomas]

If you did, then you'd know the answer.

So your answer is that the external auditors are fudging the numbers?

Is everyone on this board so personally vested in their viewpoints that they can never admit when they're wrong?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

So your answer is that the external auditors are fudging the numbers?

Is everyone on this board so personally vested in their viewpoints that they can never admit when they're wrong?

jesus H christ - are you guys really that obtuse? Just because someone says 3% goes somewhere doesn't mean it's the only money being spent on it. Like my post stated, it wouldn't surprise me that the 3% goes to subsidizing abortion proceedures, but you would be a fool to think that abortion proceedure subsidies are the only outlays for abortion but it's likely the thing that can be audited and monies attributed directly to it.

I guess I need to stop assuming people here can actually think... damn optimism anyway...

 

[werepossum]

http://www.lifenews.com/2011/04/11/politifact-misleads-in-bashing-jon-kyl-over-planned-parenthood/

These folks make a case that Kyl is correct about the 90% from certain angles...

From your link

The new document the abortion organization posted shows Planned Parenthood provided prenatal services to merely 7,021 women and referred only 977 women for adoption services. These numbers were a 25 percent drop in prenatal care clients and a whopping 59 percent decline in adoption referrals from the 2,405 adoption referrals in 2008. The abortion business helped only 9,433 prenatal clients in 2008, down substantially from the 11,000 women it provided prenatal care to in 2007 — showing health care given to pregnant woman has fallen substantially over the years.

As a result, Kyl is correct because 97.6 percent of pregnant women going to Planned Parenthood are sold abortions while less than 2.4 percent of pregnant women received non-abortion services including adoption and prenatal care. That’s up from 96.5 percent of pregnant women going to Planned Parenthood getting abortions in 2008.

The PPFA report also shows Planned Parenthood does 340 abortions for every one adoption referral and 47 abortions for every one prenatal care client — both of which exceed the “90 percent” figure Kyl cited in his remarks. The report also shows Planned Parenthood had only 19,796 primary health care clients as opposed to the 332,278 clients who obtained abortions.

As such, Politifact’s assessment of Kyl’s remarks is false and misleading and fails to focus on the percentage of “services” Planned Parenthood provides to pregnant women — which was the intent of Kyl’s remarks.

I could argue it either way, but two things are beyond argument.
(1) Tax dollars are used to provide medical facilities which are overwhelmingly used to provide abortions, thus subsidizing them.
(2) Tax dollars are not used to directly provide abortions (i.e. pay doctors, nurses, etc.), thus meeting the letter of the law.

I could argue the correct percentage either way, on either side, and those Democrats who stated that poor women depend on Planned Parenthood for cancer screenings were even more inaccurate than was Kyl. My only comments are that Senators should be prepared to back up a hard statistic before they use it, and that Senators and Representatives should not have the ability to change what they said after they have said it. Extend, certainly, with the notation that the extended remarks were placing into the record. Change, no. Otherwise the record is no more than a convenient political tool.

 

[Eos]

From your link

I could argue it either way, but two things are beyond argument.
(1) Tax dollars are used to provide medical facilities which are overwhelmingly used to provide abortions, thus subsidizing them.
(2) Tax dollars are not used to directly provide abortions (i.e. pay doctors, nurses, etc.), thus meeting the letter of the law.

I could argue the correct percentage either way, on either side, and those Democrats who stated that poor women depend on Planned Parenthood for cancer screenings were even more inaccurate than was Kyl. My only comments are that Senators should be prepared to back up a hard statistic before they use it, and that Senators and Representatives should not have the ability to change what they said after they have said it. Extend, certainly, with the notation that the extended remarks were placing into the record. Change, no. Otherwise the record is no more than a convenient political tool.

For the record, days on which abortions (they provide both medical and surgical) are performed at my local PP are billed to a specific fund (taken from private donations and trusts) so that no Title X money is used. The rent, utilities, wages, all monies that are required for THAT day of appointments is paid for by private donations. EVERYTHING.

It's as if the same staff who supplies BC and STD screenings the other four days a week in the same building are contracted by the fund for those services and those services only.

Yes, abortions are provided one day per week.

 

[Red Dawn]

The Senate is "supposed" to be made up of gentleman that do not officially disparage each other.

Doing so, could come back to haunt them.

Hehehe, back in the day (way back) Gentlemen use to have duels to the death when they officially disparaged one another