Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
July 30, 2014, 08:41:36 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Could Whistleblower Claims Strip Planned Parenthood of Government Funding?  (Read 3154 times)
Straw Man
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 24849


one dwells in nirvana


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: February 22, 2011, 10:24:59 AM »

I'm not in favor of government funding abortions (although I am pro choice) but to cut off all funding will end with numerous unwanted children born. Now a friend of mine had this discussion yesterday and she posed this question.

Would you rather your tax dollars pay for 18 years for most of these unwanted children or terminate the pregnancy in the first 12 weeks. I replied interesting point but how bout parents teach kids consequences of unprotected sex. Then we talked about shows like teen mom on MTV. I used to think it was a good way to show young girls that being a mom is NOT easy. My friend said and then go look at the magazines over there on the stand (we were at the gym) and boom their were some of the girls from that show on the cover. She said, these young girls see them on the cover and will think that could be the way to fame. She was kind of right about that IMO.

exactly right

the most direct way to prevent abortion is to prevent unwanted pregnacies

defunding Planned Parenthood would increase unwanted pregnancies which would result in more abortions

http://opinionessoftheworld.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/planned-parenthood-stats.png
Report to moderator   Logged
Fury
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 21035


All aboard the USS Leverage


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: February 22, 2011, 10:28:55 AM »

Next time Planned Parenthood should stop aiding hood rats and other felonious criminals in their attempts to skirt the law.

Waste of money to begin with.
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 7755


Doesnt lie about lifting.


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: February 22, 2011, 04:01:31 PM »

Obama Praises Planned Parenthood; Questions Pro-Life Videos
The Christian Post ^ | Feb. 21, 2011 | Stephanie Samuel




In a recent NBC Channel 12 interview, President Barack Obama praised Planned Parenthood's work and suggested that pro-life videos implicating the abortion provider of cover ups were "manufactured."

Obama expressed pro-choice sentiments during a Richmond, Va. television interview. The interviewer asked the president to comment on videos made by youth-led group Live Action, and Republicans' efforts to defund Planned Parenthood Federation of America.

Obama responded by pointing to other issues that he contended deserved more attention. He also questioned the authenticity of the Live Action videos.

"I think some of these issues get manufactured and they get a lot of attention on the blogosphere," Obama responded. "I think that Planned Parenthood, in the past, has done good work."

He suggested national problems such as jobs and the economy be addressed instead of focusing on abortion.

The president's comments were taped last week when House Republicans were working to pass an amendment to the spending proposal that would completely defund PPFA.

During the Thursday testimony session, GOP representatives persuaded House members to vote for the amendment by referencing the videos.

Amendment author Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.) rehashed the abortion provider's past indiscretions.

"The headlines and years of investigations speak for themselves. In 2002, Parenthood was found civilly liable in Arizona for failure to report statutory rape. In 2008 it violated reporting laws in Indiana and California. In 2009 it instructed a girl in Tennessee to lie about her age so she could get an abortion without her parents' knowledge," he stated.

Pence also described the undercover Live Action videos that show branch employees in various states, including Virginia, give advice to a self-proclaimed pimp and prostitute.

Pence concluded, "As the father of two teenage daughters, there are not words strong enough to portray my contempt of this pattern of apparent fraud and abuse by Planned Parenthood."

PPFA President Cecile Richards has denounced the videos saying they were edited to damage the group’s reputation. PPFA officials also said staff simply answered the actors' questions and reported the encounters afterwards.

Some pro-lifers have also questioned Live Action's methods. In the Catholic legal theory blog, Mirror of Justice, the writer of a Feb. 15 post questions whether the apprehensible actions of Planned Parenthood justify having actors lie to expose the truth.

The writer concludes, "A culture of life can only be built on a foundation of truth. Lying may produce short term victories, but it will, in the end, frustrate our long term objective."

Still, House representatives approved the amendment to cut all federal funding to the nation's largest abortion provider on Friday. On Saturday, Congress members passed the spending bill that includes the amendment to defund PPFA.

Pro-life groups heralded the vote as a victory for the preborn. The National Black Pro-life Union praised Pence in a statement released today.

"I want to thank you for your efforts to defund Planned Parenthood," stated Day Gardner, NBPLU president. "This great news is especially important to members of the black community as we celebrate Black History Month."

