Posted by tedco on 4/16/2011 12:36:00 PM (view original):
Holding the budget hostage over a social issue certainly is psychotic.

And supporting the continued funding of PP doesn't have anything to do with abortion, as those funds have zero to do with abortions.

You keep saying this when even you don't believe it.   You're funny.  








In a sad way.

Posted by swamphawk22 on 4/17/2011 6:36:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tedco on 4/16/2011 3:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by swamphawk22 on 4/16/2011 2:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tedco on 4/16/2011 12:36:00 PM (view original):
Holding the budget hostage over a social issue certainly is psychotic.

And supporting the continued funding of PP doesn't have anything to do with abortion, as those funds have zero to do with abortions.

It isnt being held over a social issue. It is being held over funding a priate orginization.

Both sides feel deeply about the issue.

Isnt honest debate over core issues something we want from our politicians? Isnt making back room deals that trade off things something we are trying to get rid of?

A "pirate" organization? WTF is that supposed to mean?

And you know it's a social issue. Or you're deluding yourself.

priate was a misspell of private.

And of course abortion is a social issue. We are not deciding the abortion issue. We are not deciding if PP stays open. we are deciding if the US federal Government is going to give it milions of dollars a year!

Most people support why we give it millions of dollars every year - to help provide essential women's health services to populations that don't otherwise have access to it.

But the "pyshcos" on the GOP side are willing to sacrifice all that just to placate the part of their base who can't get over the fact that PP also provides a perfectly legal procedure that they don't like.

Posted by tedco on 4/17/2011 1:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by swamphawk22 on 4/17/2011 6:36:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tedco on 4/16/2011 3:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by swamphawk22 on 4/16/2011 2:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tedco on 4/16/2011 12:36:00 PM (view original):
Holding the budget hostage over a social issue certainly is psychotic.

And supporting the continued funding of PP doesn't have anything to do with abortion, as those funds have zero to do with abortions.

It isnt being held over a social issue. It is being held over funding a priate orginization.

Both sides feel deeply about the issue.

Isnt honest debate over core issues something we want from our politicians? Isnt making back room deals that trade off things something we are trying to get rid of?

A "pirate" organization? WTF is that supposed to mean?

And you know it's a social issue. Or you're deluding yourself.

priate was a misspell of private.

And of course abortion is a social issue. We are not deciding the abortion issue. We are not deciding if PP stays open. we are deciding if the US federal Government is going to give it milions of dollars a year!

Most people support why we give it millions of dollars every year - to help provide essential women's health services to populations that don't otherwise have access to it.

But the "pyshcos" on the GOP side are willing to sacrifice all that just to placate the part of their base who can't get over the fact that PP also provides a perfectly legal procedure that they don't like.

Providing essential women's (and men's) health services that don't otherwise have it is something Medicaid does.  PP could do their business without government funding.  Essential (and non-essential) services can be provided without government help.

Posted by tedco on 4/17/2011 1:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by swamphawk22 on 4/17/2011 6:36:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tedco on 4/16/2011 3:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by swamphawk22 on 4/16/2011 2:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tedco on 4/16/2011 12:36:00 PM (view original):
Holding the budget hostage over a social issue certainly is psychotic.

And supporting the continued funding of PP doesn't have anything to do with abortion, as those funds have zero to do with abortions.

It isnt being held over a social issue. It is being held over funding a priate orginization.

Both sides feel deeply about the issue.

Isnt honest debate over core issues something we want from our politicians? Isnt making back room deals that trade off things something we are trying to get rid of?

A "pirate" organization? WTF is that supposed to mean?

And you know it's a social issue. Or you're deluding yourself.

priate was a misspell of private.

And of course abortion is a social issue. We are not deciding the abortion issue. We are not deciding if PP stays open. we are deciding if the US federal Government is going to give it milions of dollars a year!

Most people support why we give it millions of dollars every year - to help provide essential women's health services to populations that don't otherwise have access to it.

But the "pyshcos" on the GOP side are willing to sacrifice all that just to placate the part of their base who can't get over the fact that PP also provides a perfectly legal procedure that they don't like.

So if it is really such a tiny part of what PP does why dont they just stop doing abortions and continue to do all those other wonderful things...and the lie is exposed!

That 3% number is spin. It says that every customer that happens to pick up a pamphlet is equal. In reality PP is one of the single largest abortion provider in Ameirca. They do other stuff to, but it isnt 97%.

Abortion is legal. No one is going to ban abortions if we decide to not give a private orginization a check. This is part of limiting the scope of government. When the Tea Party says limit government and dont pay for things that are outside the Federal scope the left always shoots back with "they want to shut down SS and fire stations". They want to make it look like everything is critical.

So let start small. How about we dont need the Federal Government to give a large check to an abortion provider!

Why in the world should they stop performing abortions??

And why focus on that so much when they provide so many other vital services?

The derangement on the right over this is absolutely astounding.

I will agree to no federal funding to organizations like PP and NPR if it's accompanied by the removal of tax-exempt status from all religions.

How about we don't need the Federal Government to give a large check to a large ag company or oil company or chain retailer or defense contractor or real estate developers or banks or etc, etc, etc, etc.

Why not start there Swamp?

Everything is on the table.

The issue is if PP is such an important issue that we cannot defund it, why would we even look at anything else.

That is exactly what I mean about this insane right-wing derangement over PP. If they were serious about cutting government spending, why start with a health care provider when there are so many bigger targets out there?

Posted by antonsirius on 4/17/2011 3:40:00 PM (view original):
I will agree to no federal funding to organizations like PP and NPR if it's accompanied by the removal of tax-exempt status from all religions.

I cannot imagine that anyone ties these 2 issues together.

Religious freedom is a cornerstone of what America is all about.

I cannot imagine why you would look at PP and think they are the same as a religion!

Posted by swamphawk22 on 4/17/2011 3:52:00 PM (view original):
Everything is on the table.

The issue is if PP is such an important issue that we cannot defund it, why would we even look at anything else.

What do you mean by "why would we even look at anything else"??

We are in a mindset that the Federal Government should do everything. All you need to show is it is a good cause and federal funding is ok.

We need to start drawing the line and saying this isnt a Fedearal issue.

You may be right, but I think that there are much bigger and more suitable targets than health care providers.

Corporate welfare has been off the charts for the last 20-30 years. How about we start there before we start worrying about pap smears and birth control.

Posted by swamphawk22 on 4/17/2011 3:52:00 PM (view original):
Everything is on the table.

The issue is if PP is such an important issue that we cannot defund it, why would we even look at anything else.

Bullshit.  Billions of dollars could be saved by ending these subsidies now, but the right goes after the the chump change that is given to groups like Acorn, NPR and PP.  If spending cuts are the big priority, then why not save a couple hundred billion a year by stopping corporate welfare?

Posted by swamphawk22 on 4/17/2011 3:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by antonsirius on 4/17/2011 3:40:00 PM (view original):
I will agree to no federal funding to organizations like PP and NPR if it's accompanied by the removal of tax-exempt status from all religions.

I cannot imagine that anyone ties these 2 issues together.

Religious freedom is a cornerstone of what America is all about.

I cannot imagine why you would look at PP and think they are the same as a religion!

I gave you a chance to have an honest discussion about an issue, and you naturally decided to spew your usual bullshit instead.

**** off, liar.