I am proud to stand with Planned Parenthood

[DemocratSinceBirth]

[leftofcool]

1. So am I!

[ismnotwasm]

2. Yes indeed!

[Iliyah]

3. I'm proud as well

My family and I are sending them $1,000 and will continue to support them.

[cali]

4. Your sudden devotion to women's reproductive rights is disturbing and suspect.

[Cary]

75. BFD

I'm sure you will get over it.

[cali]

92. Lol.

[Cary]

93. Laugh and the whole world laughs with you

Hahahahaha!

[JRLeft]

5. I will continue to donate to PP, but I can see them going the way of ACORN.

By the way ACORN should still be around.

[JoePhilly]

6. If a Republican becomes President, you can count on it.

[JRLeft]

7. It's a matter of time. The reality is everything PP does should be provided

by the government.

[JoePhilly]

8. The GOP is definitely not going to be allowing that any time soon.

[JRLeft]

13. Agreed, not just the GOP, but several democrats. Why

because of the make believe man in the sky.

[leftofcool]

9. Please enlighten us as to which of the above medical services ACORN provided to women

[JRLeft]

10. I never said ACORN provided any of those services, I used ACORN as example of where I see

I see PP headed towards. Either you cannot read or you are looking for confrontation.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

12. I am not looking for confrontation.

But PP's base of support is much broader, despite the attacks by the far right.

[synergie]

58. Yes, but the base of the attacks and the hatred of PP runs deeper than the hatred of

ACORN. They're using the EXACT same playbook to attack PP, and they're making inroads simply because of the religious dedication to hating PP among the right wingers. Even those who support PP and approve it of are sometimes rather shallow in their support, if you remember how they were piling on to attack PP and the doctors filmed in those fraudulent videos?

And let's not forget those people who are proudly proclaiming how they've participated in the supposed 'backlash against PP" by redirecting the money they give to help PP provide medical services to Bernie for ad buys or whatever.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

67. IMHO, PP is harder to marginalize and isolate than ACORN./nt

[synergie]

70. I desperately hope you're right, but if you pay attention to what even

those who supposedly support PP have been saying over the past months and the childish temper tantrums of some of the rather volatile section of the Bernie supporters, you know how shallow the support of this organization is sometimes.

[uppityperson]

98. Are you saying Bernie supporters don't support PP?

[George II]

22. How can anyone possibly draw a comparison between Planned Parenthood and ACORN?

[JRLeft]

23. Another person who cannot comprehend something so simple.

The only comparison I made was, PP may disappear like ACORN.

[oasis]

33. ACORN is to an acorn as Planned Parenthood is to an oak tree. (eom)

[JRLeft]

35. SMFH @ the stupidity.

[oasis]

37. Content yourself with that fact that you are one of the few remaining geniuses on DU.

A salute to your wisdom.

[synergie]

60. It won't.

[m-lekktor]

100. no shit, it was hardly rocket science. The WOOOOOOOOOOSH is strong with a certain crowd! nt

[synergie]

59. Pretty logically and with a whole lot of evidence, considering that the exact same

methods are being used against both organizations. The poster was saying that equally reprehensible right wing attacks are being launched against both organizations, because right wingers and those who mindlessly parrot their talking points hate the groups these organizations serve and don't much care who they harm when they play their political games.

[Cha]

11. Vital Services for our Health.. thank you, DSB!

[Gore1FL]

14. I am too.

They shouldn't have endorsed anyone though. That was poorly thought out.

[pandr32]

15. There is much to gain from an endorsement

for both sides of an endorsement. Since HC already has a huge ground operation, this translates well to PP, an organization under attack, and HC's history fighting for women and children as well as their healthcare provides a good fit. For HC it translates to political clout and more GOTV efforts, possibly getting the benefit of their volunteers.
Why do you say the endorsement is "poorly thought out?"

[Gore1FL]

16. They got involved in something that was unnecessarily divisive

They get that enough without trying.

[pandr32]

25. Why?

It stands to reason that no organization is going to please everyone all the time. Sanders' supporters are not happy, oh well. This isn't T-ball, but a presidential contest.
As for being beleaguered, PP is right to want to tap into the support that HC has--the majority of the Democratic Congress. She also has the most support of state leaders and reps. Add to that almost all of the major unions. That is a whole lot of muscle. This endorsement is a win-win because it also validates HC's long-time support of women's health as being a critically important issue, particularly while the conservatives are trying to push it back into the Dark Ages.

