So, the pretense behind de-funding Planned Parenthood starts with the need to cut the budget (true), then to taxpayers should not have to pay for abortions (which they don't), and of all Planned Parenthood's services provided:

"Planned Parenthood is the nation's leading sexual and reproductive health care advocate and provider.[29] In 2008, they reported that contraception constituted 35% of total services, STI/STD testing and treatment constituted 34%, cancer testing and screening constituted 17%; and other women's health procedures, including pregnancy, prenatal, midlife, and infertility were 10%.[30] 2% to 3% of visits involve abortions.[31]"

Hum! Two to three per cent of their visits are about abortions, which no federal funds are spent. And, many of those procedures are not done out of convenience but for ectopic pregnancies, dnc's due to the death of the embryo in utero, and other emergencies threatening the life and health of the mother.

What a sham by the right wingers pushing their social agenda! Pence being one of them! Hope he runs for President. We'll see how badly the Republicans lose if he does.

-- Modified on 4/8/2011 11:05:25 AM

-- Modified on 4/8/2011 11:17:00 AM

significant cuts. What are they are talking about, $30B, $60B, $80B? The 2008 budget was $2.8T, and the 2011 budget is $3.8T, and both parties are talking these insignificant cuts. I don't care if it's Planned Parenthood, NPR or any other social issue important to the liberals. I just wanting fucking cuts.

Re your comment about social agenda. Just about every initiative funded by government is a social issue. Is Social Security a social issue? Is Medicare a social issue? Shit, even the expenditures for the environment, energy, labor are based on social agendas. So this argument is not valid.

this is a social, cultural, moral issue embraced by the conservative and Catholic Christians. And, the Republicans are making it as big an issue, or bigger than the budget cuts themselves. Some budget cuts will save you money, and some will cost you money. I don't think Nixon was particularly a spend thrift, but he had the foresight to see that government funding for women's reproductive health would save the our society, over the long run. Much like the expense of flu shots, the government can save money by not supporting research and development for the annual flu shot vaccine each year, but how much does that cost us as a society as a whole in work productivity, school and business shutdowns, and medical cost of those without health insurance. Many more people get sick needlessly and at a greater cost to society than the expense.

-- Modified on 4/8/2011 12:58:34 PM

-- Modified on 4/8/2011 1:05:07 PM

-- Modified on 4/8/2011 1:05:17 PM

fully implemented, why will there be a need for Planned Parenthood at all? All the Planned Parenthood measures you mention will be covered by Obamacare. In fact, annual physical exams will become mandatory, (if you can find a doctor that is available to give one). With an additional 35 million on the healthcare rolls, where's all the healthcare professionals to treat the new recipients?  

Oh, and flu shots? They are mandatory in the military.....I always got the fucking flu anyway, and was grounded. That sucked. Since retiring, I've never received a flu shot, and have yet to get the flu, any kind of flu.

Lastly, I agree with St Croix. Cut everything. Useless program to zero, and substantial cuts in everything else. Did you know the federal government is paying a company in Missouri, $15 million/year to make and store helium gas? Just in case it might be needed. Been doing that for over 50 years.

Oh! I use to work in in the field of cryogenics, and liquid helium is in extremely short supply, and is needed for research, particularly regarding satellites and space travel.

...but cutting planned parenthood and NPR won't amount to shit.

There are three things we should focus cuts on. 1) the Treasury Dept. 2) the Defense Dept. 3) Health and Human Services dept.

...of course, it wouldn't hurt if US taxpayers weren't forced to give massive subsidies to corporations. 43% of Bank of America's profits came from US taxpayers a few years ago. They didn't pay shit in taxes. Neither did Citi, or GE.

You didn't answer my question. Why is Planned Parenthood necessary by 2014?

Also, I believe I said helium gas, not liquid helium. Is liquid helium as cold as LOX?

willy, $25 million here, $50 million there....it all adds up. Gotta start somewhere.

You got a bank account? If so, YOU pay the corporation taxes, not the bank. The only money banks possess is from it's members and investors.

Looking at your graph, isn't it interesting how defense spending increased largely in 2009, after the dems took control of everything? But, oh no, It's all Bush's fault. LMAO.

Like I said, $30B, $60B, $80B whatever, ain't going to do it. You know eventually what's going to happen? Not today, not tomorrow, not next year, but in 5, 7 or 10 years from now, the IMF comes a calling.

