Reason Roundup

Planned Parenthood President Wrong on Illegal Abortion Deaths Pre-Roe

Plus: how the FDA is handling cannabidiol products, highlights from Harris and Amash town halls, and more...


Did thousands of U.S. women die of illegal abortions per year? Planned Parenthood President Leana Wen has repeatedly claimed that "thousands of women died every year" from botched abortions in a pre–Roe v. Wade America. It looks like Wen may play as loose with language as her predecessor, Cecile Richards (who left in 2018), did.

After "a tour of decades of musty academic literature," The Washington Post's Glenn Kessler concludes that Wen's claim is false (or, in Post terms, worth "Four Pinocchios") if we're talking about the era leading up to the 1973 Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion throughout the country.

Wen "should know better than to peddle statistics based on data that predates the advent of antibiotics," Kessler writes.

Even given the fuzzy nature of the data and estimates, there is no evidence that in the years immediately preceding the Supreme Court's decision, thousands of women died every year in the United States from illegal abortions.

Wen's repeated use of this number reminds us of the shoddy data used by human trafficking opponents. Unsafe abortion is certainly a serious issue, especially in countries with inadequate medical facilities. But advocates hurt their cause when they use figures that do not withstand scrutiny. These numbers were debunked in 1969—50 years ago—by a statistician celebrated by Planned Parenthood. There's no reason to use them today.

Back in 1969, researchers writing in Scientific American pointed out that "the total number of deaths from all causes among women of reproductive age in the U.S. is not more than about 50,000 per year. The National Center for Health Statistics listed 235 deaths from abortion in 1965. Total mortality from illegal abortions was undoubtedly larger than that figure, but in all likelihood it was under 1,000."

By 1972, when the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention started keeping track of abortion-related mortality, the official numbers were down to 24 deaths from legally-induced abortions and 39 deaths from illegal abortions. Again, the real number was almost certainly somewhat higher but not dramatically so.

Today, we have better medical technology all around, plus abortion via pill that's as safe and effective in the first trimester as it is discreet. The picture of illegal abortion today wouldn't look much like its 20th- and pre-20th-century counterparts, thank goodness—which isn't to say that abortion pill black markets (and a potential crackdown on them) wouldn't come with their own dangers. But tying nationwide abortion access to the idea that masses of women will die without it probably isn't the best tack.


Pew Research Center looks at the demographics of Twitter:


The U.S. Food and Drug Administration will consider how to regulate cannabidiol (a.k.a. CBD) products at a hearing this Friday. MarketWatch notes that "the substance can be extracted from the cannabis plant or from hemp, which has caused confusion ever since hemp was legalized as part of December's 2018 Farm Bill. CBD was not legalized in that bill, but rather it was moved under the purview of the FDA, which immediately said companies cannot add it to food or beverages, as many are hoping to do."

Why did the FDA get control of CBD in the first place?

That's because it's the main ingredient in the only cannabis-based drug to win FDA approval, GW Pharma PLC's GWPH, -1.31% Epidiolex, a treatment for severe forms of childhood epilepsy.

The FDA is under pressure to create a regulatory framework to allow the use of CBD to treat such ailments as inflammation and anxiety, but it has said it may look to Congress to act instead, if it's unable to move in a timely manner. The regulator has been cracking down on companies making claims for CBD products in treating serious illnesses such as Alzheimer's disease, as MarketWatch reported last week.


  • Rep. Justin Amash (R–Mich.) did a town hall yesterday as well. "If you had never heard of Amash before, it was a perfect introduction to his views on just about every significant issue. If you are familiar with him, it was a standout performance," writes Reason's Eric Boehm. Watch here.
  • Rep. Justin Amash's primary challenger "said he had not read Mueller's report but agreed with the assessment of most Republicans." Amash expanded his assessment of the case for President Donald Trump's impeachment in another Twitter thread:

  • The U.S. has learned the wrong lessons from last decade in Iraq, argues Foreign Affairs' Jon Finner after reviewing new military material on the matter. "The U.S. Army's official history of the Iraq war erodes the tenuous consensus on what went wrong in Iraq and thus makes another damaging conflict—this time with Iran—more likely."
  • The Baltimore City Fraternal Order of Police blasted out a warning that officers shouldn't "fall into the trap" of thinking that teenagers "are only kids. Some are criminals!"
  • The Wall Street Journal rips into Sen. Kamala Harris' wage gap proposal:

Under Ms. Harris's plan, every business with 100 workers or more would have to get an "Equal Pay Certification" from the federal government. To earn this gold star, they must "prove they're not paying women less than men for equal work." That means demonstrating, to the satisfaction of some bureaucrat, that any wage gap "is based on merit, performance, or seniority—not gender." The penalty for failure is a steep fine: "1% of their profits for every 1% wage gap they allow to persist."

