Planned Parenthood

That Gruesome Planned Parenthood Footage Fiorina Described in the GOP Debate? It Doesn't Exist.

There's still plenty to horrify pro-lifers in the Planned Parenthood sting videos, but what Fiorina claims to have seen isn't among it.

|

@CBSThisMorning/Twitter

In the GOP debate on CNN last night, Carly Fiorina gave an impassioned speech about why she would risk shutting down the government in order to strip funding from Planned Parenthood. "This is about the character of our nation, and if we will not stand up and force President Obama to veto this bill, then shame on us!" she said, going on to describe footage that she claims she watched showing "a fully formed fetus on the table, its heart beating, its legs kicking, while someone says we have to keep it alive to harvest its brain." This horrific imagery allegedly appeared in one of the 10 recent Planned Parenthood sting videos released by the anti-abortion advocacy group Center for Medical Progress (CMP). 

But "no video has surfaced showing the scene Fiorina describes taking place inside a Planned Parenthood facility," The Washington Post "Fact Check" columnists say. A video produced by the Center for Medical Progress does feature an interview with Holly O'Donnell, a former technician at StemExpress, a biotechnology company that Planned Parenthood affiliates in California sometimes donated fetal tissue and organs to. O'Donnell says she saw a StemExpress supervisor tap on an aborted fetus' heart to make it beat again.

"And I'm sitting here and I'm looking at this fetus, and its heart is beating, and I don't know what to think," says O'Donnell in the interview. "She gave me the scissors and told me that I had to cut down the middle of the face [to get to the brain]. I can't even describe what that feels like." 

Gruesome? Incredibly. But so is a lot of surgery, and so is organ and tissue harvesting in general. Why the supervisor would want to make the heart beat again is unclear, but it is not part of the procedure—there is no mention of anyone saying to "keep it alive so we can harvest its brain." Maybe he or she wanted to show the new employee how hearts can keep beating after death. This doesn't mean, however, that the fetus was alive in any meaningful way; a heart will beat after a brain has died and any consciousness or pain has ceased.

In any event, the events in question neither take place in a Planned Parenthood clinic, nor are they actually depicted in any of the CMP footage. They may have taken place at StemExpress, but Fiorina did not see them, as the only evidence we have of them is the interview with O'Donnell, a young woman choosing to appear in an anti-abortion video and talk about her experiences working at the biotechnology company.

Even Mollie Hemingway at The Federalist, in a piece purporting to defend Fiorina's remarks ("Watch The Video Planned Parenthood And Its Media Allies Deny Exists"), only offers this:

As for Fiorina's quote, she is likely referring to the entirety of the 10 videos, including the seventh video released by the Center for Medical Progress. Watch the full video for yourself. It does, in fact, show a fully formed fetus, heart beating and legs kicking. And it shows this while Holly O'Donnell, a former organ harvester who worked for StemExpress at a Planned Parenthood affiliate, graphically discuss the harvesting of a brain from a baby whose heart was beating.

Just to clarify: No one is denying the existance of this video that anyone can very clearly view on the Internet right now (including below). It exists, and it shows fetuses, and it shows an interview with O'Donnell. It just doesn't show the things Fiorina claimed in front of more than 20 million viewers last night. 

Fiorina defended her remarks on Good Morning America Thursday morning. "Rest assured, I have seen the images I talked about last night," Fiorina told George Stephanolous. 

NEXT: 8-Year-Olds Can't Be Left Alone in British Columbia. No Exceptions.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Alas, the GOP’s Great Gyno-American Trump Slayer doesn’t much like Planned Parenthood. It’s always something.

    1. This annoys me no end. Every time some politician opens their mouth to complain about government doing something they don’t like, they leap straight to making the government do the opposite, which pleases them, but offends everyone else. They seem incapable of making that cognitive enlightenment necessary to ask why government has any business with regards to that question at all, and then conclude that if it were left to individuals, they would all make their own decision and harm nobody. People would be happier, in general (except for the nannyists), the wasted inefficiency of government regulation would vanish, society would have a lot less friction from people no longer tussling over control of something they want more to preclude others from controlling them than to control others, and life in general would be a lot less stressful.

      Why can’t they just leave me and everybody else the fuck alone? (Rhetorical question!)

      1. Too many people who go into politics do so in order to stop people from doing something they don’t like, or to force people to act in a different way, or to just feel like they’ve made a difference. Do you know how many thousands of laws get passed every year between the states and federal government? How about repealing all those stupid laws that no longer apply and aren’t enforced. As an old guy I used to work with said, “The fact these politicians want the job disqualifies them.” I tend to agree.

        1. Are those rhetorical questions in a rhetorical answer to a rhetorical question?

          1. I’m going to ponder this question inside my Klein Bottle…

            1. Oh come now – there are better kinds or brands of bottle to slip into.

    2. They prefer to be called “People of Vagina” now, or PoV for short.

    3. So reason’s view is Carly lied because the “fetus'” heart was beating only, but it wasn’t alive.

      I saw a live baby with a beating heart be murdered, but let’s call it a dead fetus so we can support government agents torturing and murdering newborns. That apparently what reason supports today, paid government agents destroying the innocent.

      1. A fetus is alive if the heart is beating, but that still does not make it a person. You can’t use that as the criterion, unless you also want to give right to a tumor that has vascularized.

        1. Tumors have hearts? Crazy!

        2. A legitimate point to be sure, but it really depends on each individual’s opinion of when life does or does not begin.

          Planned Parenthood does seem like some of their employees are pretty damn unethical, and the organization definitely has a shadow over it.

          The conservatives probably aren’t totally wrong about this one. What Fiorina did or didn’t see, well who the hell knows, but PP does definitely have some shady individuals working there.

    4. Come on Carly. Enough with the rookie moves. Get your shit together!

  2. They’re obviously working to create an army of tiny Robocops.

  3. You would think libertarians would be supportive in principle of stripping public funding from PP.

    Too bad Carly overreached/fibbed on the footage, of course. Deserves to have her hand slapped for that.

    But, Boehner has already surrendered on this issue, so none of it matters for at least another year.

    1. What’s all this talk about fetuses? I thought we only want PP stripped of funding because we hate the women.

      1. I though we just hated government stealing peoples money to give to other people ?

        1. But by funding PP, government saves more money than it spends, and lowers your taxes.

          1. So, your argument is that the Government is justified in forcing people to pay for an action that violates their conscience as long as it saves Society money overall?

            Then I’m sure that you would agree with my suggestions below.

            (1) All pregnant women receiving government aid must agree to abort their fetuses if they wish the aid to continue. (2) All applications for government aid from pregnant women will not be approved unless they have an abortion. (3) And, (since there is overwhelming evidence that children raised in single family homes have a much higher rate of drug abuse, criminality, etc., when they become adults) all single parents applying for or receiving government aid must agree to give their children up for adoption.

    2. This was about my thinking. I personally don’t have much of a problem with the harvesting of fetal tissue from abortions. If they’re killing it anyway, some use should probably come from it.

      But, why the hell are we paying for it?