You know the IMF? They are kinda like Cash Call. You remember Gary Coleman when he was pitching for that pay day loan company. Usually the IMF only bails out 2 bit 3 world piece of shit countries. They also mandate draconian cuts, usually around, you guessed it social agenda issues, because that's where the money is. And they demand, and get, huge returns for the investment. In 2010 they visited Greece, and will soon be visiting Portugal and Ireland.

Remember the riots in Greece. The unions were pissed that the IMF required huge govt cuts in order for Greece to reduce its debt to GDP from double digits to 3%.

Were not there yet. We can avoid it. Both the left and the right need to get off these social agenda issues, because except for defense, everything the govt spends your tax dollars on are social issues.

Cutting Defense, Treasury, and Health and Human Services. Cutting 25 million out of a 3.8 TRILLION budget is absurd. The cuts are so insignficant that you waste money going through the time and effort to institute those cuts. Like I said before, it's like sitting down to dinner with a big plate of speghetti, inform your dinner guests that you're on a diet, and then pick out flecks of pepper. It's fucking retarded. Let me repeat that. It's fucking retarded. Let me repeat it again. It. Is. Fucking. Retarded.

There is only one way to balance the budget. Raise taxes, cut spending. You raise taxes on people who have the money to pay taxes, and you cut spending where most of the money is being spent. It's not that hard to follow. Unless you're willing to do that, then you're not serious about the budget. Period.

in the federal budget is spent on SOCIAL PROGRAMS. Cut defense if you want, but the social programs are sucking the life out of taxpayers' dollars.

It's difficult to cut much from the Treasury budget, as much of that is interes payments on money that the government has borrowed to fund their useless fucking social programs. Now THAT'S fucking retarded.

poor and uninsured and break even?

You're kidding right? Instead of tax, let's just steal their entire net worth. How much do you think you'll get. About $500B, give or take a few billion. Gee, that reduces the 2011 deficit from $1.3T to $800? What are your plans for 2012? How about $2013? How about $2014 when the deficits are projected at $1T each year.

I really am amazed at the stupidity of some of the liberals on this board. No wonder GaG doesn't respond to your idiocy, or willy's.

Do me favor? Go play in traffic!

af, I'm in total agreement with cutting farm subsidies. As you stated, the majority of those subsidies go to those who least need it. How about grants to universities for 'research'? Gone....Harvard is sitting on approximately a $45 billion annuity. Let them fund their own research. Matter of fact, why not free tuition for all Harvard undergrads for the next 4 years, and stop Pell grants and student loans.

40 families control 90% of the wealth? First time I heard that.

No af, you're wrong. There's a lot more to social programs than just healthcare.

I'm done with this argument, are you?

I think we are talking about $400M in federal funding. I believe federal funding is about 1/3 of Planned Parenthood's budget. For this argument, don't view Planned Parenthood as a social or political issue.

Now if you had to cut 1/3 of your budget, and still provide those services to those who really really need it, what would you do? Think of cutting a budget like you were the CFO of a business.

Planned Parenthood has over 800 locations. I did a quick little search, specifically in CA, and found many of them are close to universities. You know why? A captive audience of young college age girls getting birth control pills, HPV vaccines, STD tests and the like. I also noticed some locations are in affluent areas. Obviously those are not designed to target the poor.

Let's go back to the universities for a second. Most, if not all, of those universities have student health centers. Those services are free as they are included as part of the tuition. The majority of these girls also have private insurance through their parents. See they have 2 options, but they use Planned Parenthood. A lot of these girls scam the system, by claiming they don't have any income, hence the universities give them a card stating so, which can be used at Planned Parenthood. And as a result, they can get certain services for free, or at a dramatically reduced rate, which is lower than the cost to Planned Parenthood.

Why don't these girls use their private insurance, which is usually under the parent's policy. Is it because their parents will find out they are "fucking" around? Probably. They don't ask a lot of questions. It's relatively easy to get the services need, at a free or reduced rate.

My point is, don't get political. Don't listen to Harry Reid or the other liberals saying Republicans want to kill women. Let's think about process re-engineering Planned Parenthood where they would not need Federal funding, but continue to provide the required services to the poor.

So as a professed liberal, would you at least agree to look at Planned Parenthood's business model, and make the appropriate changes where federal is not really needed?

whether by decree, or by gunpoint, stealing one man's money for the benefit of another is stealing. Plain and simple.

IMO the very premise is way too ridiculous to qualify as an argument.