Sidewalk counseling group 40 Days for Life celebrated the newly passed bill Friday with, "You Did It," emails to supporters. The group partnered with Live Action founder Lila Rose to lobby Congress.

After the Friday vote, PPFA released a letter entitled, "How Could You?"

"Your vote was not only against those who seek care at Planned Parenthood health centers, but against every one of us who has ever sought care there, and against every one of us who knows that when we are healthy, when we are in charge of our lives, we thrive," the letter read.

Obama's past comments have revealed him to be pro-choice.

In a January speech marking the 38th anniversary of Roe v Wade, he said, "the Supreme Court decision that protects women's health and reproductive freedom, and affirms a fundamental principle: that government should not intrude on private family matters."

In the recent NBC interview, Obama asked politicians not be "distracted" by the abortion issue.

The approved House spending bill with the anti-Planned Parenthood amendment inside is headed to the Senate. The bill will likely meet resistance in the Democrat-controlled chamber.

House Republicans also have another bill in committee to stop all abortion providers from receiving federal funds through the Title X program. There is no word when it will be voted on.


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2678169/posts



* obama_doctors-lootie.jpg (47.81 KB, 580x330 - viewed 92 times.)
Report to moderator   Logged
newmom
Guest
« Reply #28 on: February 22, 2011, 04:05:02 PM »

Next time Planned Parenthood should stop aiding hood rats and other felonious criminals in their attempts to skirt the law.

Waste of money to begin with.

I don't see it that way. I was far from a hoot rat when I went in there at 16 to get on the pill
Report to moderator   Logged
Beach Bum
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 40859


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: February 22, 2011, 07:20:22 PM »


So the president essentially called this a manufactured controversy?   Roll Eyes  What about the plethora of other examples of Planned Parenthood engaging in misconduct?  Just flat out embarrassing. 
Report to moderator   Logged
Beach Bum
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 40859


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: September 28, 2011, 09:00:37 AM »

House Panel Launches Probe of Planned Parenthood
Published September 28, 2011
FoxNews.com

In this Jan. 23 photo, Bryan Howard, CEO of Planned Parenthood Arizona, walks in front of a Planned Parenthood facility in Tucson, Ariz.

A Republican-led House committee has launched an investigation into Planned Parenthood, requesting a mountain of documents covering everything from audits to abortion-funding records to its policies on reporting sexual abuse.

In a move Democrats decried as "unfair and unjustified," Rep. Cliff Stearns, R-Fla., earlier this month wrote to Planned Parenthood informing them that the House Energy and Commerce Committee was looking at the group's "institutional practices and policies."

Stearns, chairman of the committee's oversight panel, said in a statement that federal funding indirectly helps Planned Parenthood pay for abortions despite legal restrictions. Leaving no doubt about his intentions, he said that funding "should be evaluated" along with other expenses to reduce the deficit.

"Although Planned Parenthood is barred from using federal funds to perform abortions, these funds are fungible and allow the group to use funds from other sources ostensibly for abortions," Stearns said in a statement. "Since the Planned Parenthood Foundation of America receives about $1 million a day in taxpayer funds, I sent a letter to the group's president requesting documents and information as we look at the organization's use of federal dollars and its compliance with various laws."

Stearns also cited what he called the group's "extensive record of violating state sexual assault and child abuse reporting laws, and of encouraging young girls to lie about their ages to circumvent state reporting laws."

The line was an apparent reference to a series of sting operations conducted by anti-abortion group Live Action. The group has released videos which appear to show, in some cases, Planned Parenthood employees offering advice to people posing as sex traffickers.

But Planned Parenthood staunchly defended its practices and dismissed Stearns' request as a politically motivated attack -- one that follows unsuccessful Republican-led attempts in Congress to strip federal funding for Planned Parenthood.

"Planned Parenthood is a trusted nonprofit health care provider that provides professional, reliable and quality health care, including birth control, lifesaving cancer screenings, annual exams and STD testing and treatment to 3 million women and men across the country," group President Cecile Richards said in a statement. "This politically motivated investigation is a continuation of the efforts of earlier this year to undermine Planned Parenthood, and more disturbingly, women's access to the primary and preventive care they need."

In a letter sent Tuesday to Stearns, Reps. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., and Diana DeGette, D-Colo., excoriated Stearns for his request.

