Trump

[Aargh]

Alternative facts? Probably not the greatest chloice of words to put together.

But then, counting crowds at inaugurations is an attempt to make something out of nithing.

[jdshock]

Unfortunately, the opposite is probably true. Abortion aside, Planned Parenthood gets in the way of women's health. There are far more free and reduced clinics for women's health than Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood is a very small minority and unneeded. And Planned Parenthood provides the fewest services of all. Planned Parenthood will provide a breast exam, but not a mammogram. If there is a concern from the breast exam, PP refers women to the non PP free clinics for followup and mammograms. PP does do vaginal exams and even provide Pap's, but once again, if there is an irregularity, PP refers to the other clinics. It's just what they do.

Conversely, those other clincs, which do the followups, compete with PP for federal money. These clinics that actually treat problems, including cancer, lose out to PP. If you have cancer, it would be far better to be diagnosed sooner, with treatment started sooner, than to have PP slow the whole thing down.

But, the above won't ever change, PP has done a great job of pushing their story, they have no plans of ever providing cancer services, but they will always want the money. When I see this commercial, I always think of PP. https://youtu.be/k8piX3PCsx4

What a strange comparison to make, though. I shouldn't drop my primary care physician just because he can't help with a cancer diagnosis. If I have a spot that looks worrisome, he's going to refer me to a specialist. From your other post listing clinics, my only experience is with GraceMed. They're a great organization that really has a great mission. They also have incredibly long wait lists. If you're just going for an annual exam, you can get in at Planned Parenthood the same week.

It's funny that your perspective is that Planned Parenthood has sold their story well. From my perspective, conservatives have done a great job selling the narrative of how evil Planned Parenthood is. Let's review some of the facts: (1) when we talk about "defunding" Planned Parenthood we're talking about things like Medicaid reimbursement and the potential for federal grants that every other non-profit health center can access; (2) federal money can't go toward abortion services anyway; (3) many conservatives don't want to stop the federal funds going to many of the other free and reduced clinics that offer abortion services; (4) many of the Planned Parenthood locations, such as the Wichita one, don't even offer abortion services.

[jdshock]

What about the numerous other questions I posed? I'd really like to have this discussion. I can understand a pro-choice platform. I can understand an environmentalist platform. I can understand the want for gov to solve problems for individuals. I disagree, but it's reasonable and I understand. I haven't made heads or tails about the rest of it.

Are you referring to the questions about the various movements? I'm not sure there's much potential for a great discussion on those topics. I don't believe the various movements pushing for women's and minorities' rights are exclusionary. It's hard to point to evidence because I don't know what it would look like on this topic. When I say I support women's rights and am behind that movement, I don't mean women are better than men or something. I've never met someone that did. Because of that, I think it's just a difference of opinion.

I do think your point about progressives and special people is a valid criticism of many individual progressives. It's certainly not the goal of the progressive movement, by its definition. I have met liberals that appear to view it that way, though, and they give the movement a bad name.

[jdshock]

Alternative facts? Probably not the greatest chloice of words to put together.

But then, counting crowds at inaugurations is an attempt to make something out of nithing.

It's Orwellian doublethink. Crowd size is such a silly topic, it should be a non-issue to just say "yeah, factually there were fewer people present for the inauguration than there were in 09 and 13." To talk about "alternative facts" even a little bit is just nutty propaganda.

I'm sure several people are already getting ready to click "reply" to tell me it's a silly media narrative or that it detracts from real issues. And I agree that crowd size is nothing. It's meaningless. But meaningless issues tend to be the ones that people are okay owning up to. Lying about this tiny, inconsequential issue is a giant, flashing, red warning light.

[MoValley John]

What a strange comparison to make, though. I shouldn't drop my primary care physician just because he can't help with a cancer diagnosis. If I have a spot that looks worrisome, he's going to refer me to a specialist. From your other post listing clinics, my only experience is with GraceMed. They're a great organization that really has a great mission. They also have incredibly long wait lists. If you're just going for an annual exam, you can get in at Planned Parenthood the same week.

It's funny that your perspective is that Planned Parenthood has sold their story well. From my perspective, conservatives have done a great job selling the narrative of how evil Planned Parenthood is. Let's review some of the facts: (1) when we talk about "defunding" Planned Parenthood we're talking about things like Medicaid reimbursement and the potential for federal grants that every other non-profit health center can access; (2) federal money can't go toward abortion services anyway; (3) many conservatives don't want to stop the federal funds going to many of the other free and reduced clinics that offer abortion services; (4) many of the Planned Parenthood locations, such as the Wichita one, don't even offer abortion services.

