Archive for Abortion

Nixon, George H.W. Bush helped Planned Parenthood push U.S. ‘family planning’ programs

Posted in Bernard Berelson, birth control, Birth Control and Eugenics, Birth Control for Population Control, birth control in water, Black Adoption, Black Babies, Black Birth Rates, Black Genocide, Bush, Bush Family, Forced Population Control, Fred Jaffe, Guttmacher, Guttmacher Staffer, Jesse Jackson, Planned Parenthood abortion plank, Planned Parenthood and Black Leaders, Planned Parenthood and Eugenics, Planned Parenthood Blueprint, Planned Parenthood Board Member, Planned Parenthood Free Birth Control, Planned Parenthood History, Planned Parenthood in Black Neighborhoods, Planned Parenthood in minority community, Planned Parenthood Margaret Sanger Award, Planned Parenthood opposed by Blacks, Planned Parenthood politicians, Planned Parenthood President, Planned Parenthood racist supporter, Planned Parenthood Republican Party, Planned Parenthood Republicans, Planned Parenthood uses blacks, Population Control, Population Council, Racism, Richard Nixon, Sterilizing agents in Drinking Water, Title X, Zero Population Growth with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on December 10, 2018 by saynsumthn
Image: George and Barbara Bush 1966

George and Barbara Bush 1966

As is often said, when it comes to unraveling the agendas behind most questionable objectives, follow the money — and, I might add, the motivation. In the 1960s and early 1970s as the government began to push for federal dollars to fund population control programs, this did not occur in a vacuum. In fact, as Live Action News has documented in this series on Title X, it was concocted by movers and shakers within eugenics-based organizations, most notably the Population Council and Planned Parenthood. The previous segment in this series documented how the Nixon Administration — which showed concern over the increase in the Black population at the time — ushered in huge increases in government dollars for so-called “family planning.” In this article, Live Action News will show how the creation of the Federal Title X Program targeting poor families was manipulated by people within the Planned Parenthood and Guttmacher organizations.

The move came at a pivotal moment on the eugenics timeline, because the Black community was quickly gaining traction in the realm of civil rights. Many outspoken Black leaders felt government funded birth control and abortion programs were designed to limit Black births. In a July 1969 speech given by Alan F. Guttmacher (a former Planned Parenthood president and VP of the American Eugenics Society who masterminded the push for legal abortion and is credited with opening the flood gates of abortion within Planned Parenthood), he acknowledged this suspicion, saying:

“In addition, we must take full cognizance of the fact that our work among some militant minority groups is considered genocidal. They charge that what we are doing is not really trying to give a better family life to the less privileged segments of the community but trying to retard the numerical growth of ethnic minorities.”

In that same speech, Guttmacher also acknowledged that funding for the Institute came from grants “from the Kellogg, Rockefeller, and Ford Foundations as well as several other lesser foundations.” Some of these same organizations had been funding eugenics for years. A 1970 article published by the New York Times also acknowledged minorities’ fears:

Thus the government’s concentration on the procreative proclivities of the poor is often viewed with suspicion. For instance, “Muhammad Speaks,” the organ of the Black Muslim Movement, has charged that “black people are the target of birth control not because the ruling politicians like them and care about their economic equality, but because they hate them and can no longer use them plantations and other cheap labor conditions.

Just one year earlier, President Richard Nixon recommended that Congress create a Commission on Population Growth and the American Future, noting, “it is clear that the domestic family planning services supported by the Federal Government should be expanded and better integrated.”

Image: Nixon Signs Commission on Population Growth and the American Future (Image credit: Maafa21)

Nixon Signs Commission on Population Growth and the American Future (Image credit: Maafa21)

The commission was chaired by John D. Rockefeller III, a longtime advocate of population control. The Executive Director of the project was to be Dr. Charles F. Westoff, a member of both the American Eugenics Society and Planned Parenthood’s National Advisory Council.

Image: Nixon Commission on Population chaired by eugenics members

Nixon Commission on Population chaired by eugenics members

Nixon’s commission was applauded by former Planned Parenthood VP Fredrick Jaffe. In 1968, Jaffe founded the PPFA Center for Family Planning Program Development, which later became the Guttmacher Institute, Planned Parenthood’s research arm. The organization is named after Alan F. Guttmacher (previously mentioned). At the time this memo was created, coercive population control measures were being considered — such as poisoning water supplies with birth control chemicals without consumers’ consent or knowledge. If there was resistance to voluntary methods, “involuntary control must be imposed.”  (Read Jaffe’s disturbing memo outlining this here).