  • The Supreme Court let stand a lower court ruling that allowed eastern Pennsylvania students to use bathrooms and locker rooms that correspond with their gender identity.
  • "A UFO is not necessarily an alien from another planet," points out Daniel Drezner.

NEXT: Liberals Who Learned About White Privilege Became Less Sympathetic to Poor Whites

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 or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

    1. Hello.

    2. In this thread, I own Special-Sparky AGAIN. He cries. AGAIN. Zeb sucks his dick. AGAIN.

      1. And Tulpa is an intellectually vapid entity, and an asshole-troll to boot. No surprises here with regards to THAT, now…

        1. Holy shit, sqrlsy calling someone else intellectually vapid is the height of self ignorance

  1. Planned Parenthood President Leana Wen has repeatedly claimed that “thousands of women died every year” from botched abortions…

    That kind of number fudging will get you increased government regulation.

    1. Not to mention donations

  2. % of U.S. adults who use #Twitter, by demographic group…

    That kind of relatively uniform demo inhabiting the twittersphere tells me everyone is equally stupid.

    1. Twitter is the most aptly named of all social media services. Their users are nearly all twits.

  3. …Sen. Kamala Harris (D–Calif.) said she would somehow require states to submit all reproductive healthcare laws to the Department of Justice for approval.

    I am beginning to suspect she might be a blatant panderer with no intention of following through with campaign promises.

    1. Still….she’s a frightening and loathsome person.

      Nurse Ratchet in drag. Or something.

      1. At least a supporter of a strong, unchecked President. Unless it is Trump. Or any other Republican. Or…

  4. “A UFO is not necessarily an alien from another planet,” points out Daniel Drezner.

    An object that is flying and hasn’t been identified is FOR SURE an alien and Drezner is part of the coverup.

  5. “If you think having too many choices is tyranny, wait until you have too few.”

    Gillespie threatening to vote Sanders.

  6. “In an MSNBC town hall yesterday, Sen. Kamala Harris (D–Calif.) said she would somehow require states to submit all reproductive healthcare laws to the Department of Justice for approval.”

    See? This is why she’s still my first choice for 2020. Republicans are literally turning this country into The Handmaid’s Tale, and we need a President who will fight back.


    1. Occasionally you are funny, most of the time you are stupid, today you are very stupid

      1. It’s hard to be original all the time. OBL is running on fumes.

        1. It’s sort of like being some future version of Tony or something. It’s hard to keep that shtick going forever.

          1. I would like to preorder his book.

      2. It is difficult to parody people who are already into the surreal.

  7. …officers shouldn’t “fall into the trap” of thinking that teenagers “are only kids. Some are criminals!”

    And has been repeatedly said, teenagers shouldn’t fall into the trap that law enforcement are well-trained and perfectly suited to the authority society gives them. Some are criminals.

  8. Attorney General Barr has deliberately misrepresented key aspects of Mueller’s report and decisions in the investigation, which has helped further the president’s false narrative about the investigation.

    There are plenty of false narratives floating around this whole debacle.

    1. I’m quite confused by Amash. His thoughts on Barr don’t add up. Why would Barr misrepresent the findings, knowing full well he was going to release the full report just a little bit later? Even if you think it wasn’t completely accurate, does Hanlon’s Razor not apply? Especially in a situation where the effects of misrepresentation don’t matter since the full report is available? This whole debacle annoys me.

      Is Amash doing this because he likes the pats on the back and the Kudos the mainstream press is giving him? The moment they rediscover he’s a wrongthinker they’ll kick him to the curb.

      1. Why would Barr misrepresent the findings, knowing full well he was going to release the full report just a little bit later?

        He knew that few people would read the report. It turns out he was right. Amash’s opinion of the report can be wrong, but unlike 95% of the people who have an opinion on the topic he’s actually read the report and cited parts of it to support his position.