Actually, my perspective is from being married to a nurse for 25 years. Knowing her friends and cowoworkers that have had stints both working at PP and other locations, they attest to just how pointless PP is outside of birth control. Note, I did give PP credit for being a quality birth control provider. It also should be pointed out that independent government reviews have recommended defunding PP for the very reasons I've given. It doesn't matter though, the issue is entrenched and there isn't enough proof on either side for any give. That said, if you go to PP for a lump on your breast, PP, just like the cavity monitor, will look at the lump and say, yup, you have a lump, and then go to lunch.

[jdshock]

Actually, my perspective is from being married to a nurse for 25 years. Knowing her friends and cowoworkers that have had stints both working at PP and other locations, they attest to just how pointless PP is outside of birth control.

I never said where I thought you got your perspective. I'm sure your wife being a nurse gives her a more inside knowledge of Planned Parenthood than I am privy to, but nurses are still susceptible to their own biases. There are many nurses that believe Planned Parenthood does great work and uses their money wisely.

Note, I did give PP credit for being a quality birth control provider.

Not in the post I quoted.

It also should be pointed out that independent government reviews have recommended defunding PP for the very reasons I've given.

I would be interested in reading those reviews.

[MoValley John]

(1) when we talk about "defunding" Planned Parenthood we're talking about things like Medicaid reimbursement and the potential for federal grants that every other non-profit health center can access; (2) federal money can't go toward abortion services anyway; (3) many conservatives don't want to stop the federal funds going to many of the other free and reduced clinics that offer abortion services; (4) many of the Planned Parenthood locations, such as the Wichita one, don't even offer abortion services.

1. Planned Parenthood has been caught, more than once, overbilling for reimbursements. That overbilling is money that could be used elsewhere.

2. Planned Parenthoods practice of segregating services allows them the ability to muddy the waters and mix in federal funds with abortion.

3. I don't care what many conservatives may, or may not want.
4. Many, most, actually nearly all PP locations that don't provide abortion, are pass through ports to independent physicians that do. In a jaded way, PP franchises abortion markets. Physician A. wants to perform abortions and becomes a large PP donor. Physician A. Gives so much that PP places said physician on their board. Physician A. gets all of the abortion business in the market area. Planned Parenthood gets all the money from other "vital" services, Planned Parenthood gets a huge influx of donations from physician, making it better to refer than to perform abortions on their own. Physician A. gets so much business, he buys a second Ferrari. This is just how it works.

[MoValley John]

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/mar/11/planned-parenthood-accused-of-6m-fraud/

[MoValley John]

https://www.justice.gov/usao-edtx/pr/planned-parenthood-pays-43-million-settle-allegations-unnecessary-medical-care

[WuDrWu]

Many of these arguments are just the tip of the iceberg regarding what's wrong with government.

Reducing future growth is NOT "cutting" expenses.

Discussing "women's rights" or "minority rights" is a ruse. We all have the exact same rights. If liberals, or anyone for that matter, want to argue that certain groups of citizens need special help and protection, then let's have that welfare debate. Just remember that EVERY TIME you make a special rule for yourself or someone else, it's YOU that are saying you're different, or you're incapable or you're a lesser person. Not me.

Stop saying taking something away that doesn't belong to you in the first place is "disproportionately harming" certain classes of people. Taking that stance means admitting that right now, everything you get from government is due you and no less. It's the classic government argument and why we're so deep in debt. There's NO chance of going backwards. Today's spending is the lowest baseline and nobody can be "harmed" one iota.


@jdshock: said "I'm sure several people are already getting ready to click "reply" to tell me it's a silly media narrative or that it detracts from real issues. And I agree that crowd size is nothing. It's meaningless. But meaningless issues tend to be the ones that people are okay owning up to. Lying about this tiny, inconsequential issue is a giant, flashing, red warning light."

It IS a silly narrative. BUT it's the liberal media that brought it up! Did anyone here for 1 minute think the crowd size was going to be comparable to '09 or '13? In one of THE most liberal of cities, where turnout voted something north of 90% for Clinton and "racial" makeup is predominantly black (more than 45%). I'm not surprised the 1st black President drew more people than Trump. Why is EITHER side making a big deal of it? I'm guessing the GOP wouldn't have EVER mentioned crowd size (why would they when it was so much different?) and would have gone about the business of doing the People's business. But no, the media HAD to bring it up. I think it's ridiculous, but these guys aren't going to take it anymore, which is exactly why Trump was elected. People are sick and tired of being manipulated and misled by elite coastal government and media.