Image: Eugenics leaders led the Nixon Commission on Population, (Image credit: Maafa21)

Eugenics leaders led the Nixon Commission on Population, (Image credit: Maafa21)

As previously documented, one of the chief co-sponsors of the Title X statute, which allocates millions of federal tax dollars to Planned Parenthood, was Rep. George H.W. Bush (R-Texas), who later became our nation’s 41st president. Additional information has surfaced indicating that the push for federal population control dollars by Congressman Bush was actually initiated by Planned Parenthood and its “special affiliate,” the Guttmacher Institute.

Image: George HW Bush elected to Congress 1966 with wife Barbara (Image credit: Credit: George Bush Presidential Library and Museum)

George HW Bush elected to Congress 1966 with wife Barbara (Image credit: Credit: George Bush Presidential Library and Museum)

This information comes from a Planned Parenthood insider by the name of Jeannie Isabelle Rosoff.

In the book, “A Tradition of Choice,” Planned Parenthood describes Rosoff as the lobbyist (alongside director Frederick S. Jaffe) of the “first Washington office of PPFA.” That office was called the Center for Family Planning Program Development, which later became the Guttmacher Institute.

Image: Jeannie Rosoff, director Planned Parenthood Washington Office

Jeannie Rosoff, director Planned Parenthood Washington Office

In an interview she conducted in 2001 with Rebecca Sharpless, published by Baylor University Institute for Oral History, Rosoff described the affiliate’s move to the nation’s capital:

Ostensibly, therefore, the reason for Planned Parenthood‘s opening an office in Washington was that federal grants were going to be made out of Washington and therefore one should be there to kind of seize the opportunity and guide the direction of this new national program… the whole imperative there is not to refinance Planned Parenthood services but to expand services nationwide… This is where AGI [ Alan Guttmacher Institute] began, really, because to do that, you would really have to go proselytize at the local level…So Fred Jaffe went to the Ford Foundation and got a large grant essentially for the Washington office to create a technical assistance program….

According to the Lancet, Rosoff served two decades “as President and CEO of the Guttmacher Institute” after being recruited by PPFA and hired by Frederick Jaffe. She had first-hand knowledge of the behind-the-scenes dealings regarding the passage of the Title X program. In her interview, Rosoff seems to indicate that the plan rested on her ability to choose the right person to sponsor the legislation.

One of the requisites for the chief Republican was that it had to be somebody who had a decent record on civil rights. We did not want any hint of coercion or excessive concern for saving welfare dollars. And Pierre du Pont of Delaware at that time was in Congress… And he pointed us toward George Bush. And George Bush was serving on the Ways and Means committee as a new congressman from Houston… [O]ne day, Alan Guttmacher was testifying. I could see that he was asking questions and seemed very supportive. So I went to see him and I said, ―You know, this is what we‘re thinking of, and would you be interested in it? And he said, ―Yeah. So he began to organize colleagues, do all the things that you do in terms of getting legislation, getting some cosponsors.

During this same time, coercive population control measures were being bantered around by people within the Planned Parenthood movement, as acknowledged in a 1969 article published by the New York Times.

Image: Planned Parenthood members consider coercive population control measures (Image credit: New York Times)

Planned Parenthood members consider coercive population control measures (Image credit: New York Times)

The paper noted that many leaders sitting on Planned Parenthood’s board were in favor of coercive measures of population control. While painting the picture of an agency which was pushing birth control on the “ghetto” rather than the “middle-class” who were having more than the optimal amount of children, the paper noted that a “sizable” number of Planned Parenthood’s board was made up of “preponderantly white and well-to-do” people. The paper quoted a Planned Parenthood board member who admitted the classist attitude of the organization when he stated, “What it all comes down to is that we want the poor to stop breeding while we retain our freedom to have large families. It’s strictly a class point of view.”

Image: Guttmacher Compulsory Birth Control 1970

Guttmacher Compulsory Birth Control 1970

Guttmacher suggested to the paper that they were not trying to take away anyone’s rights, but trying to “show ghetto families how to space their children and avoid having children they don’t want.” But he did not rule out coercion, as the paper noted.

“Admittedly Guttmacher is buying time,” writes the New York Times in that 1969 report. “He thinks the voluntary movement should set a deadline of 1980. If world population growth has not dropped below 1.5 percent by then, he says, ‘we’ll have to get tough.’” That same year, the Population Council’s president, Bernard Berelson, published an article suggesting that if voluntary methods of birth control were not successful, it may become necessary for the government to put a “fertility control agent” in the water supplies of “urban” neighborhoods.

By all indications, Congressman George H.W. Bush may have been targeted by Rosoff for another reason, namely that his grandfather, Prescott Bush, once sat on the board of Planned Parenthood.