        1. Do we really want to support someone who can sit down and read something so boring and long?

        2. Is anyone addressing the possibility that the report itself is fallible? How much of the evidence for its conclusions is hard and how much is simple testimony?

          I personally would have no intention of reading it. I hate to be cynical but this thing is a product of federal prosecutors in a charged political environment. It could be completely wrong – for or against the president.

          1. That’s true. We should be skeptical about any document that only has the prosecution’s side of the case.

            1. We should also be skeptical of our skepticism.

        3. He knew few people would read it, of course, but he also knew some people would. I think the point still stands.

          I’m not questioning his opinion of the report, but more his attacks on Barr. Does Barr just have the wrong opinion of the report and Amash’s is correct? Therefore, Barr is a bad person?

          1. They’re both politically motivated, it seems.

            I thought fact check had a pretty thorough analysis of the report, if, like me, you don’t really care to read a lengthy report. It addresses Barr’s claims in the press conference and suggests that his claims are “contradicted by the report.” You’re free to draw your own conclusions.

            1. “I thought fact check had a pretty thorough analysis of the report, if, like me, you don’t really care to read a lengthy report”

              So you didn’t read the original report but think that fact check is thorough…

              1. It’s thorough enough at debunking the claims from the White House that the report concluded #NoCollusion!

                Can you point to relevant specifics in the report that the FactCheck article fails to include?

                1. Oops I meant to say #NoObstruction!

      2. >>>I’m quite confused by Amash.

        you’re overthinking he’s not deep.

  9. More bad economic news.

    Dressbarn, CVS, Pier 1 and Topshop shuttering stores, pushing planned closures to 7,150

    Drumpf inherited the strongest economy in American history and only needed a couple years to completely ruin it.


    1. Never heard of Topshop but I’m surprised Pier1 still exists-I literally have not been in one since about 1994. As far as CVS goes-they have some of the shittiest customer service of any drug store and so deserve to fail.

      1. Not true about CVS – one of their employees recently offered to help carry my receipt to the car.

        1. Someone knows their 10 year old memes.

    1. JP Chase CEO Dimon asked if he’s debanking conservatives.

      Dimon: Maybe I did. Maybe I didn’t. But I can’t promise it won’t happen!

      Conservatives: Chase closed our accounts!

      Reason: Snowflakes!

  10. Eve Peyser goes in search of New Yorkers who actually want to see New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio as president.

    New Yorkers want him all to themselves.

    1. Like Georgians voting for Carter, New Yorkers will vote for de Blasio just to get him out of town for four years.

  11. As I’ve been predicting, the Democratic Party is moving steadily closer to the Koch / Reason open borders position.

    Beto O’Rourke Pushes Plan to Limit Deportation for Non-Criminals

    “His plan comes after Julian Castro, a fellow Texan and former Obama administration cabinet secretary who’s seeking to become the first Latino president, has called for decriminalizing migration while cutting the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency in half and limiting its role to issues such as drug trafficking and terrorism.”


  12. If Republicans can’t control their womenfolk’s sexual organs, the Libruls have won.

    1. Please try to make your reproductive rights advocacy more trans-friendly. It’s not just “womenfolk” who need access to abortion care; many transmen and non-binary people need it too.


      1. #HavingAUterusDoesntMakeYouFemale

        As OBL aptly demonstrates with his bovine uterus murse.

    2. Blowhard Woodchip
      May.29.2019 at 9:49 am
      “If Republicans can’t control their womenfolk’s sexual organs, the Libruls have won.”

      Sarc or abysmal stupidity?

      1. Does it have to be or?

    3. Do you think we don’t know it’s you Shreek?

  13. “A UFO is not necessarily an alien from another planet,” points out Daniel Drezner.

    But a few of them could be aliens from another planet.

    1. If we knew they were aliens, they wouldn’t be unidentified, would they?

      1. Well, then we would need to identify which aliens they are – the little grey people, the tall blondes, the reptilians, the insect like aliens, and my main concern is how many genders they might have, and which bathroom they would want to use. In all seriousness, though, there’s no way that 50,000+ reports over decades around the world can all be swamp gas, or Venus. They’re coming, we likely know a lot more about it than what they are revealing, and there is no way the government will admit it in my lifetime.

        1. They came to read the Mueller report.

        2. I know you’re being facetious about the alien gender thing, but everybody surely knows that aliens don’t need to pee or crap. I’ve never seen a film where an alien needs to take a piss, because otherwise Sigourney would have had a much easier time taking them all out. Just sayin’. 😉

    2. The most likely source is drones, be they personal recreation, from the media, or actual foreign spy aircraft.

      It would be foolish of the military not to investigate UFOs.