They suggested the probe was part of a "Republican vendetta" against the group and described his document request as "extraordinarily broad and burdensome." Noting that other watchdogs regularly audit Planned Parenthood, they wrote that "we are aware of no predicate that would justify this sweeping and invasive request."

"We are committed to strong congressional oversight," they wrote. "But we are opposed to investigations that appear to be designed to harass and shut down an organization simply because Republicans disagree with the work that it does."

Stearns is requesting several sets of documents. He asked Planned Parenthood for internal audits for the national organization and its affiliates covering 1998-2010. He asked for documentation showing how federal funding is segregated from abortion services. He asked for policies showing how Planned Parenthood reports cases of potential sexual abuse.

Live Action President Lila Rose applauded the move, calling the group's practices "abusive and lawless."

Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the anti-abortion Susan B. Anthony List, called the probe a "critical step" in holding the group accountable.

"We strongly believe that as Congress and the American people learn more about Planned Parenthood, they will see the urgency in defunding them immediately of the hundreds of millions of tax dollars they receive every year," she said in a statement.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/28/house-panel-launches-probe-planned-parenthood/?test=latestnews
Report to moderator   Logged
Beach Bum
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 40859


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: May 05, 2012, 09:47:16 AM »

Gov. Brewer signs Arizona ban on Planned Parenthood funding
Published May 05, 2012
Associated Press

PHOENIX –  Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer on Friday signed into law a bill to cut off Planned Parenthood's access to taxpayer money funneled through the state for non-abortion services.

Arizona already bars use of public money for abortions except to save the life of the mother, but anti-abortion legislators and other supporters of the bill have said the broader prohibition is needed to make sure that no public money indirectly supports abortion services.

"This is a common sense law that tightens existing state regulations and closes loopholes in order to ensure that taxpayer dollars are not used to fund abortions, whether directly or indirectly," said Brewer, a Republican. "By signing this measure into law, I stand with the majority of Americans who oppose the use of taxpayer funds for abortion."

Arizona has said a funding ban would interrupt its preventive health care and family planning services for nearly 20,000 women served by the organization's clinics. The organization has said it will consider a legal challenge.

The measure targeting funding for Planned Parenthood for non-abortion services was one of several approved by Arizona's Republican-led Legislature related to contentious reproductive health care issues during a 116-day session that ended Thursday. Brewer is a Republican.

Other approved Arizona bills include one generally banning abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, which Brewer has already signed, and one loosening a state law that generally requires health care plans to cover contraception.

On the funding issue, similar attempts in Texas, Kansas and Indiana have resulted in litigation.

States that considered versions of the legislation this year included New Hampshire where lawmakers effectively killed a bill as they heeded warnings that blocking public funding to abortion providers could jeopardize New Hampshire's Medicaid program.

A federal appeals court ruled Friday that Texas cannot ban Planned Parenthood from receiving state funds, at least until a lower court has a chance to hear formal arguments. At issue is funding for a Texas program that provides basic health care and contraception to 130,000 poor women.

Texas lost federal Medicaid funding for its Women's Health Program after the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services said a state law prohibiting funding for clinics affiliated with an abortion provider violated a federal law that guarantees women the right to choose their health care providers.

Texas' attorney general sued the federal government to have the funding restored, while clinics have sued the state.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/05/05/gov-brewer-signs-arizona-ban-on-planned-parenthood-funding/
Report to moderator   Logged
Straw Man
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 24849


one dwells in nirvana


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: May 05, 2012, 10:09:06 AM »

Great job Arizona - now your citizens can not only pay for more unwanted children but they will also get to enjoy higher rates and breast cancer and cervical cancer which will no doubt wind up costing the state more money too

Report to moderator   Logged
tonymctones
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 24897



View Profile
« Reply #33 on: May 05, 2012, 10:15:56 AM »

Great job Arizona - now your citizens can not only pay for more unwanted children but they will also get to enjoy higher rates and breast cancer and cervical cancer which will no doubt wind up costing the state more money too
If planned parenthood was really concerned about it all they need to do is seperate the two business practices.