Image: Prescott Bush sat on Board of Planned Parenthood

Prescott Bush sat on Board of Planned Parenthood

In a foreword to a book on population control, the former president wrote that his father’s (Prescott Bush) involvement with Planned Parenthood motivated his views:

My own first awareness of birth control as a public policy issue came with a jolt in 1950 when my father was running for the United States Senate. Drew Pearson, on the Sunday before Election Day, “revealed” that my father was involved with Planned Parenthood…

Image: Prescott Bush with his son, George Bush (Image Credit: George Bush Presidential Library and Museum)

Prescott Bush with his son, George Bush (Image Credit: George Bush Presidential Library and Museum)

And, like his father, George H. W. Bush became a vocal advocate for Planned Parenthood’s agenda while serving as a U. S. Congressman from Texas. He created the National Center for Population and Family Planning in the Department of Health Education and Welfare (HEW).

Congressman Bush seemed dismissive of critics of population control who viewed government programs as a means of Black genocide. He said, “We need to make population and family planning household words. We need to take sensationalism out of this topic so that it can no longer be used by militants who have no real knowledge of the voluntary nature of the program but rather are using it as a political steppingstone. If family planning is anything, it is a public health matter.”

Recruiting members of the Black community to help push the agenda was a priority for Planned Parenthood groups. As documented many times, founder Margaret Sanger showed Planned Parenthood how to masquerade the true eugenics agenda when she implemented her so-called “Negro Project.”

Sanger penned in a letter to eugenicist Clarence Gamble regarding her desire to use Black ministers in furthering her organization’s agenda, “We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population.” If it did, these ministers could “straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”

planned parenthood

Excerpt: Margaret Sanger Letter to Clarence Gamble, Negro Project

Planned Parenthood understood that recruiting Black support for government funded population control programs was key, and Rosoff was just the person to make it happen. In the previously mentioned interview, the former Guttmacher staffer explains:

One thing which I thought was very important was to get the House black caucus absolutely on board on these issues, which nobody thought could be done because everybody—because of genocide issue brewing at the time….The entire black caucus signed on as cosponsors. So that meant that all Democrats didn’t have to worry about protecting their backs. And George Bush organized a lot of the Republicans.

For her efforts, in 1986, Planned Parenthood granted Rosoff their infamous Margaret Sanger Award.

As a result of Rosoff’s recruitment of Rep. Bush, in 1970, the United States House of Representatives voted 298 to 32 to approve the Family Planning Services and Population Research Act, Title X of the Public Health Service Act, authorizing federal dollars to pay for family planning services for low-income women. The Senate had previously approved the legislation, with the help of Democrat Senator Joseph D. Tydings, a Planned Parenthood supporter who was granted PPFA’s infamous Margaret Sanger award that same year.

These moves did not silence Black leaders. The following year, on June 22, 1971, civil rights leader Jesse Jackson, then national director of SCLC Operation Breadbasket, told Nixon’s Population Commission:

Birth Control as a National policy will simply marshal sophisticated methods to remove (and control when not remove) the weak, the poor – quite likely the black and other minorities whose relative increase in population threatens the white caste in this nation. Contraceptives, will become a form of drug warfare against the helpless in this nation. Those who we could not get rid of in the rice paddies of Vietnam we now propose to exterminate, if necessary, eliminate if possible, in the OB wards and gynecology clinics of our urban hospitals. The direct extension of the old “man-in-the-house” rule against public aid recipients can be detected in the drive for birth control…

(Source: Statements at public hearings of the Commission on Population Growth and the American Future as quoted in: Genocide? Birth Control and the Black American by Robert G. Weisbord, Greenwoor Press, 1972; P. 165)

planned parenthood, birth control, family planning

Rev. Jesse Jackson opposed abortion and birth control as Black Genocide

Famed comedian Dick Gregory wrote in Ebony Magazine, “There is ample evidence that government programs designed for poor black folks emphasize birth control and abortion availability, both measures obviously designed to limit black population,” adding:

For years they told us where to sit, where to eat, and where to live. Now they want to dictate our bedroom habits. First the white man tells me to sit in the back of the bus. Now it looks like he wants me to sleep under the bed. Back in the days of slavery, black folks couldn’t grow kids fast enough for white folks to harvest. Now that we’ve got a little taste of power, white folks want us to call a moratorium on having children.

Image: Dick Gregory Ebony Magazine Abortion is Genocide

Dick Gregory Ebony Magazine Abortion is Genocide

Naomi Gray, a former VP of Planned Parenthood World Population and a Black family planning consultant, told the U.S. population commission that many Blacks felt talk of zero population growth was genocide aimed at them. “To many blacks the zero sounds like zero Black children,” Gray said. “White interests in this question have ranged, in my experience, from a desire to have the charge refuted, all the way to finding out if blacks are really smart enough to figure out that whites would like to get rid of them in some polite way.”