  14. “the substance can be extracted from the cannabis plant or from hemp, which has caused confusion ever since hemp was legalized as part of December’s 2018 Farm Bill.

    Hemp is the cannabis plant. It’s a cultivar of Cannabis sativa, just like weed. Any confusion probably comes down to the purely legally defined distinction between the two.
    Which should make enforcement of marijuana laws much more difficult. How can you tell if someone is smoking weed or “hemp flower”?

    1. Vaping is a big problem. While I would never light up a joint at the bus stop and smoke it out in the open, I have no problem hitting the lemon diesel now from my vape while waiting for the bus, because as far as anyone can tell it’s just the nicotine or CBD oil. And now I get home freaking blitzed, which is OK some of the time, but not so much all of the time.

      1. No wonder everyone hates you.

  15. Her baby died. No one knows why, including the coroner. But because she was co-sleeping using cocaine, she was charged with manslaughter and is serving five years in prison.

    — josie duffy rice (@jduffyrice) May 28, 2019

    The sleeping arrangements had nothing to do with her going to jail.

    1. The sleeping arrangements had nothing to do with her going to jail.

      Neither did her drug use, but you would have actually have had to read the article to understand that you giant bag of dicks.

      They put her in jail for 5 years even though there is no evidence whatsoever that she did anything that caused the death of her baby other than go to sleep.

      1. They put her in jail for 5 years even though there is no evidence whatsoever that she did anything that caused the death of her baby other than go to sleep.

        You’re not very bright are you? First you call me a bag of dicks then you agree with me. Nice work.

        1. Both things can be true, which you appear to be too stupid to realize.

          1. Ahahah look how afraid Sparky is, he saw my post and realized his idiotic mistake, but decided to avoid admitting it and give Charles one of his oh so famous Special-Sparky retorts “NU UH!!! YOU’RE DUMB!!! ”

            AHAHAHAHAAHAHAH what a chickenshit response Special-Sparky!! Everyone here knows you’re fucking stupid lololol

        2. I did not agree with you. You crossed out sleeping and put using cocaine, a direct implication that her drug use led somehow to her baby’s death. The article clearly does not support this. The judge in the case is, like you, a giant bag of dicks who thinks that her confession of the use of cocaine 2 days before means she should face additional consequences for the accidental death of her child.

          And how is losing her child not enough punishment? Do you actually believe there is some positive benefit to society by putting the mother of a dead child in jail? That the cost of the trial and incarceration is worth the message it sends to other young mothers who want to use cocaine and kill their babies, but will be dissuaded by this judges decision?

          Brindle’s friend, who was renting the apartment, confirmed to police and to The Appeal that she saw them sleeping on opposite sides of the bed….

          …Roger Byard is a professor at the University of Adelaide in Australia who has studied infant death and suffocation. He reviewed the autopsy and said he was surprised Brindle had been charged with manslaughter, particularly without any firm evidence that she had rolled onto her son.

          1. So not only are you not smart, you’re vehement about proving it.

            1. Shorter sparky “I think ‘Bag of Dicks’ means ‘wrong'”

              Lololol is it any wonder everyone thinks you’re a stupid bag of dicks lolololol

          2. You are making an ass of yourself. I’m pretty sure Sparky is saying that the cocaine is the reason she went to prison, not that it’s the reason her kid died.

            1. No, Special-Sparky is saying that when challenged, his lack of social skills requires him to resort ot insults in order to hide his vast stupidity.

              1. So what’s your excuse?

            2. I’m pretty sure Sparky is saying that the cocaine is the reason she went to prison, not that it’s the reason her kid died.

              Sparky is proving the assertion that he is a giant bag of dicks. I had an emotional response to this particular article because I have friends who lost their child the week before her 2nd birthday and, similarly to this case, the subsequent investigation was unable to determine why she died. She was sick, but had been seen by a doctor and there was no particular concern. Her exhausted mother put her in her crib to sleep, but she never woke up. Our friend blamed herself for being asleep when her child died, but sometimes babies die even when parents do everything right just as sometimes babies live despite neglect and abuse.