[Gore1FL]

40. They shouldn't use themselves to wedge the left.

That's why.

[synergie]

74. They're not, but some small faction of the supposed left is using this an

excuse to create more division and more strife, and that's why this "backlash" that a few are trying to make happen is going to blow up in their own faces.

[Gore1FL]

79. Cause and effect

Seriously. they took action and obvious consequences happened.

It's a shame.

[synergie]

87. Um, what consequences do you imagine happened? It's a shame that you believe the hype you hear on

the closed Berniebro support groups, and that reality isn't filtering in.

They took action and quite a lot of people are pleased and few whiny people who apparently don't actually give a fark about women's healthcare took to whining on the internet and claiming to no longer donate. Yet, has there been any actual proof of any reduction in donations?

Nope.

Seriously, that you're gas-lighting here about "punishing" PP, when you don't even understand the difference between PP and PPPA kinda shows why your pretend consequences aren't as major as you might hope, but it's a shame that you guys exposed yourselves for what you are here.

Punishing poor women, men and children for not getting your way is indeed shameful.

[summerschild]

20. I don't think it is good for Planned Parenthood to endorse anyone.

Women's reproductive health should be a woman's issue, not a political issue.

PP is so sorely needed. They don't need to do anything that jeopardizes their continuation. Now every time funding comes up there's no way to argue that point.

[SunSeeker]

28. Oh please. Women's reproductive health has always been a political issue.

PP did not make it so. The patriarchy did. PP is just acknowledging reality and making sure the best fighter, for its and all women's interests in the political war over women's bodies, gets into the White House.

[Gore1FL]

41. There is no reason fore PP to divide it's supporters.

It's self-destructive to an an organization to a an already beleaguered organization.

[SunSeeker]

44. PP is not dividing its supporters. PP did not even endorse. PP PAC did.

I think it is safe to assume the subset of Bernie supporters who are throwing a snit and vowing to never donate to PP weren't really supporters to begin with.

[Gore1FL]

45. I don't have the numbers on that. n/t

[synergie]

65. If you're willing to withdraw your suppot of an organization that provides necessary meidcal

care to women and men who have no other source for care, and are now quoting Anti-Choice lies to justify your act of pique, then you were not much of a supporter of PP or women's basic healthcare in the first place. Especially in this climate where PP is being robbed of vital funds by the right wingers whose talking points are now being used to punish PP for daring to slight their candidate.

It's just pettiness and rather cruel and those who honestly supported PP and have been actually paying attention to what's been going on (from what women are doing when they cannot access care, the HIV outbreaks and the STIs that have been rampaging, including the multi-drug resistant strains), you do not do what these people are doing.

So if you're spending your money on Bernie rather than funding PP's basic mission, then you truly were not much of a supporter of that mission in the first place, and that's a valid comment to make.

[Gore1FL]

69. It didn't make sense for PP to join the nomination stage at this point in the game.

Did you blame people that quit donating to Komen when they made a political statement? Or did you blame Komen for taking a stupid divisive political stance?

[synergie]

72. Actually, PP has doen this before and no one threw a tantrum then. So why all the

OUTRAGE now? It's just because you didn't get your way.

Komen was not even remotely the same thing, please don't resort to false equivalence here.

Your ONLY argument here is that you do not like who they endorsed, period.

What Komen did was not even remotely on point. Had you followed the actual issue, you'd realize why making such a claim is a merit-less argument.

Komen, an organization that was meant to raise money for Breast Cancer awareness cut off funding an organization that provided mammograms for poor women, which was the only way they could access them. That was more than a "political statement", it was quite literally betraying the very women who made that organization what it was, by betraying such a vital component of what Komen pretended to stand for. This is why their directors stepped down, and why women stopped buying all that pinkwashed stuff that mostly went to Komen's operating costs and didn't support any breast cancer awareness, research or prevention funding (like mammograms for poor women in places like PP).

I understand you're upset about not getting your way, but the stupid divisive nonsense here is not coming from PP, but from the reactionary portion of the highly excitable segment of Bernie supporters (not even the majority of them). I blame anyone stupid enough to use this to defund PP themselves for their own actions.

[Gore1FL]

77. When did they endorse before IA?

please provide a link.


Komen got into the political arena divided it's supporters and lost support. PP got in the political arena divided it's supporters and lost support. The Boy Scouts got into the political arena divided it's supporters and lost support.

The lesson is don't get into the political arena and divided your supporters. You'll lose support.