Two bad this has become more about political activism then it is about the health of women and their babies.
Report to moderator   Logged
Straw Man
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 24849


one dwells in nirvana


View Profile
« Reply #34 on: May 05, 2012, 10:27:07 AM »

If planned parenthood was really concerned about it all they need to do is seperate the two business practices.
Two bad this has become more about political activism then it is about the health of women and their babies.

why should they do anything just to please fundie christians and I doubt establishing a bunch of separate facilities (and at what cost) would satisfy the fundies anyway.  

Better to just let the good people of Arizona enjoy the consequences of the decisions by their politicians

It will be a good case study

Let's check back in about 5 years and see the results







Report to moderator   Logged
tonymctones
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 24897



View Profile
« Reply #35 on: May 06, 2012, 07:12:40 AM »

why should they do anything just to please fundie christians and I doubt establishing a bunch of separate facilities (and at what cost) would satisfy the fundies anyway.  

Better to just let the good people of Arizona enjoy the consequences of the decisions by their politicians

It will be a good case study

Let's check back in about 5 years and see the results
b/c it would let them get back to the business of helping hapless women that SUPPOSEDLY cares so much about.

per their own statements abortions only are a small percentage of their business. Why let the rest of the business suffer for the small percentage?

not doing so is basically cuting off your nose to spite your face
Report to moderator   Logged
tonymctones
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 24897



View Profile
« Reply #36 on: May 06, 2012, 07:15:16 AM »

It will be a good case study

Let's check back in about 5 years and see the results
A good case study indeed, but I think if they are allowed to institute their immigration bills it may sway the findings a little too.
Report to moderator   Logged
Straw Man
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 24849


one dwells in nirvana


View Profile
« Reply #37 on: May 06, 2012, 08:00:58 AM »

b/c it would let them get back to the business of helping hapless women that SUPPOSEDLY cares so much about.

per their own statements abortions only are a small percentage of their business. Why let the rest of the business suffer for the small percentage?

not doing so is basically cuting off your nose to spite your face

administrations come and go and this is only one state

why should they modify anything they do to please a handful of fundies in one state

bottom line is that this decision will result in higher rates of cervical cancer, breast cancer and unwanted pregnacies, all of which will cost the state of Arizona more money.  That is a great example of cutting off your nose to spite your face

I say let both sides live with the consequences
Report to moderator   Logged
tonymctones
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 24897



View Profile
« Reply #38 on: May 06, 2012, 08:11:30 AM »

administrations come and go and this is only one state

why should they modify anything they do to please a handful of fundies in one state

bottom line is that this decision will result in higher rates of cervical cancer, breast cancer and unwanted pregnacies, all of which will cost the state of Arizona more money.  That is a great example of cutting off your nose to spite your face

I say let both sides live with the consequences
Ill agree with that statement...

but if they were sincerely concerned with their mission they would do whats necessary to keep the vast majority of their operations funded. I think i read before that supposedly abortions are like 3% of their procedures...

why let 3% hinder the other 97%(if thats the %)?

if they did this they wouldnt have to worry about admins coming and going for 97% of their business to achieve their social mission.
Report to moderator   Logged
Straw Man
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 24849


one dwells in nirvana


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: May 06, 2012, 09:53:20 AM »

Ill agree with that statement...

but if they were sincerely concerned with their mission they would do whats necessary to keep the vast majority of their operations funded. I think i read before that supposedly abortions are like 3% of their procedures...

why let 3% hinder the other 97%(if thats the %)?

if they did this they wouldnt have to worry about admins coming and going for 97% of their business to achieve their social mission.

how exactly are they supposed to foot the bill to do what you suggest
are they supposed to get an agreement upfront from AZ and honestly why even bother

it would be better for their cause in the long run to let people see the results of lack of access to their services
Report to moderator   Logged
tonymctones
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 24897



View Profile
« Reply #40 on: May 06, 2012, 04:38:04 PM »

how exactly are they supposed to foot the bill to do what you suggest
are they supposed to get an agreement upfront from AZ and honestly why even bother

it would be better for their cause in the long run to let people see the results of lack of access to their services
foot the bill for what? seperating their business?

get a DBA and just keep another set of books.

If abortions are what they say and only a small % of their business Im sure they could get that small % funded publicly by ppl like yourself.

if they do that then, what reason would anyone have to keep money from then?

Report to moderator   Logged
Straw Man
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 24849


one dwells in nirvana


View Profile
« Reply #41 on: May 06, 2012, 05:40:08 PM »

foot the bill for what? seperating their business?

get a DBA and just keep another set of books.