Even though Gray herself was an advocate of these programs, she admitted, “It could then legitimately be said that some white interests are more concerned with causing certain black babies not to get born than they are with survival of those already born.”

According to research published by the Institute of Medicine, in 1972, Congress made additional funding for family planning services for low-income available through Medicaid.

In March of 1972, the Commission on Population Growth and the American Future,which Nixon had created three years earlier, began calling for the nationwide legalization of abortion.

planned parenthood

Nixon’s Commission on Population and the American Future (Image credit: Maafa21)

Today, proponents of programs like Title X claim they are helping the poor by providing them with contraceptives. As a result of these kinds of government funded population control programs, the birthrate of women of reproductive age within the U.S. has dropped to its lowest point in 30 years. Some might hail this a victory, but it is just more evidence that, as Sanger suggested in 1919 and the minority community warned in the 60s and 70s, “birth control” may have indeed cleared “the way for eugenics.”

Read the series here: Part OnePart TwoPart Three. Additional articles on Title X’s history include Planned Parenthood’s Blueprint and George HW Bush’s relationship to Title X and Planned Parenthood.

Editor’s Note, 11/8/18: Related links added.

    • This article is reprinted with permission. The original appeared here at Live Action News.

CDC: Number of abortions in U.S. drop to historic low

Posted in Abortion complication, Abortion death, Abortion Death List, Abortion decreasing, Abortion injury, Abortion Numbers, Abortion reporting, Abortion stats, Black Abortion Stats, CDC, Hispanic Abortion Stats, Late term abortion, repeat abortion with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on November 29, 2018 by saynsumthn

pregnancy centers

Abortion data just released by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reveals that the number of reported abortions dipped slightly (2.27 percent) from the previous year. In 2015, 638,169 abortions (down from 652,639 in 2014) were reported to CDC from 49 reporting areas excluding California, Maryland and New Hampshire. The abortion rate also decreased from 12.1 in 2014 to 11.8 in 2015.

The CDC estimates that, in 2015, 18% of all pregnancies in the United States ended in induced abortion, according to the most recent national estimates from 2010.

Highlights from the report, published November 23, 2018, are below.

Previous live births/abortions in 2015:

  • Women with one or more previous live births accounted for 59.3% of abortions.
  • Women with no previous live births accounted for 40.7% of abortions.
  • Women with three or more previous births accounted for 14.2% of abortions.
  • Women with one or more previous induced abortions accounted for 43.6% of abortions.
  • Women with no previous abortion accounted for 56.3% of abortions.
  • Women with three or more previous abortions accounted for 8.2% of abortions.

Race/ethnicity (30 reporting areas, Percentage based on 353,128 abortions):

In 2015’s report, the CDC noted that minorities are still having abortions at a higher rate, writing, “abortion rates and ratios remained 1.5 and 1.3 times higher for Hispanic compared with non-Hispanic white women and 3.6 and 3.5 times higher for non-Hispanic black compared with non-Hispanic white women.”

Image: 2015 Abortion stats by race (Image: CDC )

2015 Abortion stats by race (Image: CDC )

Non-Hispanic white women, 36.9% in 2015 (down from 38.0% in 2014)

  • Abortion rate of 6.8 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15–44 years.
  • Abortion ratio: 111 abortions per 1,000 live births.

Non-Hispanic black women, 36.0% in 2015 (same as 2014):

  • Abortion rate: 25.1 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15–44 years.
  • Abortion ratio: 390 abortions per 1,000 live births.

Hispanic women, 18.5% in 2015 (slight increase from 18.3% in 2014):

  • Abortion rate: 11.2 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15–44 years.
  • Abortion ratio: 147 abortions per 1,000 live births.

READ: Shock: More than half of abortions in Medicaid-coverage states are taxpayer funded

Gestational Age of abortions reported in 2015 (excluding 12 reporting areas):

  • 8 weeks or less: 279,999 (65.4%)
  • 9-13 weeks: 109,860 (25.7%)
  • 14-15 weeks: 15,146 (3.5%)
  • 16-17 weeks: 9,030 (2.1%)
  • 18-20 weeks: 8,410 (2.0%)
  • 21 weeks or greater: 5,597 (1.3%)

According to these numbers, 8.9% of children aborted in 2015  — 38,183 — were past the first trimester of pregnancy.

Image: 2015 Abortion by gestation selected reporting areas CDC (Image: CDC)

2015 Abortion by gestation selected reporting areas CDC (Image: CDC)

California, Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York State, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Wyoming did not report abortions by gestation.