              This particular case is a whole basket of horrible because, although the mother has already suffered the worst possible outcome, the petty tyrant judge seems compelled to say awful things to the mother in an effort to out-outrage the petty tyrant prosecutor.

              I am not sure how it makes me an ass for responding with passion to the dipshit who declined to clue anyone in on his ‘dead baby’ humor.

              1. Because you misunderstood what he was saying. That’s how you made an ass of yourself.

                1. I responded to what he actually said. The misunderstanding are due to the fact that his responses followed no logical pattern. Clearly you are fixated on the word ass, which may be related to the current location of your head. Which is up your ass.

                  See, a joke isn’t funny when you have to explain it. Just sad, like Sparky.

              2. I had an emotional response to this particular article

                On a “libertarian” site? GTFO. Feels are for progressive pussies.

                1. Feels are for progressive pussies

                  Yes, you are a progressive pussy, I agree. See, I am still right.

                  (This is how you play the troll game, right? Wait, let me get on my sock puppet and act like someone gets my joke…)

                  1. Sparky is making an ass of himself. I am pretty sure that he and Zeb are cut from the same cloth. Cloth that came from a giant bag of dicks.

      2. FTA:

        Judge Brent Robinson wasn’t swayed. “This is what happens when people use drugs,” he said at the time. “You made some bad choices and you are going to suffer some bad consequences.”

        1. So what if the baby died? We got a drug user off the streets, and that’s what really matters.

          1. Not only that, but she deserved having her baby die.

        2. Horrifying

        3. I get it, you can take a quote from an article that is completely contrary to its central thesis. And are willing to do so even though it is contrary to what libertarian’s actually advocate for when it comes to justice. This is right out of the ‘Progressive Handbook’ for making a point that you have no evidence to support.

          Here is the quote from the only expert quoted in the article:

          “Stepping up to manslaughter is a pretty major step,” he added. “I suppose legally and technically, you can make it this, but I don’t know where the justice is.”

          1. Yes, you already proved above that you’re not very bright.

            1. Ooh, I got trolled by the sarcasm troll. Well, out of consideration for the well-deserved lesson, I hope that your mother does not roll over and smother you while you are fucking her tonight.

              1. “Ooh, I got trolled by the sarcasm troll”

                He knows he is wrong, that’s why he’s just stupidly bitching at you.

            2. Hey look it’s another Special-Sparky ““NU UH!!! YOU’RE DUMB!!! ” post !!!

          2. I am starting to get the impression that I am arguing with the proverbial fool. Perhaps he is not advocating for the the incarceration of the mother, but being sarcastic about the reason she was imprisoned.

            But perhaps sarcasm is a completely inappropriate response to a story that involves a dead child and a grieving mother, so I will stand by my giant bag of dicks comment.

            1. Well at least you made friends with fake Tulpa, so there’s that.



            2. “I am starting to get the impression that I am arguing with the proverbial fool”

              Don’t be too hard on him, Special-Sparky tries his best, but thinking makes his head hurt.

    2. Who cares if she was blowing lines – did she roll over the baby or not?

      1. The judge apparently cared.

  16. “Rep. Justin Amash (R–Mich.) did a town hall yesterday as well. “If you had never heard of Amash before, it was a perfect introduction to his views on just about every significant issue. If you are familiar with him, it was a standout performance,” writes Reason’s Eric Boehm. Watch here.”

    Can we safely call this ‘self-referential’?
    What’s next? And article about how this article was written?

    1. I would enjoy that.

      “As Robby sips on his Cosmo, his hand thoughtfully passing through his coif in a self-grooming gesture, the next line comes to him.
      ‘To be sure, it’s reprehensible to judge people on their gender identity, but that does not mean it should be forbidden to express such evil views.’ He looks down at one of his Yorkies. ‘Is evil too strong a word there, Milton?’ Milton sounds off with a solitary bark.
      As I watch Robby work, I realize he is in a trance. He does not acknowledge my questions. I keep watching….

  17. “Trump Administration Hardens Its Attack on Climate Science”
    “The attack on science is underway throughout the government. In the most recent example, the White House-appointed director of the United States Geological Survey, James Reilly, a former astronaut and petroleum geologist, has ordered that scientific assessments produced by that office use only computer-generated climate models that project the impact of climate change through 2040, rather than through the end of the century, as had been done previously.
    Scientists say that would give a misleading picture because the biggest effects of current emissions will be felt after 2040. Models show that the planet will most likely warm at about the same rate through about 2050. From that point until the end of the century, however, the rate of warming differs significantly with an increase or decrease in carbon emissions.”