If abortions are what they say and only a small % of their business Im sure they could get that small % funded publicly by ppl like yourself.

if they do that then, what reason would anyone have to keep money from then?

as you know, federal law prohibits any $'s from going to abortion so there is no need to change anything just to please a group of politicians in one state

As I've already said, I think it's better for  PP cause in the long run to deny services and let the states enjoy the increase costs as a result

That would have more of an effect than try to appease fundie nutjob (who will never be satisfied)
Report to moderator   Logged
Beach Bum
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 40859


View Profile
« Reply #42 on: May 30, 2012, 02:46:35 PM »

How the heck are they doing this with our tax dollars??


Planned Parenthood targets Romney with new swing-state ad buy
Published May 30, 2012
FoxNews.com

Planned Parenthood, endorsing President Obama Wednesday morning, went after Mitt Romney out of the gate with a new ad buy in crucial swing states accusing the Republican candidate of undermining women's rights.

The ad campaign seeks to exploit the so-called gender gap between the two candidates. Polls consistently show Obama doing better among female voters than Romney -- though Romney typically does better among men.

The 30-second ad, a $1.4 million buy expected to run in Florida and Iowa, pulls no punches. It intersperses sound-bites from Romney with warnings about his policies.

"When Mitt Romney says, 'Planned Parenthood, we're gonna get rid of that,' Romney is saying he'll deny women the birth control and cancer screenings they depend on," the narrator says. "When Romney says, 'Do I believe the Supreme Court should overturn Roe v. Wade? Yes,' he's saying he'll deny women the right to make their own medical decisions."

The quote from Romney saying he'd "get rid" of Planned Parenthood has drawn complaints from the Romney camp in the past when it's been used by opposition groups. In the original interview with a St. Louis TV station, Romney appeared to be saying he'd get rid of federal funding for Planned Parenthood, and not the organization itself.

Regardless, the Planned Parenthood ad buy marks the latest escalation in a general election race that is quickly heating up. Romney clinched the nomination Tuesday night with a win in the Texas primary -- Obama, according to his campaign, called Romney shortly before noon on Wednesday to congratulate him. 

With the latest ad buy, the Obama campaign can allow Planned Parenthood to wage somewhat of a proxy fight over women's issues and abortion, allowing the president's reelection team to focus on Romney's resume.

The Obama campaign is about to add a new line of attack to its anti-Romney message. After calling into question his tenure at Bain Capital, the campaign now plans to criticize his record as governor of Massachusetts. An Obama campaign official told Fox News this does not mean the campaign is abandoning its attacks over Bain.

The Romney campaign, meanwhile, is going after the Obama administration for its record of using taxpayer dollars to fund companies "that later failed."

No doubt meant as a response to the Bain aid, a new Romney web video asks voters: "President Obama is spending your tax dollars to create jobs. How's he doing?"

It goes on to cite Solyndra, the solar-panel firm that went bankrupt after receiving a $535 million taxpayer-backed loan guarantee. But the video notes "that's not even half the story," and cites other Energy Department-backed loans and grants to firms that later lost money and cut workers.

Outside groups on both sides will continue to pour millions into the presidential campaign. According to Politico, conservative super PACs and other organizations are planning to spend roughly $1 billion on the White House and congressional races.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/05/30/planned-parenthood-targets-romney-with-new-swing-state-ad-buy/
Report to moderator   Logged
Beach Bum
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 40859


View Profile
« Reply #43 on: July 25, 2012, 01:43:44 PM »

Rep wants public hearing on Planned Parenthood after woman's death
Published July 24, 2012
FoxNews.com

Planned Parenthood is facing new calls for congressional scrutiny after a Chicago woman died following an abortion at a local clinic last week.

Twenty-four-year old Tonya Reaves died Friday of hemorrhaging following the abortion, according to the Cook County Medical Examiner's office. Her death has been ruled an accident.

While Planned Parenthood afterward issued a statement expressing condolences to the family, the abortion provider's most vocal critics in Washington swiftly began calling for a closer look into the group's safety guidelines and financial practices.

Rep. Cliff Stearns, R-Fla., who launched a probe into Planned Parenthood earlier this year, is now calling for a public hearing on Capitol Hill.