We have real problems in this country. Hopefully we can start addressing them and get past this pettiness.

[pinstripers]

This country has to stop looking for a free ride. No one owes you a living. No one owes you free medical. No one owes you free college. In this country, “paying your fair share” has come to mean paying for yourself and anyone else the government decides.

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/opinion/opn-co...#storylink=cpy

[jdshock]

It IS a silly narrative. BUT it's the liberal media that brought it up! Did anyone here for 1 minute think the crowd size was going to be comparable to '09 or '13? In one of THE most liberal of cities, where turnout voted something north of 90% for Clinton and "racial" makeup is predominantly black (more than 45%). I'm not surprised the 1st black President drew more people than Trump. Why is EITHER side making a big deal of it? I'm guessing the GOP wouldn't have EVER mentioned crowd size (why would they when it was so much different?) and would have gone about the business of doing the People's business. But no, the media HAD to bring it up. I think it's ridiculous, but these guys aren't going to take it anymore, which is exactly why Trump was elected. People are sick and tired of being manipulated and misled by elite coastal government and media.

Your arguments about why the turnout was smaller are really good arguments. So why isn't that the official stance of the administration? Instead they're just doing more lying. People are sick and tired of being manipulated and misled, but they're completely unwilling to admit that they're being manipulated and misled by the current administration. It's hypocritical.

And the thing that is just completely bonkers about the situation is that your arguments are good. Why lie?

Stop saying taking something away that doesn't belong to you in the first place is "disproportionately harming" certain classes of people. Taking that stance means admitting that right now, everything you get from government is due you and no less. It's the classic government argument and why we're so deep in debt. There's NO chance of going backwards. Today's spending is the lowest baseline and nobody can be "harmed" one iota.

No one is legitimately recommending that all free and reduced health clinics stop receiving medicaid reimbursement or federal grant money. Limiting it to Planned Parenthood does disproportionately harm women because more women utilize PP's services than men do. That has nothing to do with entitlement or anything like that. If you are recommending we stop all reimbursement for medicaid and stop all federal grant money for free and reduced clinics, that's a different argument. I'd disagree with that approach for a variety of reasons, but it would be less of a "women's issue" than Planned Parenthood has become.

[jdshock]

1. Planned Parenthood has been caught, more than once, overbilling for reimbursements. That overbilling is money that could be used elsewhere.

2. Planned Parenthoods practice of segregating services allows them the ability to muddy the waters and mix in federal funds with abortion.

3. I don't care what many conservatives may, or may not want.
4. Many, most, actually nearly all PP locations that don't provide abortion, are pass through ports to independent physicians that do. In a jaded way, PP franchises abortion markets. Physician A. wants to perform abortions and becomes a large PP donor. Physician A. Gives so much that PP places said physician on their board. Physician A. gets all of the abortion business in the market area. Planned Parenthood gets all the money from other "vital" services, Planned Parenthood gets a huge influx of donations from physician, making it better to refer than to perform abortions on their own. Physician A. gets so much business, he buys a second Ferrari. This is just how it works.

I am still interested in seeing the independent reports saying the government should defund Planned Parenthood. Your lower links are about lawsuits against PP. Many government agencies have lost lawsuits. Many businesses have lost lawsuits. Maybe that is an argument that we should defund Planned Parenthood, even. But it is not an independent report that we should defund them.

[MoValley John]

I am still interested in seeing the independent reports saying the government should defund Planned Parenthood. Your lower links are about lawsuits against PP. Many government agencies have lost lawsuits. Many businesses have lost lawsuits. Maybe that is an argument that we should defund Planned Parenthood, even. But it is not an independent report that we should defund them.

You mean my lower link from the US Justice Department? Where PP agreed to pay the government after being caught? You want to simply dismiss that? That isn't the only time PP has lost to the government. But like I said, this is an entrenched issue. And unlike other healthcare providers that risk being defunded if they continually defraud medicare/medicaide, PP has the political clout to just keep rolling along.

[MoValley John]

Fraud.....

https://aishealth.com/archive/rmc072516-01