    It’s actually a NYT feed, so we get the unsupported claims regarding the prognosis.
    Have these folks hit ONE prediction?

    1. As soon as democrats gain a majority they’ll implement massive taxes on the rich and middle class and POOF, they’ll declare victory and all our climate problems will cease… Until Republicans are back in office

      It’s like when the republicans talk about the deficit except rather than ignore the issue like republicans, democrats are dead set on taking more of you money

      1. Actually, the dems tebd ti tax the working poor the most and will most certainly do so again with the carbon tax to “solve” climate change. No chance they will ever tax their limousine liberal benefactors.

    2. Seems sensible. What good is modeling climate 100 years out? Why would anyone think that models tell us anything useful at all that far out?

    3. My favorite is the new spokesperson they have put out as the face of climate hysteria crisis. She is the environmentalist equivalent of the bulletproof glass around the pope-mobile. Who wants to be on the news criticizing a autistic teenage girl to whom English is a second language?

      Funny how the ‘I Love Fucking Science’ crowd stoops to smarmy sentimentality when their predictions fail to come true year after year after year. We still have ice in the summer at the North Pole, still have polar bears, penguins, and coral, still have Al Gore using 12x the average energy consumption to power his home.

    4. No engineer in their right mind would trust any climate model.

      Different models used by the IPCC are internally contradictory. The differences become increasingly clear when they are downscaled to regional or local predictions, in which the aggregate models often provide a “rainbow” prediction, predicting flooding or drought increases simultaneously in practically every location. If you want a specific example, I would suggest looking up a study done on Joshua Trees, which made the mistake of actually providing the model results and publishing them online, showing how low the predictive quality is.

      If you don’t believe me, ask the IPCC itself. The reports show clear as day. Despite 20 years, billions of dollars, and far stronger supercomputers working models, we still have a climate sensitivity number ranging from 1.5-4.5C per doubling of CO2. A number unchanged from the first IPCC report.

      Therefore, I find all policy created based on these models to be highly suspect.

  18. Creepy Uncle Joe just can’t help himself

    Joe Biden, who has publicly stated that he would stop touching women without their permission and would respect their space, touches a young girl at a campaign rally.

    Biden tells her, “I bet you’re as bright as you are good looking.”*

    *NOT from the Onion.

    1. Cue the theremin music.

      1. If that’s a Lost Weekend reference, it’s very subtle indeed.

    2. I bet you’re as bright as you are good looking.

      Biden’s staff: We keep sending him to sexual harassment seminars, but he seems to think they are improv workshops. On a lighter note, we are polling well with people who loved Steve Carrell on The Office

  19. Prior to Roe v Wade, most women probably could find a doc who would do an abortion if they paid him under the table and it was done off the books. Of course there were those who couldn’t afford one from a respectable doc, but they could find a way if they really wanted to end their pregnancy.

    1. “Of course there were those who couldn’t afford one from a respectable doc, but they could find a way if they really wanted to end their pregnancy.”

      Before dope was legal, we could find it anyhow and risk jail; is that what you’re proposing?

      1. Dope is *that* deadly? I never figured you for a *Reefer Madness* fan, sevo!

      2. Dope and abortion may have been illegal, but you were unlikely to get busted and do any jail time for either of you were white and privileged. That said, I absolutely think abortion should be legal up to the point of labor contractions. Do I like the idea of abortion- no!

  20. “ATLANTA—Netflix Inc., which shoots major series in Georgia including “Stranger Things” and “Ozark,” said it would work to oppose a new state law restricting abortions but would continue to film in the state for now. Should the law take effect in 2020 as scheduled, “we’d rethink our entire investment in Georgia,” Ted Sarandos, the company’s chief content officer, said in a statement.

    —-Wall Street Journal

    Virtue signalling by Hollywood is tedious as hell, and it isn’t any prettier when Netflix does it. Can’t even Netflix and chill without it passing some politically correct, progressive test these days?

    I saw a metal fan reviewing a recent release from the extreme metal band Marduk on YouTube recently. Cannibalism, necrophilia, etc.–being fascinated with these things is pretty typical in extreme metal. A fascination with the Nazis, on the other hand, is socially unacceptable?