      1. “harvesting of fetal tissue from abortions”

        I always assumed this was going on and don’t understand the uproar. Would it be better to toss them in the trash, rather than use them for possibly life-saving research? Even Ben Carson has done research with fetal tissue. Where did he think it came from?

        1. I feel about the same way. I’ve been a bit surprised at how many people who weren’t already completely anti-abortion seem to be bothered by it.

          1. More surprised at all the pro-abortion people trying to suppress these videos, make excuses, and distance themselves from the reality. But I suppose Conservatives can be just as bad. For instance, they won’t allow executions to be recorded because they’re afraid support for the Death Penalty would drop if the average American witnessed a person being killed by their government.

            1. For instance, they won’t allow executions to be recorded because they’re afraid support for the Death Penalty would drop if the average American witnessed a person being killed by their government.

              Cite?

            2. I would PAY to see some of these scumbags offed. And even more for the opportunity to do it myself. But then , I have an underlying hope that I could absorb their quickening and increase my powers.

          2. “I’ve been a bit surprised at how many people who weren’t already completely anti-abortion seem to be bothered by it.”

            Because they’ve been trying to avoid thinking carefully about the issue, soothing themselves with euphemisms and talking points (“choice!” “right-wing theocrats!” “domestic institutions!” – oops, wrong era) until they see some actual real-world evidence which cuts straight through the BS.

            1. Which is surprising to me.

              It’s like when public opinion shifts on gun control after a mass shooting or something as if everyone didn’t already know that stiff like that can happen.

              1. Because people are fucking idiots. Soy-Lent green.

              2. It’s like when video surfaced of Ray Rice knocking his girlfriend out.

                Prior to that, we knew he knocked his girlfriend out. 2 game suspension.

                Then people saw the video and said, “Holy shit! Ray Rice knocked his girlfriend out,” like this was some new revelation.

                Lifetime ban.

                1. No. It is the same reason why someone isn’t traumatized when they hear about a murder, but are when they see one committed.

                  Hearsay and bearing witness to something (even if through a video) are completely different things, and rightfully so.

                  1. Maybe to people who have a problem with disassociation. A murder is real. A video of it doesn’t change that.

          3. Consider the possibility of faux outrage.

          4. The point is that they seem to be prioritizing the harvest over a quick and painless procedure for the fetus.

            People also seem surprised that these are not the undifferentiated clumps of tissue they were promised. They are recognizable humans with defined organs and stuff.

            Turns out that aborted fetuses look just like real people!

            1. Its that, plus their obvious view of abortions as revenue centers.

            2. You knock that shit out! That’s a clump of cells, not a person.

              It’s “tissue research,” not “body part harvesting.”

              Fuckin’ woman-hating bastard.

        2. Incentives matter? Why not do the same after death penalty? Use CO2 to kill them, that doesn’t damage the organs and is relatively painless, then scrap them for parts to save lives and research!
          The consequences of which were explored by Larry Niven in ARM storeis.

          1. Hmmm…interesting dilemma. But you’re right, if the government begins to profit off of executed prisoners then they have a big incentive to increase the number of people being executed. But it’s individuals who choose to have abortions, and they don’t directly profit from the sale of the fetal tissue (although and argument could be made that they should). But would women begin to get pregnant and have abortions to make more money? Hard for me to imagine anyone being that cold, except perhaps that twat who talked her boyfriend into killing himself.

            1. Why not? Abortion is a sacrament of modern Progressivism. It’s considered a fundamental right, and fetus is no more than a tumor. More importantly, say a woman wants an abortion at four weeks. It’s in PP’s interest to delay it till fetus is better developed. They can’t pay her directly, but certainly can make it cheaper, or just kick some money under the table. And since they have all the authority (asymmetric information is a bitch in health care) and take care of the scheduling, not a problem.

              1. Call me an idealist, but I don’t believe there are many people capable of being so cold and Machiavellian. Then again, I could be wrong…

                1. *shrug* How many coldhearted people you need? Most of the people are uncomfortable with partial birth abortions, or 8.5 months abortion, or having the fetus delivered and then killed, but that doesn’t stop such procedures happening.
                  Remember, fetus is a parasite. Removing it is a healthy procedure that makes your life better. Why not benefit society at large while you’re at it?
                  Seriously, Obama voted against a law that would force a medical professional to give aid to a newborn, simply because it happens in an abortion clinic. How much colder can you be?

                  1. force a medical professional to give aid to a newborn

                    I thought enslaving doctors was a bad thing?

                    1. I thought enslaving doctors was a bad thing?

                      Not when it’s your own damn fault, and it happens because you fucked up the procedure you were paid to do. If the difference between fetus and baby is magic trip through birth canal, now it’s a baby and you, as a medical professional, should do your best it survives. Seems as reasonable as any other piece of medical legislation.

                    2. The fact that there needs to a law requiring abortionists to give aid to a newborn should be the first thing that bothers you.

                      This is really just trying to force abortionists to treat actually delivered babies exactly the same as, well, actually delivered babies. No slavery required.

                2. Call me an idealist, but I don’t believe there are many people capable of being so cold and Machiavellian.

            2. You can make a lot more money selling a healthy baby than a dead fetus.

              Just saying.

              1. Yeah, but they lose half their value the minute you get out of the hospital parking lot.

                  1. What, not even a chortle? Damn, Zeb, you cold.

                    1. In case the acronym I just made up didn’t translate: “laughing but not out loud”. Or was that already a thing?

                    2. Urban dictionary says it is a real acronym.

            3. And no one has an incentive to make abortions seem acceptable and easy?

            4. No one should profit from the sale of dead fetal tissue. I know a lot of people here are soulless anarcho-capitalists that would just shrug if they saw a live baby being burned alive in front of them, but seriously, we need SOME standards.

          2. The consequences of which were explored by Larry Niven in ARM stories.

            I read a book once where Communism worked really well and was a good idea. Now Niven is a much better and smarter writer, but that still doesn’t mean he gets everything right.

            Seems like you could solve it by letting the condemned choose to donate their bodies or not, like everyone else gets to do. Or get rid of the death penalty.

            1. “I read a book once where Communism worked really well and was a good idea.”

              Star Trek?

              I refuse to be an organ donor because I don’t like the idea of people making money off my death. Now, if some of the proceeds were to go to a person of my choosing, I’d be up for it. But for now, nope.

              1. Yeah. When I found out that pretty much everyone in the organ “donation” industry gets to make money on it except the donor (or donor’s heirs) it changed my view of the whole thing a bit.

              2. I refuse because of the stories my surgeon friends tell me. They claim some ER surgeons will not try their best to save a patient that is an organ donor–because more lives could be saved with their tasty organs. None of the surgeons I know are donors for this reason.

                1. Real trauma surgeons are looking for the lives they can save, as the best statistic to have. I never heard of ER surgeons, as a specialty, either. I was board certified, in 1985, in general surgery. The only reason I could see “ER surgeons” not trying their hardest to save the patient, would be from laziness. But, I never met a fellow general surgeon that was, ever, seen as lazy! So, your claim of ER surgeons…blah, blah, blah, is just male bovine manure!

