• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

GOP to Launch a New Assault on Obamacare, Planned Parenthood

You want to talk about propaganda? They did conduct an investigation, hell, they shouldn't have bothered, their is no reason to, their is no evidence PP is doing anything wrong.

Sorry can you link the actual investigation findings then?
 
It's okay. I appreciate your honesty and admitting they didn't investigate anything.

They did though, they literally did. It may not be on the scale you want, but that's ok, PP is innocent, their is no evidence that should even lead to an investigation in the first place.
 

You Bastard!!! I was going to use that to refute whatever lame argument MrT was going to throw out there. Maybe he will post an answer before he reads this post.

I totally agree, however, one day I would hope they lock the rules in cement rather than play legal games with the procedures. Maybe that would reduce the opportunity to play dirty. They will never play nice and if they do it won't last long.
 

Ahem. Point of fact here.

Reconciliation on a bill is standard procedure, and not 'an obscure procedural move'. If you want a truly 'an obscure procedural move', check into how an unrelated bill got started in the house, was gutted, replaced in it's entirety with an amendment by the Senate and ObamaCare shoveled into the bill instead, this because the house has to originate spending bills (oh wait, it's a tax instead - :roll: - yeah, when it needs to be). Now THAT is an obscure procedural move, and was executed by the Harry Reid controlled Senate.

So yes, that characterization that ObamaCare was shoved down the throats of the nation, is most accurate. This? Not so much.


No, it most certainly IS NOT the same procedural process as was used by the Democrats for ObamaCare, and even if it were, good for the goose, good for the gander.


Indeed. The damage that Reid, Obama and Pelosi have done to the institution of congress hasn't even been discussed or measured yet.
 
All of these PP investigations are worse than useless because they are held up as "proof" that PP hasn't done anything wrong.

Lets say, hypothetically, Colorado legal marijuana growers are accused of breaking State laws or regulations. So...what do we do? Do we investigate those growers? No... We'll investigate WASHINGTON legal marijuana growers...find out those guys aren't breaking any WA laws or regulations...and then say ALL marijuana growers are okay.

That's what people are doing when they talk about PA, ID, etc, investigating their local PP's and finding nothing wrong.
 

PP has done nothing wrong, they shouldn't be investigated anyway. No evidence.
 
PP has done nothing wrong, they shouldn't be investigated anyway. No evidence.

Actually, there is plenty of evidence...multiple videos.
 
This strikes me as a sensationalist headline.

An "assault" that is silenced with the signature from a pen?

It strikes me more as busywork or grandstanding.

So, the pent-up GOP frustration is at such depth, that getting a bill to the President for a sure veto is some sort of progress or a 'win'? The way it's been going for them lately, I suspect so. Bang the drum.

Then there's Mr. Trump unveiling and talking an amazing array of ideas, plans, and promises, and I suspect (irregardless of the possibility to deliver) it sounds pretty good to the average Republican, compared to more 'bang the drum'.
 
LMAO what a complete waste of time . . .

if true these are two things that do not need to be in any platform for a running president and will actually help them LOSE if they make it a major part of thier platform.

I most certainly do no agree with all the parts of the ACA but fighting the ACA is stupid and history proves that. Saying it needs "repealed" is even more retarded and is never going to happen. What a HUGE waste of time that would be, what a waste of money and disaster it would be screwing over so many people already on it/benefiting from it. Its never gonna happen its a pipe dream. Lastly werent there studies done on it and didnt the vast majority of people on the right agree with alike 80% of it? why scrap it thats beyond dumb, tweak etc do what ever is needed to improve it but scrapping it is a joke and worthless idea. Its just a sound bite to cater to extremists cause they make the most noise.

As for PP, that also isnt going anywhere and is also a Very stupid battle that will only hurt people and not help them. There are around 700 of them in the country and many dont even offer abortion services LMAO Theres like 36 in my state and i think 11 of them offer abortion services less than 33%

As far as PP breaking any laws, well theres ZERO evidence of that right now and if any turns up i fully support prosecution of those individuals that broke the law, if it goes further than prosecution of certain clinics etc. :shrug:
 
The way I see it, there are two issues involving PP:

1. The videos that suggest improprieties in the way they handle fetal tissue donations and the fees they charge for such handling.

2. Whether the federal government should be giving PP half a billion dollars a year so they can provide their services.

The first issue would be better handled, in-house, by PP. They should set rules for all of their clinics and employees that would eliminate the kinds of things we've seen in those videos. The federal government need not get involved. On the other hand, if they won't deal with their organization's problems, perhaps the courts can deal with it.