    I don’t care if the bacon I eat came from pigs that were raised in pro-life states by homophobic farmers, and I don’t think that makes me unusual–not even among pro-choice consumers who support gay marriage. If you’re making business decisions based on criteria that aren’t fundamental to your business, you’re just begging for competitors to come along and clean your clock.

    1. “I don’t care”

      That’s because you’re not religiously progressive yet. Don’t worry, once your bank account freezes you’ll probably change your mind

    2. If you’re making business decisions based on criteria that aren’t fundamental to your business, you’re just begging for competitors to come along and clean your clock.

      Or in the case of Chick-Fil-A, their political positions seem to have provided a boon to their business. But that’s the beauty of the free market, Netflix and Chick-Fil-A are both allowed to take political positions and their customers are allowed to respond in kind.

      1. I suspect both Netflix and Chick-Fil-A became strong contenders on the basis of their underlying products, rather than their political stances, and once they get to be a certain size, they’re likely to find that chasing growth requires them to chase customers who like gay marriage and think killing babies is wrong.

        1. It’s hard to say with Chick-Fil-A. They were certainly on the rise before the controversy. I remember immediately afterwards there were lines around the block at my local CFA, many of those people I suspect were trying it for the first time as a counter-protest to the boycott call. Those lines didn’t exist to that extent prior to the call for a boycott.


        2. I do miss the butthurt reviews on Netflix about how a film was too decadent for using the f-word and promoting Godless values.

      2. But that’s the beauty of the free market

        Yeah, right. Next you’ll be saying it’s fine for Facebook and Twitter to kick out whoever they feel like kicking out.


        1. Bake that cake!

          1. I bet that’s a fetish now.

            1. A getting aroused fetish or a tiny doll fetish?

    3. Netflix is already losing Disney content before the end of the year. Have they considered giving people reasons to watch them instead of reasons to NOT watch them?

      1. Warner is also becoming the competition.

        Imagine McDonald’s refusing to buy the highest quality beef at the lowest prices because it was raised in a state that doesn’t like abortion. They have a fiduciary duty to their shareholders. We’re not even talking about horseshit concepts like “stakeholders” here. Pro-choice doesn’t have any stake at all in this. If they were abdicating their responsibility to shareholders because of bribery, that would at least make sense. Selling the shareholders down the river because of your “principles” isn’t any better. If I were a shareholder (through anything but an index fund), I’d be pissed. If you want to play at politics, do so with your own money on your own time. You’re supposed to be working for the shareholders, not Planned Parenthood.

  21. The Jews Always Flip

    According to Wolff, Mueller endured tortured deliberations over whether to charge the president, and even more tortured deliberations over the president’s power to dismiss him or his boss, the then deputy attorney general, Rod Rosenstein. Mueller ultimately demurred, Wolff writes, but his team’s work gave rise to as many as 13 other investigations that led to cooperating witness plea deals from Michael Cohen, David Pecker of American Media and Trump Organization accountant Allen Weisselberg.

    “The Jews always flip,” was Trump’s comment on those deals, according to Wolff.

    1. Michael Wolff?

      Isn’t that the Michael Wolff who insinuated that Trump was having an affair with Nikki Haley?

      Why, yes, it is!

      Here he is being excoriated for it by the right-wing* New Yorker:

      *There’s this thing called sarcasm. It doesn’t have a font, but it should. It really should.

      1. It doesn’t have a font, but it does have a tag.

    2. You should probably avoid posting kiddie porn Shreek, so you won’t have to hide behind sock puppets like you are now.

  22. ENB, you’re not allowed to talk about abortion if you don’t have a vagina! Oh wait, you do. Rephrase. You’re not allowed to question the abortion narrative! Period. There, I got it right finally.

    That’s the rules put in place. Men aren’t allowed to talk about abortion, and women aren’t allowed to question the narrative.

    1. Also men are allowed to talk about abortion so long as they support the narrative

      1. Men can talk about anything they’re willing to pay for

        1. If you are talking about abortions with a hooker, you either got severe issues or are one very sick bastard.

      2. I was told quite clearly last week in a FB thread that since I had an outie I was not allowed to participate in the discussion. A discussion started by a person with an outie on his own FB page.

    2. Being able to see your own side clearly enough to criticize it is the mark of intellectual honesty. It looks as good on ENB as it does on every other libertarian.