              3. The money needed to pay the surgical team, to procure it, and ship it, should not be considered paying for the organ. Thing is, the payment system seems to be evolving to make a profit. Back in the late seventies and early eighties, we surgical residents were not encouraged, with an incentive of payment, to obtain donor tissue.

            2. Seems like you could solve it by letting the condemned choose to donate their bodies or not, like everyone else gets to do

              That’s the situation we have now. But, if you have no problem scrapping the fetus for parts because it’s dead, so what difference at this point etc, you should apply the same reasoning to any corpse. I picked on death penalty since I honestly think killing someone is worse than harvesting the organs afterwards. It comes from a purely non-rational perspective, but it’s a valid one. Or we’d be eating Soylent Green (probably – not sure what is the nutritional value of a human corpse, but I trust that private/science enterprise can make it profitable).

              1. I suppose maybe it should come down to an agreement between the abortion provider and customer. Does the woman getting the abortion own the remains, does PP get to keep it to do what they want with it, or is there some other agreed upon disposition?
                That plus a little more honesty about how “donated” organs are treated after they are donated and I think it would be pretty OK.

          3. Makes the meat kind of dark, but it still tastes fine.

        3. Would you be happier if women got paid for having abortions? After all, it’s just a fetus. It’s not a REAL human being. It’s just a parasite.

          A useful parasite that could cure diseases. Millions of human beings could benefit from that abortion.

          Who needs NAP anyway?

        4. Atleast for libertarians the uproar is that we are paying for it.

          We should not be paying for PP, Ethanol, Ex-Im, NEA, NEH, or Big Bird.

          Past that, if this disturbs you – picket PP, or Chick-Fil-et, or both or whatever it is you wish to picket.

          You are entitled to utilitarian views that fetal tissue should not be wasted, just as you are entitled to be grossed out by this. What you are not entitled to do is force everyone else to pay for whatever values you hold.

          1. HBO owns Big Bird now, so…one down…

      2. Because it saves more money than it costs, and lowers your taxes.

    3. Yes, people should pay for their own abortions and birth control. Beyond that, I don’t care about any of this at all.

      1. Correct. I don’t understand the support for tax payer funding of Planned Parent Hood. No problem with them delivering their service, but why must we pay for it ?

        1. Not paying is the same as banning.

          1. “Not paying is the same as banning.”

            I hope this is sarcasm, because otherwise it is idiocy.

            So if the government will not pay for your next Big Mac, that means Big Mac’s have been banned ?

            1. Yes, yes it does my friend 🙁

            2. Yup. You remember the birth control issue, right? If your employer doesn’t pay for your birth control, they’re stopping you from getting it.

        2. Because women are helpless creatures who cannot afford healthcare on their own.

        3. Because it saves more $ than it costs, and lowers your taxes.

      2. That’s the moral equivalent of raping a woman and throwing her into a pit of spikes, you oppressive cisshitlord!

        1. ..and ?

    4. I was under the impression the money they get is for public health education purposes (like teaching women about STDs) and is strictly segregated from money that pays for abortions.

      Yes, I know money is fungible, but I think they are required to keep it in separate accounts between which no fund may move.

      Of course, I am in favor of defunding everything. I just don’t care that much about PP’s miniscule allotment compared to the amount we blow on things like farm subsidies and entitlements.
      if you’re going to die on a hill, defunding PP is a stupid hill to die on.

      1. Most of the money goes through Medicaid. Not for abortions.

        1. So it’s mostly treating women for STDs and giving them pap smears and stuff.

          1. Yes.

          2. “They usually just give me a bunch of antibiotics, the sores go away, and I walk out.”

            1. But enough about your after-sex conversations with your ladyfriends…

          3. And giving them free whore pills.

      2. …but I think they are required to keep it in separate accounts between which no fund may move

        Hmmm…I wonder why PP’s budget for breast cancer screenings is only $1 (Not sure if this is accurate, just for illustrative purposes)? Even if you can’t transfer between accounts, you still get around it by considering subsidies in your annual allocations to accounts.

        And, while farm subsidies and entitlements are a lot bigger, they’re also a lot harder to get rid of. This should be low-hanging fruit.

        1. Well, it’s obviously not low-hanging fruit when you consider that it’s a sacred cow to Democrats.
          Low-hanging fruit is stuff you can cut easily and quietly. What THIS is? This is an excuse for Republicans presidential candidates to get the base riled up.

          1. “Low-hanging fruit is stuff you can cut easily and quietly.”

            Problem is, that fruit don’t exist. Everything you try and cut, someone’s going to run to the nearest news station and scream bloody murder.

              1. I need to know who the Jazz Masters are, so the NEA stays.

          2. Well, it’s obviously not low-hanging fruit when you consider that it’s a sacred cow to Democrats.

            Yes, it is. But, I think this story got a wide swath of the public more than a little uncomfortable with the Democrats’ support of Planned Parenthood. Whether it should have or not (I don’t think there was really any new information here), I think it made the public look at all this as a little more suspect. If the GOP really wanted to, they could have pushed defunding and put the Democrats in the position of not being able to put up much of a fight.

      3. Yes, I know money is fungible, but I think they are required to keep it in separate accounts between which no fund may move.

        Tax dollars just keep the lights on while the abortion is being performed.

      4. I was under the impression the money they get is for public health education purposes (like teaching women about STDs) and is strictly segregated from money that pays for abortions.

        Money is fungible. You know that, right?

        And you also know that they grossly overstate their non-abortion business, right?

      5. ” was under the impression the money they get is for public health education purposes (like teaching women about STDs) and is strictly segregated from money that pays for abortions.”

        very easy to get around. all that is required….. is itemizing the bill. have you seen a medical bill lately? separate payments to radiology, surgery, doctors, anesthesiologists, the sonogram… there is probably even a medical coding for checking you weight. using this money for some part of an abortion process, without funding the one line item prohibited would not be hard for even a complete hack of an accountant.

        1. $500 for manual breast exam
          $5 for abortion

          WE PREVENT CANCER, WE ARE NOT AN ABORTION MILL!

      6. But if you die on the hill, could you please donate your corpse to medical research? In fact, since you’re going to die anyway, let’s just make an appointment for your euthanasia and do it tomorrow.

        Fresh organs harvest better. And guillotine is a “cleaner” medium.

    5. I am in favor of doing just that. But, I also believe that in the same pen stroke, birth-control should be made available over the counter with no age restrictions.

    6. You would think libertarians would be supportive in principle of stripping public funding from PP.

      Real libertarians are.

      Fakers who are Beltway liberals pretending to be libertarians to earn a paycheck (such as Elizabeth Nolan Brown for example) aren’t.

  4. No problem with women choosing to have an abortion. But it should not be subsidized by our tax dollars. Those who claim to support Planned Parenthood should donate their own money to keep it afloat–but you know that’ll never happen.

    1. Actually I’ve been told that instead of doing that I should just donate right to the DNC.

      1. Potato, puhtato.

      2. Just donate to me, and I’ll go out and get a bunch of women pregnant and then encourage them to get abortions. I swear, I’ll actually make an effort!