[synergie]

82. Please explain why they need to heed your wishes about when they should or should not

endorse? They "alienated" republicans, who also support them financially when they endorsed Kerry in 2004, 2 years after they came up with guidelines.

Komen's actions and the reaction to their actions had nothing to do with their 'getting into the political arena', they got into denying funds to breast cancer screening programs , THAT is what lost the support. I'm sorry that even having that point made clear to you 3 times, still wasn't enough for it to sink into for you and that you are committed to your fallacious determination to equate things that are not even remotely alike to excuse your pique.

PP did NOT get into the political arena, PP's political action committee did, and they didn't divide any supporters, you're doing that to yourselves because you're upset about not getting your way.

The Boy Scouts also did not get into the political arena and they also have not lost any support.

The lesson is that you don't just get to make up things because your nose it out of joint, and making up numbers and percentages online doesn't equate to any actual backlash or harm to a political action committee doing what it's literally created to do, get involved in the political aspect of issues.


PP hasn't lost support, they lost a few whiny people who claim they were supporting it and who decided that playing political games was more important than STDS, funding abortions for poor women and mammograms.

Basically, the lesson is that if you're poor losers who retaliate for not getting their way and not understanding why defunding PP because they literally have no clue what the PPPAC is, you've divided yourself and you were not much of a supporter anyway.

When you do so by parroting the anti-choice attacks of the right wing repubs to excuse your childish behavior, why would anyone wish to cater to your silliness?

Behaving in this aggressive, immature, and whiny manner, while punishing poor women, men and children is a way to ensure that you lose supporters, who know you're no different in your commitment to women's rights and the public health than the right wingers who endanger it now, and whose talking points you have made your own.

[synergie]

62. THEY are not the ones dividing their supporters, that's people who are upset

that they didn't get their way. You would not be saying the same things had they endorsed your preferred candidate. I'm sorry, but Bernie supporters choosing to destroy an organization that is VITAL for poor men and women in this country is not "self destructive" on their part, but willfully, petulantly destructive on the part of people who are affronted that their candidate did not get the nod.

[Gore1FL]

64. Cause and effect

And yes, it's a shame it's happening, but not at all surprising. That's why it is incredibly wrong headed for them to divide their supporters and piss half of them off.

[synergie]

68. Sorry, but when you're making a willful choice, you are responsible for the "effect" you're

willfully choosing, and yes, it's surprising that so many are so shallow in their supposed concern for the work of PP, and the population it serves.

It's incredibly wrong headed for these "supporters" to vent their rage, and they're not "half" of anything. Not even Bernie supporters, this is a small, petulant group who are super upset that their candidate didn't get an endorsement, their reactions and their acting out is not "cause an effect" any more than a child throwing a tantrum for not getting a toy in a store.

Sorry, but that reasoning just doesn't hold water.

[Gore1FL]

71. So who was at fault when Komen lost their support?

Was it Komen for dividing it's supporters by taking an anti-choice position, or was it the supporters for donating elsewhere?

[synergie]

76. You do realize that I've already explained this to you right?

They were a breast cancer awareness group raising money for mammograms and who cut off a primary source of mammograms for poor women.

It was Komen taking an ANTI BREAST CANCER PREVENTION FOR POOR WOMEN stance, that was the fault.

I understand your need to paint your stance as something other than toddler throwing a temper tantrum, but you're not doing a very good job of trying to justify your stance and your ignorance of what happened with Komen isn't helping you a bit here.

[Gore1FL]

78. Well you tried. n/t

[synergie]

83. Yes, I did try, but apparently you simply cannot accept basic facts, and are too busy

throwing your tantrums to realize that your fallacious arguments were dismantled rather easily. One can present the truth and explain, but one cannot make blind fool learn what they do not wish to know.

[uppityperson]

99. I've a request for you. And welcome to DU

I understand your frustration with attempts to take away backing from PP for what it's PAC or group (don't recall the acronym) did with endorsing Hillary.

However, a strong request for you. Please stop with the "toddler temper tantrum" insults. It doesn't help and insults get hidden, posters get banned. If you could figure out a way to strongly state your opinion without sinking to insults, it would be appreciated. Seriously.

Thank you.

[comradebillyboy]

30. The reality is that women's reproductive rights have

been a political issue for a long time and will continue to be so long as the republican party is captive to religious fanatics.