  23. “Her attorney, John Boyd, pushed for probation, noting in court that she had already been punished. “While this is a serious offense, she’s having to endure the most serious consequence of this, which is the loss of her child,” he said during her sentencing.”

    *smacks forehead*

    between the crappy attorney, the declining to join her baby at the hospital, and the “hey, guys! FYI, I just came off a cocaine bender!” ….maybe she could have pleaded for mercy due to her mental retardation

    1. btw, involuntary manslaughter is a pretty normal charge for anyone who was intoxicated right before or during the period when their baby dies. There’s a significant link between SIDS/co-sleeping/and alcohol and drug use. I don’t think this is just about punishing illegal drug users

      1. Standard or not, this comment is pretty shocking:
        ‘Judge Brent Robinson wasn’t swayed. “This is what happens when people use drugs,” he said at the time. “You made some bad choices and you are going to suffer some bad consequences.”’

      2. Is two days before “right before”?

  24. >>>because she was co-sleeping, she was charged with manslaughter

    onion? this was before a jury?

  25. MUELLER: If we had evidence that the president did not commit crimes, we would have said so.

    TRUMP’S SACK-LICKERS: Total exoneration! Whoo-hoooo! Victory lap!

    1. >>>If we had evidence that the president did not commit crimes

      we’d be proving negatives 50 volumes deep?

    2. Is this Buttplug’s new handle?

      1. A difference that makes no difference is no difference.

    3. Shreek “I got banned for posting kiddie porn”

  26. Mueller: Despite multiple instances of obstruction, Justice Department policy prohibits the indictment of a sitting president, therefore we couldn’t and didn’t indict him.

    POO*: Total exoneration! Whoo-hoo! In your face, Fake News CNN and Failing New York Times! Victory lap! God Bless America! @FoxNews @SeanHannity @RushLimbaugh

    *President Orange Obstruction

    1. Do you work hard at being a dumbass, or does it come naturally?

    2. We need to push back against the absurd idea Drumpf has been exonerated. In fact, Mueller’s investigation proved #TrumpRussia was no “conspiracy theory” — he literally is a Russian intelligence asset who colluded and obstructed.


      1. >>>#ItsMuellerTime

        dude just retired. Miller Time now.

    3. Piss and moan all you want, he’s staying in office.

    4. Shreek “I am too stupid to realize people know this is a sockpuppet I’m using because I got banned “

      1. Wrong. Mr. Buttplug merely lost, then eventually recovered, his password.


        1. ACTUALLY, he admitted he got banned.

          Right in that thread. And then blamed it on a Republican intern.

          Maybe you should just stick with shitty, boring parody that everyone laughs at you for.

          1. Wrong again.

            I specifically asked Mr. Buttplug about that comment later. He told me the qualifier “For all I know…” was just his way of presenting one possible theory of what transpired. Only later did he realize the issue all along was simply that he forgot his password.


            1. God even when you try REALLY HARD you are soooooo fucking boring.

              Link > Boring ass parody

              1. Try this link.

                In Mr. Buttplug’s own words: “For all I know” is an admission I didn’t know what happened. It turned out that I had just temporarily lost my password.

                1. Ahahahaah that doesn’t even make any sense ahahahahahah

                  “I lost my password but thought I got banned” ahahahahah IT DOESNT EVEN FOLLOW AHAAHAHAH

                  God you are soooo fucking boring Shreek.

  27. plus abortion via pill that’s as safe and effective in the first trimester as it is discreet.

    Hard for me to understand why surgical abortion is so much more prevalent (or alternatively why medical abortion is so infrequent) in the US than in other countries.

    In most European countries, most abortions (like 70%+) are medical via the pill. Only in the really Catholic countries and Germany is the reverse true (25% or so are medical abortions and remainder are surgical). There is nothing in the middle. Countries either seem to ‘prefer’ medical or ‘prefer’ surgical.

    1. It’s probably availability of the drugs. Drugs for abortion were developed overseas, and getting FDA approval so they can be sold in the US is a very long and very expensive process. Medical devices also need FDA approval, but AFAIK there’s nothing needed for a surgical abortion that wasn’t in use in the USA 50 years ago.

  28. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration will consider how to regulate cannabidiol (a.k.a. CBD) products at a hearing this Friday.

    Regulate this you assholes.

  29. […] They’re using numbers from a time when antibiotics were barely known or used. […]

  30. Five years of prison is not enough for naming your kid “Tre’Velle”.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.