        1. Encourage? You’re going to have to do better than that, buddy.

          1. Do I get any retroactive credit for past abortions?

            1. Credibility, maybe. Not credit.

              1. Just give me some fucking money!

                1. Suggestion: Put an add on Craigslist offering bargain abortions. Advertise yourself as ‘Dr. Scrapey’.

          2. You heard her, Epi. Start carrying around a six-pack of coat hangers in your overnight bag, then I’ll see about throwing money your way.

        2. then encourage them to get abortions

          “I promise I’ll always be there for you and the baby!”

          “OK, I’ll get the abortion”

          1. Whatever it takes, dude. Whatever it takes.

        3. I’m trying to imaging the lovechild between Epi and Nikki. And then I’m trying to unsee that vision.

          1. Have you read A Confederacy of Dunces?

            1. I suspect that I am the result of particularly weak conception on the part of my father. His sperm was probably emitted in a rather offhand manner

            1. Remarkable resemblance, to be sure.

              1. I was thinking their lovechild would look more like this.

        4. Before you “encourage them” maybe you should ask the fetus if it wants to be road kill.

    2. Didn’t that used to be a commitment by both parties that tax-dollars wouldn’t be used for elective abortions? I’m not sure when it quietly went away.

      1. Progressives love to force people to pay for things they don’t like, and Conservatives are too concerned about being seen as heartless or anti-woman.

        1. I’m not. But then, my response to progressive villainy is to outlaw Marxism and criminalize progressive behavior. Like it should be.

      2. It didn’t go away. This is about the fungibility of money.

        1. Aren’t they required to keep it in separate accounts? I would assume the government would require some sort of reporting to prevent that.

          1. It still doesn’t really matter. It affects all your allocations.

          2. Aren’t they required to keep it in separate accounts? I would assume the government would require some sort of reporting to prevent that.

            Pointless. Instead of paying for something out of account A, you pay for it out of account B, and now you have the mathematical equivalent of a transfer between accounts.

          3. It’s the callousness that the abortion provider/organ harvesters wrt to aborted fetuses.

            I’m ok with abortion when the fetus isn’t viable. But these people talk about it like it’s a joke. The numbers prove most people are against late term abortions and the planned parenthood hacks ignore it. Gosnell probably set that movement back 30 years.

            That the people who

            you should read up on gubmit, hazel

      3. Money is fungible and tax dollars that pay for the various women’s health services PP offers is money which won’t be taken out of private donations.

        Why tax dollars are going to a private charity at all remains a bigger question to my mind.

        1. Why tax dollars are going to a private charity at all remains a bigger question to my mind

          Agreed.

        2. If they’re going to give them to “faith-based” organizations, they can’t exclude non-religious ones.

          1. I almost forgot about “faith-based”. What an annoying term that was. I guess “religious” didn’t do as well in the focus group.

            1. You’re right that it’s a bit of an apples and oranges term.

              To me, as a Christian, I consider “religious” to basically be a mindless follower of religion, whereas “faith-based” is more of a personal relationship type thing.

              I guess, depending on your view, both can be considered mindless. I don’t have a problem with people saying that, either. I have my reasons to follow what I do. I really like it.

          2. Right, so they should not give any money to any private organization.

            1. If the alternative is the government doing it, I’m kinda torn….

            2. Yep, it’s none of their business

    3. Planned Parenthood shouldn’t receive federal funding because no third party organization should receive federal funding. But let’s not pretend that this is some kind of principled stand for fiscal responsibility. This is just Carly sexting SoCons to tickle their abortion boners.

      1. You say that like any first-party organization should receive it.

        1. Well the first party would be the person it’s taken from, wouldn’t it? So the government would be the second party, who should get nothing.

          1. I spent a lot of time debating that point.

        2. Hugh just really, really wanted to say “boners”.

          1. Epi I’ve already said it 37 times today, and it’s not even noon yet.

            1. Fine, maybe *I* just wanted to say “boners”! Is that really so wrong?!?

              1. Yes, because the minute I start associating boners with you, I stop being able to get them.

                1. boom

        3. What about second party organizations?

        4. Anarchy!

          Anarnikki… Anikkiarchy… Nikkarchy…

          1. Technically, wouldn’t that be a pessimocracy?

      2. There are fiscally irresponsible Republicans who want to cut Planned Parenthood’s funding.

        But I dare you to find a fiscally *responsible* Republican who wants to *continue* such funding.

        1. Well that’s the thing is that there are no fiscally responsible Republicans. No matter what kind of tap dance they do about reigning in federal spending, when it comes time to vote on military contracts or agricultural subsidies or some porkdoggle in their home district they’re more than happy to make it rain like a drunken sailor at a strip club.

          1. Let’s be fair to drunken sailors – when they grope in their pockets and find they don’t have any more bills to give to the strippers, they stop doing it – they don’t pick someone else’s pocket so they can keep handing out bills.

            1. And the money that drunken sailors spend in the first place is the money they earned.

          2. We know you suck team blue cock, Hugh. Team Red is stupid, that’s a no brainer…yet you think your team is better…you are delusional and can’t be taken seriously.

        2. In short, *some* Republicans will vote to make small cuts to Democratic groups like ACORN and PP while continuing to vote for unsustainable spending in every other area.

          But you can be sure of one thing – a Republican who won’t even take political risks to cut funding to Democratic Party proxies sure as heck isn’t going to take political risks to curb the larger spending problems.

          1. But again, they’re not taking political risks to vote against funding for those organizations. They’re doing it expressly to pander to their base who are really more interested in the kulturkampf aspect than they are in actually reducing spending.

            1. Again: Not every opponent of PP funding is for fiscal restraint, but every supporter of fiscal restraint is against PP funding.

            2. So, Hugh, you’re saying we should oppose people who want to do the right thing for the wrong reasons?

      3. Exactly. However you feel about PP, Carly’s not going to take that massive ( that’s sarcasm, btw ) amount of federal tax revenue and return it to taxpayers, or even roll it back into the budget to trim the deficit.

      4. Or maybe she really thinks it’s vile. Plenty of people do.

    4. “No problem with women choosing to have an abortion.”

      Sure, but why get the doctors involved? No reason for it. A woman wants an abortion? She can do it herself. Women have been doing their own abortions for millennia.

  5. It can’t be worse than interracial porn.

    1. Is it worse than double penetration porn though?

        1. Because TVTA would be silly.

    2. True DAT!! And you’re a RACIST for even mentioning it!!!

    3. What?! Interracial porn is the best! Maybe it’s just me, but is just seems so much naughtier than boring white-on-white porn.

      1. Oh yeah, black chick getting gang banged by a bunch of white dudes…

        1. I prefer to see less men and more woman. So, a bunch of Black girls taking on a single white guy would be much better.

          1. The only pornography I support is itsjustchocolate.

            Warning: it is porn, it is just chocolate, i am sure many ads will pop up.

          2. I find that to be highly problematic racialized content….

          3. Or…

            A bunch of Black girls taking on me, even better…

          4. who needs women?