The second issue IS in the purview of the federal government and, in my opinion, should be considered. I have nothing against PP providing health services or, even, abortions. After all, abortions are legal. But I think they should come up with their own funding and not expect the taxpayer to foot their bill. $540M isn't chicken feed. It could certainly upgrade more than a couple of bridges that are about to fall down.
 

well at the time it was unconstitutional.

however now that it is part of the budget it is completely legal to do so.
that is the difference.
 

the PP fight is stupid. there are other more important things to worry about. if anything just make sure that federal funds aren't being used for abortion and be done with it.
there should be enough people that support their cause they should be able to generate most of their funding through donations and fund drives.

on that I agree. that is how most charities get their money.
 

yeah most of those are the most hated parts of the bill.
 
from what I read.its an audit on tissue-handling practices.
The heart of the matter seems to be on selling fetal tissues for profit, or not..
 

To me, abortion shouldn't even be an issue as to whether PP should be getting half a billion dollars from the government. As a charitable organization, they should be getting ALL their funding from donations and fund drives. The taxpayer should not be funding private charitable organizations.
 



One of the reasons the Parliamentary systems works is the rules have been set in stone for 4 hundred years. There's always an attempt with a new government to play ****ty games, but it always backfires.

What you guys have now is a grandiose football game with the two sides' cheerleaders in the media. You keep score by how much you can screw over the other guy, not the legislation you've brought forward, the compromises you've achieved. "Leadership" is making the other guy look like an ass.
 



We have come a long way from when Tip O'Neil and Ronald Reagan sat down to lunch. And far from a second term Clinton who heard the voter and reconciled. Even Bush got votes from both sides of the aisle.

This group has been the nastiest and most divisive, led and supported by Obama. And no, we haven't begun to see the fall out, and looking at whose leading the primaries right now I figure there won't be a start at fixing things for a long time
 

A bi-partisan gang of 'however many' might be a start at cooperating across the isle.
 

Well said. The Republicans need to learn how to pick their battles. Its complete silliness (insanity) to fight the same battle over and over, especially since they have near zero chance of a favorable outcome. The only outcome they are assured of getting by taking on Obamacare at this point in time is to firmly entrench in the American people that notion that Republicans are petty, lack foresight, are unable to forward, unable to accomplish anything and therefore unable to lead.....

The Cons should be taking some leadership with issue that are on everyone's mind: tax reform and immigration reform, where they can show themselves as having ideas and the ability to accomplish something.
 

Boy do I agree with that statement 100%.

But with the current conditions in which PP seems to be engaged in, it is apparent that there are also loopholes in the laws that they can get away with what many Americans find unacceptable.

Listen here, I don't want any of my tax dollars supporting such crap. Period. Let those who want such things support it with their own donations.
Let them conjure up the funds to keep what they think to be a "good" thing.
 

I don't understand why millions of dollars are in Obama's budget to fund what I thought was a private entity. Am I wrong, and they are government owned?
 

I routinely have to pull data for outside council for discovery. If there is not enough evidence to bring a lawsuit because its a completely baseless accusation, it tends to go quite fast. Considering how many people are routinely gunning for Planned Parenthood, I would suspect they would keep really good records.

However, that wasn't my point. My point was that its absurd to compare authorities looking into a handful of offices to what family courts and child protective services have to go through to monitor the welfare of every child in their county or state that has been either adjudicated dependent neglect or family in need of services.
 
I don't understand why millions of dollars are in Obama's budget to fund what I thought was a private entity. Am I wrong, and they are government owned?
Evening Pol, when you read through Obamcare it takes a dozen lawyers to cipher it for you. It is a fargin mess. But then again wasn't it Pelosi who said they had to pass the bill in order for all of us to know what was in it? The truth is everyday folks are tired of the sh*t being passed into law. Sh*t that stinks to high heaven. Sh*t that endangers peoples constitutional rights. Sh*t that enables federal government to further limit the constitutional rights of state governments. Sh*t that continues to increase the national debt that we just can't accommodate.

It's SH*T that we find ourselves looking for boots, hip boots to wade through. Simply Sh*t.
 
I don't understand why millions of dollars are in Obama's budget to fund what I thought was a private entity. Am I wrong, and they are government owned?

No...they are not government owned...just heavily funded by the government.

 

Someone posted that millions of dollars are in Obama's budget to fund Planned Parenthood, which I thought was a private entity. Does the government own them off the books?

Disregard my question. I just read Mycroft's explanation, and edited my post..
 
Last edited:
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…