I would say it was more like a scolding you would give to a rather slow child who tried to intrude on an adult conversation. You can't argue with people that don't meet at least a certain minimum standard for knowledge and intelligence.

liberals need to accept that there can be no sacred cows if we are going to make meaningful cuts. As far as I am concerned, everything should be on the table, especially Willy's job.

As you said, we can either get our house in order or at some point someone else is going to do it for us.

I went to all boys Catholic HS. Hey, it was for the education and their athletic program. There was this clown in the other row that would constantly argue the most ridiculous shit, kinda like willy, AF, and a few others. One day, the guy in front of him turned around and just hit the shit out of him. You know what the Brother (we had Brothers of the Holy Cross) said, "well that should stop his ridiculous arguments for the semester, and it did.

Back then there were no lawsuits, no parental complaints. Most of the time if you had a problem with another student, you just took outside. Ahh to be young again.

You're right. I'm trying to explain things and be logical. It ain't working.

-- Modified on 4/8/2011 8:58:38 PM

"Professed Liberal."

You and Snow want me to defend Planned Parenthood appropriations when that was not even what my post was about. I was making the point that I didn't think a minority voice in congress should shut down the government while using the abortion issue to do so. And, guess what? Even Michelle Bachmann and Mike Huckabee agree on that point. If both houses of Congress and the President see fit to de-fund Planned Parenthood that's fine by me. I just don't think it should be done with a rider attached to the annual budget by a group fighting the abortion wars.

If it is such a great organization, please explain to me why it can not run on private contributions?

There are a lot of organizations that do that...

Do you Google search, some very interesting analysis comes up

Not even a rounding error. This is kind misleading rubbish that gets this country twisted in knots. If you want cut funding, why don't you start with agriculture subsidies for likes of ADM. ADM doesn't need it. $180 Billion total in 2009. Cut real waste not help for the poor and disabled. While at tax the 40 rich families holding 90% wealth in this country instead of taking money from the poor and giving it to the rich.

"The United States currently pays around $20 billion per year to farmers in direct subsidies as "farm income stabilization"[9][10][11] via U.S. farm bills. These bills date back to the economic turmoil of the Great Depression with 1922 Grain Futures Act, the 1929 Agricultural Marketing Act and the 1933 Agricultural Adjustment Act creating a tradition of government support. A Canadian report claimed that for every dollar U.S. farmers earn, 62 cents comes from some form of government, with total aid in 2009 from all levels of government adding up to $180.8 billion.[12]"

Not even close

Is distribution a fancy word for "earning".  I haven't had money distributed to me since I got an allowance.

I said private contributions, not a billable service.

If so many people think this organizationis so great, they should be willing to write checks to support it.
When is the last time you wrote a check for them, be honest...

-- Modified on 4/8/2011 6:48:36 PM

"because except for defense, everything the govt spends your tax dollars on are social issues.

isn't defense just a jobs program

just because the rich can afford the high priced attorneys and accountants and lobbyists,  they can legally "steal" money from the majority of the people to line there pockets.  i dont see it as stealing, i see it as taking back what was taken from me.  and unless you are quite affluent, they got your money too.  i got no problem in creating wealth and keeping what I EARN, not what i can fleece from others because they are to dumb to realize they are being robbed, always blinded by the ruse of "hey look at us rich folk, don't you wanna be rich too? well, just keep believing in the american dream and it can happen to you!" that is what is being done to the middle class., and  at this point the middle class is an endangered species

Look at the data and if you want to drink the cool aid instead, go right ahead.

Snow, you just brought up the 4 most dreaded words in the liberals' vocabulary.....'hard work', and, 'risk taking', LOL. Way to go.

Or look at the data. Where the fuck gun point come from. FYi, data just shows how the distribution is today, however it happened doesn't matter. If you think this is free market or capitalism, it is not. It is more like Oligarchy.

GaG is going to call me stupid moron as usual without even realizing that I did not come with the data.  GaG thinks he belongs to the top 1%.

i really do wish we had someone like FDR back in the saddle. he had the majorities welfare(oops, there is that dreaded word) in mind.

" No person should try, or be allowed to get rich out of the program, and the principle of tax payments in accordance with ability to pay should be constantly before our eyes to guide our legislation."

"The basic things expected by our people of their political and economic systems are simple. They are:

Equality of opportunity for youth and for others.

Jobs for those who can work.

Security for those who need it.

***The ending of special privilege for the few.***

The preservation of civil liberties for all.

*****The enjoyment -- The enjoyment of the fruits of scientific progress in a wider and constantly rising standard of living."*****

Why should he be obligated to give it all back to a bunch of lazy fucks that were either too stupid or too lazy to make their own fortune.