[Gore1FL]

42. But why divide Dems over it? n/t

[SunSeeker]

55. So did PP Action Fund "divide" its supporters when it endorsed Kerry before the primary was over?

I suggest you check this post out:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=990333

PP Action Fund has a long history of endorsing presidential nominee candidates. Funny how some Bernie supporters suddenly take issue with that.

[Gore1FL]

57. Did they do it before IA?

As I recall 2004, there really asn;t much of a contest left after the firsts few. Kerry was running away with it it.

[SunSeeker]

91. So it's OK to pick the favorite with Kerry but not with Hillary? nt

[Gore1FL]

94. Let me ask in a different way.

What did the field look like when this happened in 2004? Was it wildly divided as it is now?

Because my point is it was unwise to get into the fray. Did it play well in 2004 vs now? I don't know.

In any event, they took action. It had consequences. It's a shame they didn't think it through. They proactively walked into this. They shouldn't have. The reaction is harsher than it should be. but it's still cause and effect.

Hopefully I explained it well enough that if you choose again to put words into my mouth, at least try to come closer to my argument.

[SunSeeker]

103. Ask it any way you want.

It is not "wildly divided," nothing like 2008. And even in 2008, PP PAC endorsed, even though it was quite close, with Hillary actually getting more primary votes than Obama, but with Obama edging her out on delegates, 2,285 to 1,973.

No matter where you put the goal posts, it is hypocritical to bash PP Action Fund for endorsing Hillary.

[Gore1FL]

105. It's apparently divided enough.

If it divided people in 2004, then it was stupid then, too. That's not moving the goal posts, that;s you putting words in my mouth again.

The trick is to not piss off people that give you money. They did. It was foolish. Unless and until you can demonstrate a positive outcome of this decision, then you really have no argument against what I've actually been saying vs what you wish I was saying.

[SunSeeker]

106. I don't think any of the folks threatening to cut them off over the endorsement were donors. nt

[Gore1FL]

107. Then there is no isssue. n/t

[synergie]

63. They didn't. Certain folks were upset and decided to retaliate for not getting their own way,

PP didn't "divide Dems", one faction of Dems have already divided themselves and have been waging war on everyone else.

[Gore1FL]

66. If PP didn't endorse, they wouldn't have pissed of 1/2 their supporters.

It was unwise.

[synergie]

73. First of all, they did NOT piss off 50% of their supporters, you have no numbers

to back up this statement.

And it's unwise to keep blaming PP for PPPA's perfectly rational decision, or to stop supporting a healthcare organization that you supposedly support because you're nose is out of joint.

That's fairly unwise too, and THAT action is pissing off a lot of people who were frankly rather turned off by the antics of some of the Bernie supporters, despite their willingness to support Bernie.

At some point, you need to figure out that regardless of who you support in the primaries, we're all going to have to get together behind whomever gets the most delegates. Being obnoxious jerks about something so vital as women's healthcare in a climate where it's under real attack, where real women and men are suffering ... that's going to be a whole lot harder to convince people to do.

A greater percentage of this country supports PP, punishing it out of pique is going to backfire on you.

[Gore1FL]

80. OK it wouldn't have pissed off some of it's supporters.

It's obviously enough. Otherwise you wouldn't be melting down about it.

[synergie]

84. Um, you and a handfull of your fellow Bernie supporters are the only ones melting down

about things, not just the PP endorsement, you seem to melt down about a whole lot of things.

[SunSeeker]

104. ^^^THIS^^^

[synergie]

61. Why? They supported the person the political arm thought had the best chance and

who they have a history working with. The reactionary sentiments of the Bernie supporters with their knee jerk defunding of healthcare is poorly thought out.

[BooScout]

17. Me too!

[mcar]

18. I am too!

[mountain grammy]

19. As we all do.

But I also stand with single payer, universal health care, which will help many more than PP ever could.

[comradebillyboy]

31. We have PP now, we may get single payer

eventually, but right now PP fills a very important need.

[fbc]

21. I have canceled my recurring donation

until whoever was responsible for this decision is fired.

[MADem]

27. How much were you giving them? nt

[comradebillyboy]

32. Lip service more than likely.

[stevil]

36. Its sad if true

PP will be an issue in this election no matter WHO the Democratic candidate is. Throwing them under the bus (even in pretend land) is such childish pontification.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

52. I also disagree with the decision

but will continue to donate as they provide needed services.

[synergie]

85. How much was that? Those of us who actually care about providing access to healthcare

and not just shallow lip service to it, would like to fill the gap you're supposedly making. Do let us know so that we can step in to help poor women, children and men while you're off pouting about not getting your way.