"I would like to put them under oath," he told Fox News. "I would like to find out how they spend our half a billion dollars, and I would also like to explore some of the safety aspects, particularly in light of this death, of this tragedy."

Stearns claims that since he launched a congressional probe, all he's gotten are thousands of pages of irrelevant documents and no answers to his questions.

The anti-abortion Susan B. Anthony List also called for congressional oversight in the wake of Reaves' death.

"Congress has an obligation to exercise clear and regular oversight of businesses like Planned Parenthood that receive hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer funding and have such dramatic impact on the lives of women and unborn children," Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser said in a statement. "We must not allow Tonya Reaves to have died in vain, but rather heed this warning and call on Congress to exercise its full capacity to investigate Planned Parenthood."

Planned Parenthood's national office so far has not responded to requests from Fox News for comment. The Illinois chapter of Planned Parenthood released the following statement, which ran over the weekend in local media:

"While legal abortion services in the United States have a very high safety record, a tragedy such as this is devastating to loved ones, and we offer our deepest sympathies. Planned Parenthood of Illinois cares deeply about the health and safety of each and every patient."

The Guttmacher Institute reports that nationally, abortion has become much safer since the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. One study, which cited data from the '90s, said fewer than .3 percent of abortion patients "have complications requiring hospitalization."

"Today, having an abortion in the United States involves far less short-term risk than carrying a pregnancy to term," the report said.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/24/rep-wants-public-hearing-on-planned-parenthood-after-woman-death/#ixzz21beUrLmd?test=latestnews?test=latestnews
Report to moderator   Logged
240 is Back
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 81897


Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com


View Profile WWW
« Reply #44 on: July 25, 2012, 01:55:43 PM »

How the heck are they doing this with our tax dollars??

NRA, churches and other groups are tax-exempt and campaign for romney.

I'm sure we can find many examples of groups or individiuals that get tax dollars and use (abuse) them for political goals.

This isn't new.
Report to moderator   Logged

Straw Man
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 24849


one dwells in nirvana


View Profile
« Reply #45 on: July 25, 2012, 02:03:05 PM »

NRA, churches and other groups are tax-exempt and campaign for romney.

I'm sure we can find many examples of groups or individiuals that get tax dollars and use (abuse) them for political goals.

This isn't new.

and almost certainly PP didn't used taxpayer funds for the ad buy but most l likely used funds donated to them or one of their PACS.    Surely Repubs can't have any problem with that
Report to moderator   Logged
Beach Bum
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 40859


View Profile
« Reply #46 on: July 25, 2012, 02:11:17 PM »

NRA, churches and other groups are tax-exempt and campaign for romney.

I'm sure we can find many examples of groups or individiuals that get tax dollars and use (abuse) them for political goals.

This isn't new.

Aside from that being flatly untrue (what else is new), the issue is tax dollars being given to an organization that campaigns for one political party.  Should never happen.     
Report to moderator   Logged
Straw Man
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 24849


one dwells in nirvana


View Profile
« Reply #47 on: July 25, 2012, 02:17:15 PM »

Aside from that being flatly untrue (what else is new), the issue is tax dollars being given to an organization that campaigns for one political party.  Should never happen.     

except of course that it's 100% true.  Churches are tax exempt yet use public resources that are paid for by other taxpayers and many do violate the law by actively engaging in the political process.    PP on the other hand has various PACS and used donated money rather than tax dollars to fund their political ads
Report to moderator   Logged
240 is Back
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 81897


Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com


View Profile WWW
« Reply #48 on: July 25, 2012, 03:50:27 PM »

Aside from that being flatly untrue (what else is new), the issue is tax dollars being given to an organization that campaigns for one political party.  Should never happen.     

which part is untrue?
Report to moderator   Logged

240 is Back
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 81897


Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com


View Profile WWW
« Reply #49 on: July 25, 2012, 03:52:04 PM »

Aside from that being flatly untrue (what else is new), the issue is tax dollars being given to an organization that campaigns for one political party.  Should never happen.     

Really?  SO you're okay with tax dollarsbeing given to an org that campaigns for one political party?


Pick a field, there are examples in most.  healthcare, anyone?

Youre a smart man, BB, I didn't expect this from you - plenty of organizations get tax subsidies and blow it on political lobbying for both parties.  You didn't know this?
Report to moderator   Logged

Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Theme created by Egad Community. Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!