CDC abortion numbers are generally much lower than numbers released by Planned Parenthood’s former “special affiliate,” the Guttmacher Institute. Live Action News has previously explained some of the reasons for the variation:

  • The CDC gathers information from states which require reporting; however, the CDC admits that “although reporting to CDC is voluntary, most reporting areas provide their abortion numbers.”
  • Guttmacher gathers its figures from surveys which it claims it sends directly to all known abortion facilities, categorized by type.

According to Dr. Michael New’s analysis of the CDC report published at National Review Online (emphasis added):

The new data also demonstrate the weak abortion-reporting requirements in the U.S. The CDC doesn’t have the authority to compel states to report abortion numbers and as a result, unsurprisingly, the data are incomplete.California, Maryland, and New Hampshire all failed to report abortion data for 2015. In fact, California has not reported any abortion data to the CDC since 1997. What’s more, while the CDC has already released 2017 data on a range of public-health topics, its abortion numbers are far behind; there is almost always a lag of more than two years before abortion data is released.

Although Guttmacher has not yet released data for 2015, reported abortion numbers published by Guttmacher in 2014 showed that 926,200 were reported, and revealed that more than 100,000 abortions took place in the 2nd and 3rd trimesters. This reveals a stark difference between CDC and Guttmacher data.

Medical abortions in 2015 (43 reporting areas):

Since the FDA extended the gestational age limit for medical abortion to 70 days, the CDC says, “The percentage of abortions at 9 weeks’ gestation reported as medical has increased… (from 5.0%–7.7% during 2011–2014 to 13.0% in 2015).”

      • 2015: 24.6% were early medical abortions (a nonsurgical abortion at ≤8 weeks’ gestation)
      • 2014: 22.5% of all abortions were performed by early medical abortion

According to the CDC, an abortion is defined as legal only “if it is performed by a licensed clinician within the limits of state law.” It is unclear how CDC will calculate so-called “self-managed” abortions currently being pushed by the abortion industry.

Abortion deaths in 2015:

Tragically, every abortion ends the life of an already developing preborn child, and in some instances, the life of the pregnant woman as well. According to the CDC, “Deaths of women associated with complications from abortion for 2015 are being assessed as part of CDC’s Pregnancy Mortality Surveillance System. In 2014, the most recent year for which data were available, six women were identified to have died as a result of complications from legal induced abortion.”

Photo via Operation Rescue

Pro-life groups previously discovered the death of one of those women from 2014. Lakisha Wilson died from cardiopulmonary arrest during a legal abortion at Preterm in Cleveland, Ohio.

Women are frequently told that when abortions are legal, they are also safe. Unfortunately, abortion consent forms the industry requires women to sign show this is not always the case.

Over past years, due in part to the many efforts of pro-life advocates, published abortion numbers have been steadily decreasing. According to the CDC report, “From 2006 to 2015, the total number of reported abortions decreased 24% (from 842,855), the abortion rate decreased 26% (from 15.9 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15–44 years), and the abortion ratio decreased 19% (from 233 abortions per 1,000 live births).”

Abortion complications — including those resulting from the abortion pill — are only required to be reported by about half of U.S. states.

While the trajectory is heading in the right direction, there is still much work to be done to make abortion unthinkable and return protection to persons in the womb.

NOTE: (SAYNSUMTHN ADDS: )

These are historic lows since the year following Roe.
CDC Abortion Surveillance report from 1973 indicates that a total of 615,831 legal procedures were reported from 50 states and the District of Columbia and New York City.

Image: CDC: Reported Abortions 1969 to 1973

CDC: Reported Abortions 1969 to 1973

Image: CDC Abortion report 1974

CDC Abortion report 1974

 

In an interview with Professor Michael New on EWTN, he pointed out that he abortion RATE is lower than it was in 1973:

Image: CDC Abortion rate 1973 and 1974

CDC Abortion rate 1973 and 1974

  • 2015: 11.8 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15-44
  • 2014: 12.1 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15-44
  • 1974: 17 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15-44
  • 1973: 14 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15-44

No difference between Planned Parenthood’s “political organizer” Prez and new Prez Dr. Leana Wen

Posted in Cecile Richards, Leana Wen, Planned Parenthood politicians, Planned Parenthood President with tags , , , , , , , on November 21, 2018 by saynsumthn

Planned Parenthood masquerades as a health care organization, and as its abortion market share steadily increased (due in part to half a billion dollars they receive from taxpayers annually), Planned Parenthood’s profits skyrocketed. In 2018, Planned Parenthood set out to protect those gains by vowing to spend millions to elect pro-abortion lawmakers and hire a new director to push for activist judges on the court.

Image: Planned Parenthood national abortion market share 2000-2016

Planned Parenthood national abortion market share 2000-2016 Updated

Planned Parenthood excess revenue over expenses 2000 to 2016

Planned Parenthood excess revenue over expenses 2000 to 2016

Despite spending those millions of dollars on electing pro-abortion politicians, Planned Parenthood Federation of America is attempting to once again reinvent itself and brand itself as a health care provider.