I earned my money and just like our newest putz Anthony inadvertently pointed out, I am smart enough to hang on to it. Reagan had the right idea, lower the progressive tax rates, but make damn sure that everyone pays what they owe. Do you really think that anyone actually payed 90% of their income to the government back when tax rates where that high. If you do, then you are every bit as stupid as Willy.

but I think abortion is a personal choice. Not something the govenrment should be involved in.

BUT THAT IS EXACTLY WHY WE SHOULD NOT BE SUBSIDUZING IT OR PROVIDING "COUNSELING SERVICES" ABOUT IT!!!

not the numbers, the conclusions....

Cal it what it is. If you want to evenly distribute the money, its called communism.

If you are advocating that, at least have the guts to call it what it is....

The great thing about this country is the OPPORTUNITY!! Anyone can move into the top 1%, but it takes initiative, hard work and risk taking....

Results are not guaranteed by the Constitution, only Opportunity...

I  don't associate  with any political party,i do believe in hard work and risk taking. now explain to me how businesses and the rich are risk takers...they always have the backstop of the government to bail them out if they fuck up, most recently, 2008. They took a risk, it failed, they still got richer. Care to rebut? Or do you believe in the theory of trickle down economics "let that piss rain all over me!"

Which is it, do forty families control 90% of the wealth, or does it take hundreds of millions just to break into the top 1%? you libs can't have it both ways.

You know you have a good argument when you result to insults...lol.  If you are really in that 1% and are at least in the hundreds of  millions  range, congrats.  Where is the hard work, where is the risk taking though? I see taking. They take our money and pump it into what should be failed businesses because of the risks they took. I think most of you are not seeing clearly,i don't think anyone is saying lets rob the rich,i think most are saying lets stop the down right thievery that is being perpetuated by the rich. I would say I am in the middle class, maybe upper middle. But I am a lazy fuck because  you get Rich with my (tax) money. I'll say it again, "warren buffett said it best, this is class warfare, and my side is winning" even he disagrees with the fact that he pays a lower tax rate then the secretary working for him. It is a fundamentally flawed system. I doubt anything will Ever change. To many people are blinded this carrot dangled in front of them, known as the american dream. That you can be in the 1% too.i bet you guys agreed with tarp and how that was shoved down our throats. But yup, the rich businesses take risks and make it on  there own merit...now that's sarcasm! Lol

While taxing the rich more may not solve all our problems I doubt it would hurt.

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2009/070409a.html

the government should not have gotten involved.

Don't be pissed at the wealthy because they were smart enough to work the system. Be pissed at your elected officials about that. You are addressing your anger in the wrong direction.

BTW, companies do not magically appear. Someone has to invest capital (both mentary and sweat) to start them up, so there is risk.

How rich are you?
No anger here, just conversing. And how did those ways to work the system get in place? They just magically appeared overnight? Or did some people have a hand in it, with enough influence (translates: money) to get it done?


Ps. Love this board, its provided some much needed entertainment to this sick dog.

geeeeeeeeeeeeez



-- Modified on 4/10/2011 4:03:26 AM

US and Them.....

I'm being robbed and raped and I should be ANGRY WITH THE POLICE AND THE GOVERMENT for allowing it to happen and not the perps.

They just don’t know any better....LOL

Every day you get up and go to work you take a risk.....

I'm so sick and tired of hearing how we have to coddel business. You say they take all the risks and then thru legal machinations and the tax code they get so many breaks. Get your head out of the sand.

Time for a change.....anybody know the definition of an insurgent?



-- Modified on 4/10/2011 4:03:58 AM

-- Modified on 4/10/2011 4:06:22 AM

pretty comfortable by most standards, but there are plenty of folks who make in a day what I do in a year. And no, I did not inherit anything.

Those systems are in place through your elected representatives, and here is a news flash. COMPANIES CAN NOT VOTE, ONLY CITIZENS (hopefully, but that is another thread)

They can give money, but in the end it is the people who vote in elected officials. So if you are pissed, look all around you and let's put the responsibility where it really belongs.

The asshole laying face down, dead in the street in a pool of his own blood because he thoght his way was the only way.

What next, you gonna tell us we need Sharai Law Mr. Insurgent??

I know you want to take your ball and go home, but how about this...

Don't be pissed because someone is smarter and better than you at something, trying getting smarter and better at it as well...

You don't have to coddle business, but then why don't you figure out what we are goign to DO FOR FRIGGIN JOBS!!!!