      2. Oh, man, oh, man , you racist fuck. Nikki would like a word with you…

  6. Asking a Republican if they want to cut off funding for Planned Parenthood is equivalent to asking if they have any principles at all.

    There’s no excuse for a Republican Congress funding Planned Parenthood.

    Any Republican who votes for such funding should simply give up all pretense of wanting to curb federal spending.

    Funding Planned Parenthood is a twofer – subsidizing abortion with tax money and giving tax money to a key Democratic donor for them to send into the treasury of the Democratic party.

    What kind of castrato Republican votes money into the coffers of a Democrat-subsiding, abortion-performing organization?

    They may as well carry a placard saying “I am not a serious person and I don’t believe any of the shit I say.”

  7. I just hope our next president solves the world’s two biggest issues, and those of course are Planned Parenthood funding and gay marriage.

    #itsallthatmatters

    1. I thought it was pay inequality and hate speech

      1. Those are not even the junior varsity of what matters.

    2. Make Christian cake bakers fund Planned Parenthood?

      1. Don’t give them any ideas. After the big earthquake in San Francisco in 1989 the California legislature imposed a “temporary” sales tax increase on Orange County to pay for repairs. Have to believe this was a not-so-subtle FU to the Conservative residents.

  8. from National Review:

    Perhaps Marcotte & Co. should actually watch the Planned Parenthood videos. In the seventh video (there are ten available now, by the way, with more to come), at the 5:57 mark, is a baby, post-abortion, lying in a dish ? its leg kicking. They will also hear Holly O’Donnell, an ex-StemExpress procurement technician who worked at Planned Parenthood Mar Monte’s Alameda Clinic in San Jose, Calif., describing how she was directed to “cut down the middle of the face” of a baby with a still-beating heart “to get the brain.” Under existing state and federal law, that’s murder.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/…..eos-debate

    1. Okay, so maybe this is not so cut and dried as to the veracity of Fiorina’s statement.

    2. Watch videos? That would just muddy the waters of The Truth, which is that this is all false and nothing bad happened!

      And what if they want to perform post-natal abortion? Their bodies, their choice!

    3. Why do some women wait so long to have an abortion? I realize that it’s sometimes necessary when the life of the mother is at risk, but I imagine that’s rare. I’m extremely pro-choice but would rather see this occur as early as possible, or better yet not at all through the effective use of birth control.

      1. That was my main reaction to these videos. I find the later abortions to be gruesome and wish that if an abortion is the ultimate outcome it be as early as possible.

      2. Well, if you get more money out of better developed fetus, why not?

      3. Amniocentisis to determine if the baby has down’s syndrome occurs around week 20.
        Some women don’t find out that the baby is going to have down syndrome (or sometimes an even worse defect) until that point. So they might not be able to get an abortion until the fifth or sixth month.

        1. How about this: If you have a Down Syndrome baby, give prolifers a month or so to find an adoptive parent.

          If nobody steps forward, hold a press conference to denounce the hypocritical prolfers, etc., etc.

          But if someone *does* step forward, keep the child and let them adopt it.

          1. “keep the child” in this context means “don’t abort it.”

          2. As gruesome as abortion is I don’t think you’ll find many takers who want to go the the next level of awful. I get your principles but actually doing this seems horrific. Maybe a good plot for a poorly shot youtube movie?

          3. You would still have to carry the down syndrome baby to term and deliver it, instead of having an abortion and starting over.

            1. And think of the opportunity cost . . .Down Syndrome fetuses turn into Down Syndrome children . . . .who turn into Down syndrome adults . . . and WE CAN’T HAVE THAT!!!!

              If there ever was a definition of a parasite, it is a Down Syndrome parasite.

        2. Amniocentisis to determine if the baby has down’s syndrome occurs around week 20.

          The gold standard of invasive expensive diagnosis can’t be done much before 20 weeks, but it’s pretty easy to be 95+% certain of the outcome well before 20 weeks using much cheaper and less invasive/destructive procedures. Nuchal translucency can detect DS as early as week 11 and other test (combinations) are nearly as definitive even earlier in the pregnancy.

          Not that pro-lifers or pro-choicers care one way or the other, but anybody waiting for the amniocentesis is clinging to hope and isn’t being very objective one way (getting an abortion prior to the “beginning of life”) or the other (“inflicting” DS on someone).

          1. “anybody waiting for the amniocentesis is clinging to hope and isn’t being very objective one way (getting an abortion prior to the “beginning of life”) or the other (“inflicting” DS on someone).”

            Obviously. These people are retarded.

        3. And defending ‘the right to abort at 20+ weeks’ is pretty near the line where, by non-objective standards, you’re facilitating/allowing/encouraging the murder of more and more normal fetuses to allow the far fewer number of expectant mothers of more flawed fetuses to (give up) hope for normalcy.

      4. Now that’s just crazy talk.

        /note: I’m pretty agnostic on abortion. It’s a tiresome debate – but think that abortions – especially late-term – should be rare. Better & cheaper birth control + morning after pills that are easily available would go a long way to lessen this issue.

        Of course locking up everyone in solitary cells until they die would have even better results 😉

        1. They are rare. It’s almost always a case of the doctors finding out that the baby has some horrible birth defect late in pregnancy. Or the mother discovers she has cancer and can’t carry the baby to term or something.

        2. And I don’t see why that should make a difference. You’re not much of a libertarian – are you?

      5. If you’re “extremely pro-choice”, why does it matter when that choice is made? After all, it’s just a parasite, ain’t it? It’s not a REAL human.

        In fact, wouldn’t it be wonderful and compatible with free market libertarian principles if women actually made money on their abortions? This “donation” is a scam.

        Let’s have an honest-to-goodness free market where hard working women can have abortions at any time and make money off that damn parasite. She could make a killing and it wouldn’t even take a college degree.

        $100,000 per year -minimum. If we are real libertarians and we truly believe in free minds and free markets – what is stopping us for advocating this?

    4. According to the Gosnell verdict, yes it is!!

      1. But according to Obama, it’s not, and he’s the Ultimate Argument!

  9. “In the GOP debate on CNN last night, Carly Fiorina gave an impassioned speech about why she would risk shutting down the government in order to strip funding from Planned Parenthood.”

    A little critical thinking might suggest that Carly Fiorina would risk threatening such a thing in order to impress socially conservative Republican primary voters.

  10. What, no scare quotes? I am disappoint.

    1. Racist fuck.

    2. quadroon thighs aren’t ne thing to be scoffed at neither

  11. the left keep s claiming a need for PP based on it medical needs but i though Obama care took care of all that making PP no longer needed. of course thats why they want PP to be an Obama care provider so that they can keep their little buracracy alive ( pun intended ) forever wether needed or not.

    1. Don’t you want women to get mammograms?

      What kind of monster are you?

      1. Planned Parenthood runs exactly Zero Mammogram-capable facilities.

        Oh, wait it’s you, that was probably sarcasm.

        1. it was.

  12. I’m beginning to wonder if I really formed with one kidney or if Planned Parenthood stole it from my fetal self before that.