It’s new president, Dr. Leana Wen is a medical doctor, who believes abortion, the taking of a human life in the womb is “healthcare.”

Image: Cecile Richards and Leana Wen presidents of Planned Parenthood

Cecile Richards and Leana Wen presidents of Planned Parenthood

However her talking points are the same as its previous “political organizer” president, Cecile Richards. Watch this video from American Life League to see for yourself:

Planned Parenthood’s plan for 2019 reveals the organization’s obsession with abortion as it includes expanding abortion, despite declining clients and health services.

Pelosi promised Planned Parenthood she wouldn’t pass Obamacare without abortion

Posted in Cecile Richards, Obama and Planned Parenthood, ObamaCare, ObamaCare and abortion, Pelosi with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on November 21, 2018 by saynsumthn

  / (From Live Action News)

Image: Nancy Pelosi and former Planned Parenthood Prez Cecile Richards

Nancy Pelosi and former Planned Parenthood Prez Cecile Richards

Despite former President Barack Obama’s promises that “no federal dollars” would be used “to fund abortions and federal conscience laws would remain in place” under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), a recent Tweet by former Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards unintentionally revealed that funding abortion through the ACA was actually part of the plan from the beginning.

In a series of tweetsRichards responded to pushback against Nancy Pelosi being nominated as Speaker of the House in the newly-elected Congress. In her tweets, Richards said she spoke with Pelosi while the ACA was being pushed through, receiving an assurance that abortion would be part of the healthcare act.

“I also find it interesting – though not surprising – that the effort to go after [Pelosi] is being led by four men in Congress,” Richards tweets. “She was the Speaker of the House when we passed the Affordable Care Act. As  has said himself, we would not have the ACA without her.”

Then came this admission:

I will never forget the meeting with her [Speaker Pelosi], when I was at PP, where she told me in the middle of that fight that she would not pass the ACA if it banned insurance coverage for abortion. Though many “progressive” men were willing to throw women under the bus, she was not.

Image: Cecile Richards Tweet reveals Dems knew ObamaCare would fund abortion (Image: Twitter)

Cecile Richards Tweet reveals Dems knew ObamaCare would fund abortion (Image: Twitter)

Of course, pro-life advocates saw this coming at the time, despite the claims of Pelosi, who even had trouble wrangling members of her own party to vote for the ACA because of its abortion funding.

Planned Parenthood worked tirelessly to elect President Obama, who told members of a 2007 Planned Parenthood event,  “… In my mind reproductive care is essential care. It is basic care. So, it is at the center and at the heart of the plan that I propose….” ‘Reproductive care’ is frequently used as code for abortion.

READ: Gallup poll: Majority of Americans want more abortion restrictions

Despite the American public’s opposition to taxpayer-funded abortions, Planned Parenthood, with direct assistance from Speaker Pelosi, made certain abortion was in the ACA, and we now know this was a deliberate and calculated effort — a cooperation with the abortion industry.

In 2014, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report that identified 1,036 ACA plans that covered abortion and received taxpayer subsidies. The 2014 report concluded that more than a thousand federally subsidized ACA policies paid for abortion, often unbeknownst to policyholders.

A recent analysis of ACA plans found that, despite existing regulations requiring it, “For 2014… none of the entities interviewed that billed insurance… either itemized abortion on the premium bill or issued a separate bill that clearly named its purpose for abortion.”

To remedy this, the Trump administration issued a new rule to make certain consumers aren’t forced to pay for abortion coverage if they don’t want to. But, of course, Planned Parenthood, which recently issued a new plan to expand abortion, is crying foul.

Image: Planned Parenthood calls Trump HHS rule change secret plan (Image: PPFA Website)

Planned Parenthood calls Trump HHS rule change secret plan (Image: PPFA Website)

Why would a rule stating that consumers must be told when their plans cover abortion “make it nearly impossible… to cover abortion”? Perhaps Cecile Richards has an inkling that Americans really aren’t as favorable toward abortion as the abortion industry tries to claim.

  • This article is reprinted with permission. The original appeared here at Live Action News.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Additional:
From The New York Times (Read: LiveActionNews)

Nancy Pelosi did not want to talk about Planned Parenthood.
It was a meeting of House Democrats early in 2017, during Republicans’ drive that March to strike down the Affordable Care Act. Ms. Pelosi and her political lieutenants laid out their counterattack: Democrats would talk about pre-existing conditions and millions of people losing coverage. And they would talk about an “age tax” — a provision in the Obamacare replacement passed by the House, which would have allowed health insurers to widen the premium gap between younger and older customers.