[blackspade]

24. Quit couching this whole mess as a zero sum game.

This was a foolish political endorsement, period.
PP has negatively impacted their fundraising and further jeopardized their government funding by injecting themselves into an already divisive primary and further polarized the republican electorate against them for no discernible political gain.
Whoever Richards consulted with within her own organization and within the Clinton team committed a massive blunder in this case.

Planned Parenthood has been a spectacular success in treating women and their families for a 100 years.
That they have done so much damage to themselves is unbelievable.

[summerschild]

34. I love PP and I admire Cecile Richards.

And I agree 100% with blackspade.


I would have thought their endorsement of Bernie was a mistake also.

[Gore1FL]

43. Well said

Thanks.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

46. I stand with Planned Parenthood, without reservation.

[blackspade]

47. What does that even mean?

So you think that there is no way that this will backfire politically?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

49. I stand with Planned Parenthood and I am one hundred percent convinced...

I stand with Planned Parenthood and I am one hundred percent convinced the endorsement will withstand political scrutiny.


If I may be bold enough to inquire where do you stand?


Thank you in advance.

[blackspade]

96. Then we has a difference of opinion on this.

My support for their services to disadvantaged women and families is completely undiminished.
However, their political arm has made a serious blunder making an endorsement this political cycle as I have repeated several times now.

[synergie]

89. It means that the majority of folks are tired of people abusing PP for political purposes.

Defunding pp out of pique and announcing this "backlash" will and always has backfired politically. Americans as a whole, including Republicans who use their services, understand how and why PP is necessary in the communities where it's located. It's why it's the more popular than any and all political candidates.

It's why engaging in a 'backlash' against it will backfire on you guys politically.

[Armstead]

51. Agree

[synergie]

86. This sound so much like gaslighting. They did nothing wrong, and the "damage" you speak of is

what you yourself intend to do to them for doing something you do not like.

[blackspade]

95. What, pray tell, am I planning on doing?

Please enlighten me.

[synergie]

97. Who knows really, other than you, since you referenced the "damage" that PP would

be somehow doing to itself. I'm reminded of the bully that keeps asking his victim why they keep hitting themselves, while doing the actual hitting.

[Oilwellian]

101. Exactly

I can see an endorsement during the general election, but to do so in a primary was unbelievably short-sighted, particularly since the majority of their donations come from liberals.

As angered as most Bernie supporters are at this PAC's stupidity, I highly doubt a vast majority of them will withdraw their support for PP.

[MADem]

26. Me too. nt

[SunSeeker]

29. Yes.. I donate regularly and will continue to do so. nt

[Helen Borg]

38. Me too. But they made a major mistake.

And now they'll hear about it.

[Gothmog]

39. I stand with Planned Parenthood

[Roy Ellefson]

48. disturbing

Hillary Clinton said Tuesday that Planned Parenthood has some questions to answer regarding graphic undercover videos that accuse the women’s health organization of selling fetal tissue.
“I have seen pictures from them and obviously find them disturbing,” Clinton in an interview with the New Hampshire Union Leader.

[SunSeeker]

56. Cecile Richards and Bernie Sanders basically said the same thing.

Your point?

[synergie]

88. And the questions were answered, and the lies brought to light. What was your point again?

[Armstead]

50. I'm proud to stand with Bernie -- who stands with Planned Parenthood

From Planned Parenthood's own endorsement announcement:

https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/elections-politics/blog/how-do-hillary-clinton-and-bernie-sanders-compare-womens-health/


"Let’s be clear — when it comes to issues like birth control, abortion, and access to services at Planned Parenthood, both leading Democratic candidates for president have great records, and would make a great president. In fact, Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton are both rated 100% on Planned Parenthood Action Fund’s congressional scorecard for their perfect voting records on women’s health and rights, and have been strong defenders of Planned Parenthood. "

[Thinkingabout]

53. Planned Parenthood is a very worth group, we should thank them for their services.

[jillan]

54. And that is why women's healthcare should never be political! Republican women use PP too.

Shame on PP!

I cannot believe they jumped into the political fray.

[synergie]

90. They didn't, their political action arm did. You know, the one that has been in the political fray

for years because people keep dragging them into it and lying their rears off about them?

Shame on you for not knowing that!

[riversedge]

81. Yes, and REC

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

102. So am I. But, not with their endorsement of Hillary.