    1. Wait, I thought it was your bal…never mind, forget I even asked.

      1. PLUS Postrel won’t even cough one up for me. Most likely because other commenters here are douchebags and I’m guilty by association.

        1. It was probably your parents selling one of your kidneys when you were a toddler.

  13. There should be a waiting period before a woman is allowed to get an abortion. Like nine months. That’ll solve everything.

  14. Well, after Scott Walker positively, directly, and unequivocally affirmed that he would murder Megyn Kelly in the last debate, what’s the big deal?

  15. Scully, this is a classic case of demon fetal harvest

    1. I would never lie. I willfully participated in a campaign of misinformation.

  16. “In the GOP debate on CNN last night, Carly Fiorina gave an impassioned speech about why she would risk shutting down the government in order to strip funding from Planned Parenthood.”

    Has anyone asked Barack Obama whether he would risk shutting down the government over his funding for Planned Parenthood?

    Isn’t that question just as legitimate as whether Carly Fiorina would risk shutting down the government over funding for Planned Parenthood?

    1. They probably asked his idiot press secretary at the utterly useless White House briefing and got a non-answer.

      Of course he would. He has nothing to lose.

      1. Besides, the Republicans get blamed for government shutdowns regardless of who is actually responsible.

    2. It depends upon your definition of “shutting down the funding”. I believe most of the funding it gets from government is Medicaid funding.

    3. Shutting down the govt is a good thing

      1. Which kind of makes you wonder why Reason becomes hysterical whenever one of these fake government shutdowns takes place.

        1. They like abortions?

  17. Oh, ok thats fine. The fetus that was shown as alive wasn’t exactly the same one who’s brain was harvested, so that means that Carly was totally lying.

    Sorry, libertarians can be anti-abortion, it just matters whether they think fetuses are people with rights or whether they’re blobs of cells.

    1. A Libertarian case can be made both for abortion and against it. It just depends on whose rights are more important, the mother’s or the unborn baby. And aren’t we all just blobs of cells?

      1. And aren’t we all just blobs of cells?

        I prefer to consider myself an amalgamation of chemicals, cis-shitbiologylord.

        And good DAY, sir!

      2. “A Libertarian case can be made both for abortion and against it. It just depends on whose rights are more important, the mother’s or the unborn baby. And aren’t we all just blobs of cells?”

        Bull crap. There is no issue of rights here. All conceivable rights imputed into the infant require the service of some other party in order to be realised. Your rights can’t require that someone else do something for you. As such, the infant has no rights. In the abstract, there is only one moral agent involved in this transaction–the mother. So there is no issue of rights. Legitimately, it is only a question of ethics, specificly whether the woman has any moral obligation to her infant offspring. Even that is of little importance to the rest of us unless we can come up with some basis for applying force against her if she acts dishonorably. Generally, if a person fails to fulfil a moral obligation, or otherwise behaves dishonorably, without obstructing the rights of others, there is little ethical basis for uninvolved parties to apply force against the source of shame. One would have to determine if there is some difference in infanticide that excepts it from the general rule.

        1. You are so right about rights. I hope you go into the fetal procurement business with me.

          We will pay women for the parasitic contents of their wombs at a fair market, free market price. Fuck this donation bullshit.

    2. She could have meant “saw these images” as in, “saw these mental images with the eye of imagination”. I mean, similar phrases are quite frequently used to mean precisely that.

      1. No. The footage is 5 minutes into the 7th video. Looks like Reason may have changed the end of their story after the fact to make it look like they knew that.

        1. So ENB didn’t actually watch them herself prior to writing this, then altered her piece without noting the correction after she realized that Fiorina was correct? Well, goodness gracious!

          What a fucking lazy hack she’s become.

          1. This whole place is sinking fast. It appears that Nick and Matt are becoming more concerned over being invited on progressive talk shows and invited to related cocktail parties with the ‘cool kids’ than being serious libertarians anymore.

            How sad.

  18. Freeze dry the little buggers and give them a coat of sugar. Put ’em in a box labeled “Embrioios” and market them as a breakfast cereal. Someone’s going to steal that idea and get rich.

    1. Gives new meaning to the term “Whole Foods”

    2. I’ll just leave this here:

      http://southpark.cc.com/clips/…..-king-show

  19. Now I know reading articles is frowned upon, but from that WaPo link in the article:

    Holly O’Donnell, the technician, said she witnessed a scene similar to Fiorina’s description, but it is not actually shown. A supervisor “just taps the heart, and it starts beating. And I’m sitting here and I’m looking at this fetus, and its heart is beating, and I don’t know what to think,” she says. “She gave me the scissors and told me that I had to cut down the middle of the face [to get to the brain]. I can’t even describe what that feels like.”

    There are images of a fetus intercut with her narrative, but there is little evidence this is a fetus about to be harvested. (The source of the video is listed as the Grantham Collection, which collects videos of abortions.

    Fetus is also twitching, and, since context is talking about scrapping fetuses for parts, later the better and more intact the better, it’s fair game in my view. More importantly, since Fiorina said

    Watch a fully formed fetus on the table, its heart beating, its legs kicking while someone says we have to keep it alive to harvest its brain.”

    Here’s the video, if you want to expose yourself to it. Fiorina is wrong in saying that there’s a voice saying “we have to keep it alive”, but it does go into harvesting of the brain.

    1. So at best you can call it “technically correct, but not really”, which, fuck me, means that it should pass the fact check.

      1. Technically correct is the best kind of correct.

      2. Technically correct is the best kind of correct.

        1. Thank you, sir, for catching the reference. Every little bit helps, considering that I wasted ten minutes looking for it, while sick at home. I’ll call upon Slavic Soul as the explanation of why I’d do something so unproductive.

    2. Oh and thanks to all the sides (pro and con) for making it so hard to find, god knows what my youtube page is gonna look like after this!

      1. It’s cute that you want us to believe the content of your youtube page will retrogress. .

        1. Odds are that attractive women, video games and Margaret Thatcher will be replaced with Bible thumpers, Republican blowhards and conspiracy theorists. That’s the very definition of “regressing”.

    3. Also see Mollie Heminway’s piece in The Federalist:

      http://thefederalist.com/2015/…..ny-exists/

    4. Holly’s face is more terrifying than dead babies

      1. Except, when I see those fetal parts, I think of Michael J. Fox. I think of how he suffers horribly and maybe those fetal parts can cure his Parkinson’s disease.

        Okay, you’re right. I’m lying.

        When I see those fetal parts, I see dollar signs. I see an opportunity to start a business.

        Hell, I’m no dummy – I’m a CPA. And I’m a cold, calculating opportunist – I’m a CPA. So let’s just cut the crap, kill the parasites and be honest about this bs – I’m a CPA.

  20. It seems like her statement was literally accurate, but that the author would have preferred Fiorina provide context to soften her critique of Planned Parenthood.

    But why would she do that? The video footage is disturbing. It’s like Fiorina finds the footage disturbing (even if her pro-life position is likely born of political convenience). Her audience expects Fiorina to unequivocally condemn PP.

    It isn’t as though Planned Parenthood and it’s defenders have a shred of intellectual integrity, such that they have earned a mealy-mouthed, charitable dissent.