Ms. Pelosi acknowledged it would require restraint from Democrats. In her own San Francisco district, she said, people wanted her to fight the health care battle over funding for Planned Parenthood and Medicaid. “Those things are in our DNA, but they are not in our talking points,” Ms. Pelosi became fond of saying, according to a close associate.

Cecile Richards: (Excerpt Broadly)

“People’s impressions get based on no information,” she said. “One of the reasons I wrote what I did today is because a woman I know said to me the other day something I couldn’t believe. She was like, ‘I need to know where Pelosi is on abortion rights,’ and I was like, ‘Are you kidding? Nancy Pelosi is the reason we still have access to abortion rights under the Affordable Care Act.’”

Richards explained when the Affordable Care Act was on the verge of being passed, many members of Congress were ready to agree to it being passed while excluding abortion coverage.

When Richards visited Pelosi in her office, she said Pelosi looked her in the eye and said, “If there is an abortion ban, there will not be an Affordable Care Act.”

When it comes to criticisms being lobbed against Pelosi, Richards said much of it is “centimeter deep and a mile wide” and based on “whatever GOP line there is out there that day.”

…In terms of Pelosi’s accomplishments, Richards said there is no Speaker who has paralleled what she’s accomplished when leading the majority, and also when leading the minority.

“She’s done it at the same time as helping to build a caucus that’s beginning to look as diverse as the rest of this country,” Richards said. “A caucus with new progressive women, people of color, women of color, LGBTQ people, who are going to rock Capitol Hill. That’s something to look at and recognize.”

In Richards’ eyes, Pelosi deserves to sit in the seat at the table that she fought so for many years to obtain, a seat Richards also believes will be filled by many more women in the future.

Planned Parenthood, which murders “kids” in the womb creates vid for parents to teach “kids” how to treat others with respect

Posted in Planned Parenthood Parents with tags , , , on November 20, 2018 by saynsumthn

The largest abortion business in the nation has created a website designed to educate parents on how to raise their children.

That’s right.

In the event a kid or two manages to escape Planned Parenthood’s grasp to kill them in utero via abortion, Planned Parenthood feels the need to teach parents how to raise those “kids.”

Image: Planned Parenthood for Parents website (Image: PPFA)

Planned Parenthood for Parents website (Image: PPFA)

PP’s “for parents” website states:

There’s no better resource than a supportive parent. You don’t need to be an expert, you just need to be willing to talk AND listen. The open, non-judgmental conversations you have with your children about sex, puberty, bodies, and relationships will help them stay safe and healthy as they grow up. We’re here to show you how to be your kid’s go-to resource for answers and advice, from pre-K to college.

Note that last part, “We’re here to show you how to be your kid’s go-to resource for answers and advice, from pre-K to college.”

That is unless your “kid” is being taught sex-ed by PP or wants birth control or an abortion and then Planned Parenthood would be more than willing to step in and bypass all your parental rights, and teach YOUR “kid” that PP is the “go-to resource” but – I digress.

Case in point – below is undercover footage from Live Action showing Planned Parenthood counselors speaking to a teen about BDSM:

 

And this:

The latest Planned Parenthood video attempts to educate parents how to how to teach their “kids” to treat others with respect. 

It focuses on “kids” having “good relationships.”

Imagine the organization known for covering child sexual abuse, preaching to parents on how to teach children about “good relationships?”

Planned Parenthood’s latest piece of “advice” for parents is dubbed, “How Do I Talk With My Kid About Healthy Relationships?”

Image: Planned Parenthood for Parents video health relationships

Planned Parenthood for Parents video health relationships

The video beings, “Everyone wants their children to grow up to have healthy, fulfilling relationships.

Really, Planned Parenthood – everyone?

Do you hear yourself?

The preborn child in the womb is growing, but for several hundred dollars, Planned Parenthood is more than willing to end that growth by poisoning or dismembering the unborn “kid” as they “grow.”

Tip # 2 reads in part:

Set rules about name-calling, teasing, and physical violence so they know what’s OK and what’s not. And practice what you preach! Take time to listen to your kid, model good communication with other adults, and apologize if you hurt someone’s feelings.

I suppose calling a “kid” in the womb non-human or attacking pro-life advocates and politicians doesn’t qualify here right?

Dr. Sacco’s image of aborted baby

Vids like this from organization’s like Planned Parenthood are a joke especially when you realize the evil Planned Parenthood does to over 320K “kids” in the womb every year from abortion.

Image: Planned Parenthood national abortion market share 2000-2016

Planned Parenthood national abortion market share 2000-2016 Updated

Planned Parenthood’s video ends, “Comfort, safety, and love are the most valuable things you can give your child.”