    I mean, if this is your best defense:

    “Maybe he or she wanted to show the new employee how hearts can keep beating after death.”

    You have more or less made Fiorina’s point for her.

    I know some Libertarians have a soft spot for PP, because having an abortion is the most Libertarian thing EVAH! But the expectation here is completely unreasonable to the point of being obtuse.

    1. If these Libertarians believe abortion is the most Libertarian thing EVAH, they wouldn’t squeamish about abortion farms.

      After all, the fetus is just a parasite and women own their “own bodies”. So, why SHOULDN”T they be comfortably compensated for renting their womb for 3 – 4 months.

      Hell, they could make a bundle off of it, 5 years and never go to college. Or it could be the way they pay for that sky high college tuition.

      And after all – it’s just a parasite. And the woman can have a real child later.

    2. they’re a a bunch of cunts

      1. They can save humanity by killing parasites. We just need to pay them better.

    3. Well, it IS ENB, Reason’s very own abortion Barbie. Of course she’s going to use “scary” trigger warning words. Cuz, it’s “gruesome”‘ and Fiorina is “making shit up”.

      I just want ENB to be a REAL libertarian. And go into the “abortions are free market opportunities” too business with me.

  21. It seems like her statement was literally accurate, but that the author would have preferred Fiorina provide context to soften her critique of Planned Parenthood.

    But why would she do that? The video footage is disturbing. It’s like Fiorina finds the footage disturbing (even if her pro-life position is likely born of political convenience). Her audience expects Fiorina to unequivocally condemn PP.

    It isn’t as though Planned Parenthood and it’s defenders have a shred of intellectual integrity, such that they have earned a mealy-mouthed, charitable dissent.

    I mean, if this is your best defense:

    “Maybe he or she wanted to show the new employee how hearts can keep beating after death.”

    You have more or less made Fiorina’s point for her.

    I know some Libertarians have a soft spot for PP, because having an abortion is the most Libertarian thing EVAH! But the expectation here is completely unreasonable to the point of being obtuse.

    1. The bottom line is that there is a subset of libertarians, many of whom post here, that clearly don’t give a shit about anyone but themselves. And it really shows with this subject. In complete defiance of all known science.

  22. Every site on the net has the same image of Fiorina marching upright, smiling, illuminated in the bright natural looking light; meanwhile, Trump can be seen looking like he’s sulking, prowling in the shadows.

    If Americans actually mind, or even understand, that they’re being so blatantly manipulated via the vivid mental imagery being pushed by the national media and political planners, they sure never mention it.

  23. So, there is a video that shows an aborted fetus with its leg kicking, and there is dialogue from a past employee talking about being instructed to harvest the brain from a living fetus, and Fiorina conflated these two into a single event. Thanks for clearing that up. And to think I almost fell for that whole grisly abortion charade.

    1. I look forward to the corresponding micro-analysis of PP’s various statements in connection with these videos.

      1. Oh, fiddle dee dee, Scarlett. The parasite doesn’t matter. It is just a means to an end.

        Someone needs to profit from it having the nerve to show up, unexpectedly, in some feeble woman’s womb. They shoot trespassers still – don’t they?

        1. You mean the little fuckers actually crawl into the woman’s womb, all alien like?

          Well I never.

          1. Parasites who feed off a woman’s vital essence for 9-1/2 Months. They must be stopped or we are all doomed.

  24. I have to wonder why you have chosen to dispute the her report. Are you PP supporter, have you ever had an abortion, are you a democrat, are you a Christian?? Were you there? How do you know?

  25. Wow, a politician whose remarks are not absolutely perfectly precisely scientifically factually indisputably accurate ! Who would have thunk it!

    No, there is no video that exactly matches the sequence that Fiorona described.
    The videos are still deeply disturbing, and show or describe atleast as disturbing acts.

    If this is our definition of a lie in politics, well Carly’s nose is just about right, and nearly everyone else in politics should have woodpeckers nesting on theirs.

    Why are we parsing this ?

    The libertarian answer here is simple. Defund PP – get government out of the business of providing or paying for any services or deciding our values.

    If you support PP – then support PP, contribute. If you hate PP – take up your signs and picket.
    But they are no more entitled to government money than your neighbor, your grocer, your realtor, your podiatrist.

  26. Typo – existence, not existance.

  27. Why not stop funding for every private organization?

  28. I just started 6 weeks ago and I’ve gotten 2 check for a total of $4,200…this is the best decision I made in a long time! “Thank you for giving me this extraordinary opportunity to make extra money from home. This extra cash has changed my life in so many ways, visit this following website for more details,,, thank you!”

    http://www.OnlineJobs100.Com

  29. I just started 6 weeks ago and I’ve gotten 2 check for a total of $4,200…this is the best decision I made in a long time! “Thank you for giving me this extraordinary opportunity to make extra money from home. This extra cash has changed my life in so many ways, visit this following website for more details,,, thank you!”

    http://www.OnlineJobs100.Com

  30. The opposition to what Carly said is just silly and nit picky. It is beyond clear that body parts were harvested and that fetus with heartbeats and moving arms and legs were terminated. It is really that big of a deal if they were in a womb or on a table?

    The principle behind her statement is what is important. Why is the government funding Planned Parenthood? I’m not even saying that funding of non-profit women health agencies should be stopped, but ones that operate like PP. Look at PP history and chart their clinic locations. They target minority communities which would be a service if Margaret Sanger wasn’t their goddess.

    The practices that went on were illegal and there has yet to be a prosecution. So you can harvest fetus and nothing happened. You can be a favored Secretary of State that believe she is above the law so she ignores the law regarding e-mail security and no punishment. But if you are a shallow, Christian county clerk that won’t issue a marriage license you get thrown in jail (I do not support what the clerk did, BTW). What is wrong with this place?

  31. lol, thats silly dude. Seriously.

    http://www.Full-Anon.tk

  32. a friend had a miscarriage at 5 months in a hospital she was issued a death certificate and responsible for the remains. Funny how different the outcomes of wanted v unwanted.
    One would think the rules/laws would be the same.

  33. This business will be completely gone after Arkansas Act 301 becomes the enforced gestation regulation law.

  34. IF the headline of this article is correct, and the Pro Choice forces have any goddamned sense, they will very carefully NOT BRING IT UP. Planned Parenthood is just going to have to weather the outrage, faux or not, amd take its lumps. Start quibbling over details, amd the public will have another look at the videos, when you want them to go on to the next Big Thing and leave you alone.

    Yes, it’s tempting to argue each point. It’s bad tactics.

  35. “It does, in fact, show a fully formed fetus, heart beating and legs kicking.”

    But it doesn’t show someone cutting through the head to get at the brain, just someone describing that happening. Well, that’s completely different. Who could find that even remotely disturbing? Let’s give PP more money.

  36. YAY PPH !!! and YAY Obomacare !!!! Not only do you get to pay for things that you may be for, or against, despite what the SCOTUS says !! Now you get to pay for it too against your will !!! YAY !!!!!!!! =D

    1. Government = Freedom !!!!! =D

  37. If she has seen them where are they?
    The pro-live crowd would be sending them to every reporter in the country; if they actually existed.
    Fiorina needs a reality check. If you say it, you had better be able to prove it.

  38. Sooooo, the video actually does exist, then? I’m looking 5 minutes into the 7th video. It indeed shows an aborted baby moving around.

    And although Reason contends no one denies the video’s existence, Slate and Washington Post clearly believe it doesn’t exist. They mention in their “fact checking” that the video in question only shows the interview, not any video of a kicking aborted baby.

    “But Toast, they mean there’s no video of a technician saying to harvest the brain.”

    No, that’s not what they mean. Read Slate again closely. They claim no video exists in the series showing an aborted baby kicking and moving. Clearly they are complicit in the lying.

    Reason’s headline is misleading at best and a lie at worst, and the article only mentions at the end that, oh by the way, the video actually does exist.

    Hey look, if you’re pro choice, that’s fine. But don’t stoop to lies to advance your agenda. That’s shit Team Blue and Red do.

  39. Does Planned Parenthood offer gift certificates for abortions?

    Perhaps they have a bridal registry?

  40. It’s okay. We know that killing babies is okay with a lot of people. Hell, we know that videos like this:

    http://www.mrctv.org/videos/wa…..ion-filmed

    don’t phase liberals one bit. So, what if it’s not in the PP sting videos.

    This is not a sting video. It’s a video…of a baby being born…almost…killed definitely…

    But, THAT couldn’t be what we are enraged about, now could it?

    I mean, after all, PP hasn’t been caught doing any such horror has it?

    Therefore it all must be a right wing conspiracy and, therefore, doesn’t happen in Liberal Land, right?

    Oh…did I mention this video of a baby being born and killed?

    Well, here it is again for all of you Molech worshipers claiming that this sort of thing doesn’t happen…

    http://www.mrctv.org/videos/wa…..ion-filmed

  41. So then next time someone refers to “that gruesome Nazi Auschwitz footage” ENB will be right on them saying it doesn’t exist.

    …But only because it was from Dachau.

  42. Nonsense! Elizabeth Nolan Brown. I watched some horrific Planned Parenthood videos that were so gruesome I came to the conclusion that anyone who supports the deaths and dismembering of babies so their parts can be sold has to be out and out evil. Only evil people approve of the murder of innocents, the holocaust of babies you might say, which makes you sound as bad as Germany’s Hitler whose administration murdered over six million Jews.

    Sick, sick, sick!

    1. ENB, is that you?

  43. Anytime someone refers a near term infant as a fetus, you have a good idea where they stand. Life, liberty & property!

    No Libertarian should support government funding of planned parenthood. It should never be a function of the national government even if abortion was viewed as holy sacrament by the majority of the people.

    The founders gave the house of representatives the power of the purse. The media has blamed the congress for shut downs. Congress should vote the money they feel appropriate and take the hit when the president vetoes. Doing anything else leads us further down the road to an imperial presidency.

    1. If Congress got back to writing actual appropriations bills, rather than the lazy cromnibus approach, then the “shutdown” would only affect the stuff they want shutdown.

    2. Just for the record (not that anyone necessarily cares):

      1) I am opposed to abortion, because I am convinced it is, logically, a form of unjustified homicide.*

      2) Nevertheless, I usually use the term “fetus” for a near-term infant, especially when discussing the topic with people who disagree with me. Calling it an unborn baby or something like that could be seen as question-begging by my opponent and poison the well of discussion. Also, “fetus” is probably as close as we have to a neutral term — in that stage of its life, the unborn baby _is_ also a fetus. Just as it will later be (barring bad luck or human interference) a newborn, an infant, a toddler, a teen and a senior citizen … but always a human individual.

      * But don’t assume I have a simple legal remedy in mind. The fact that a large fraction of the population strongly and sincerely disagrees with me raises some immense practical complexities (and some additional moral ones) that stand in the way of easily abolishing this evil, this peculiar institution of abortion.

  44. Okay, so the video does exist, and it is EXACTLY like Fiorina said–with the fetus kicking and someone saying–not someone IN THE ROOM saying–that they need to harvest the brain….

    So why is this article still here? Why not a correction? Why is reason helping out publications that are demonstrably lying?

    1. Nobody wants to be the first blacklisted from the new Journolist.

      Almost as bad as being read out of the party.

    2. Reason idiots live in their own bubble. Lots of bubbles are going to pop next year.

  45. This is why I am severely torn whenever someone points out, “Planned Parenthood doesn’t just provide abortion services. In fact, it performs or facilitates hardly any. It does provide tons of other essential health services to women.”

    First, it is by now well-known that PP fudges its reporting in order to minimize the apparent proportion of abortion-related services it provides, by the way it bundles things together. Something like this (and don’t take this too literally; it’s just a hypothetical illustration to get the point across):

    SERVICES PROVIDED BY PLANNED PARENTHOOD:

    1. Contraceptives
    2. Physical examinations for services other than abortion
    3. Pain medications not related to abortion
    4. Medical gauze for procedures other than abortion
    5. Doctor’s consultations for procedures other than abortion
    6. Abortion services (includes physical exam, pain medications, gauze, doctor’s consultations.)

    “See! Abortion services make up only a small fraction of all the services that Planned Parenthood provides!)

    But that’s just part of it. Continued …

    1. Continued …

      More than that, though, it’s this: Would you expect anyone to accept an argument like the spokesperson makes below?

      “Here at St. Godwin’s Medical Center, we provide a wide variety of essential health services, including millions of dollars’ worth of unpaid health care services for the poor.”

      “What about killing Jews, which many people find to be morally objectionable?”

      “Tosh! Killing Jews is only a very tiny, tiny fraction of what we do here. We hardly kill any at all, really. An insignificant number. Maybe three or four Jews a month, tops.”

      “Well, I would like to continue giving you money, but my conscience strongly objects to killing Jews, even if it’s only a small number. Under these circumstances, I don’t think I can continue writing you checks.”

      “But then you’ll deprive us of funding for all the other important work we do, like general health care and free assistance to the poor! Don’t you care about that?”

      “Well, actually, I do. So how about this: I’ll continue to give you my money, but only if you stop with the Jew-killing — which, as you say, constitutes only a tiny, tiny, INSIGNIFICANT proportion of all the things you do anyway.”

      “YOU OPPRESSIVE MONSTER!”

  46. ????Start your home business right now. Spend more time with your family and earn. Start bringing 78$/hr just on a c0mputer. Very easy way to make your life happy and earning continuously. Start here?.

    http://www.jobhome20.com

  47. “This doesn’t mean, however, that the fetus was alive in any meaningful way; a heart will beat after a brain has died and any consciousness or pain has ceased” …and if it was alive in a meaningful way, that is conscious and in pain, that was soon taken care of.

  48. 6 min mark. There it is. Denial is astonishing. Excuse me while I go throw up.

  49. Elizabeth Nolan Brown is just grasping at straws, just like the WoT-tards who to this day are claiming that the guts of an alarm clock are a bomb. Sometimes the people in this country make me sick.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.