Who would disagree with that?

Oh yeah – Planned Parenthood would.

Taxpayer-funded Planned Parenthood hiring director to push for activist judges

Posted in Planned Parenthood Employee, Planned Parenthood hiring with tags , , , , , on November 20, 2018 by saynsumthn

Taxpayer-funded Planned Parenthood is seeking to hire staff to push for activist, pro-abortion judges in the hopes that abortion without restrictions will be upheld at any cost. Though the American public holds an unfavorable view of abortion on demand, Planned Parenthood has looked to the courts to protect abortion since the Supreme Court legalized it nationwide in 1973. Now, the nation’s largest abortion business sees cracks developing in that protective wall.

Three weeks ago, during the Supreme Court confirmation hearings of Brett Kavanaugh, Planned Parenthood posted a job opening for a Judicial Nominations Director. Could this indicate that the abortion corporation is worried?

Image: Planned Parenthood job Judicial Nominations Director (Image credit: Daybook on Twitter)

Planned Parenthood job Judicial Nominations Director (Image credit: Daybook on Twitter)

Planned Parenthood Federation of America posted this ad to its LinkedIn pageIndeed.com, and Daybook jobs. It reads, “Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) seeks a dynamic and effective Director, Judicial Nominations who will report to the National Director of Legislative Affairs in the Office of the Vice President of Policy and Government Relations.” That person, according to LinkedIn, happens to be Dana Singiser, who was added to PPFA’s team while working in the Obama White House in 2011. According to the announcement, Singiser is deeply entrenched in Democrat party politics.

Planned Parenthood job Judicial Nominations Director (Image screen PPFA LinkedIn page)

Planned Parenthood job Judicial Nominations Director (Image screen: PPFA LinkedIn page)

Notice that the job posting doesn’t mention abortion; however, just as in the case of Brett Kavanaugh, that’s what judicial fights are really about for Planned Parenthood.

What exactly will a Judicial Nominations Director do for Planned Parenthood?

According to the posting, “The Director will… be responsible for executing a strategic, intense campaign that educates members of the Senate on the harmful records of nominees, elevates for Planned Parenthood supporters and affiliates what is at stake for reproductive health and rights.”

Image: Planned Parenthood tweet to keep abortion safe and legal with SCOTUS (Image credit: PPFA on Twitter)

Planned Parenthood tweet to keep abortion safe and legal with SCOTUS (Image credit: PPFA on Twitter)

In addition, Planned Parenthood’s Judicial Nominations Director will be responsible to “[l]ead in-depth research in consultation with Litigation & Law including review and analysis of nominee’s case law and writings; interrogation of nominee’s personal and professional beliefs, associations, and memberships; as well as general opposition research in order to identify each nominee’s vulnerabilities and be able to drive a cohesive national narrative that informs in-state target Senator campaigns.”

“Interrogation of nominee’s personal and professional beliefs….” Interesting.

Planned Parenthood masquerades as a healthcare organization; yet, as Live Action News has previously reported, the organization’s former CEO, Cecile Richards, openly stated that it aimed to be “the largest kick-butt political organization.”

Image: Planned Parenthood to supporters protect abortion at SCOTUS (Image credit: PPFA on Twitter) Planned Parenthood to supporters protect abortion at SCOTUS (Image credit: PPFA on Twitter)

Planned Parenthood’s own figures indicate that while profitable abortions are on a steady decline nationally, it holds nearly 35 percent of the abortion market share.

Image: Planned Parenthood national abortion market share 2000-2016

Planned Parenthood national abortion market share 2000-2016

In addition, almost every year since 2000, Planned Parenthood’s revenue has exceeded its expenses by tens of millions of dollars (yearly surpluses range from $12.2 million in 2001 to a high of $155.5 million in 2010). And yet, it still receives half a billion dollars from taxpayers annually.

To help maintain its growing abortion market share and tax funding, Planned Parenthood’s Judicial Nominations Director will work to:

  • [C]reate a clear path for defeat and delay of targeted nominations.
  • [E]xecute in-state 360 campaigns that hold Senators accountable for appointing judges that value and protect access to abortion.
  • Create grassroots strategies that build movement and leverage the Planned Parenthood base to link the importance of judicial nomination fights to the security of the issues we value.
  • Develop tactics that tie harmful nominees to cross-movement issues, to the overall Trump agenda, and to the consequences of lifetime appointments of extremist judges to the future of progressive rights.

Image: Planned Parenthood Tweet

Planned Parenthood tweet threatening pro-Kavanaugh senators

This organization’s idea of a “harmful nominee” would be any judicial originalist who vows to look at the case and judge the merits against the original intent of the U.S. Constitution rather than some perceived right, like abortion on demand, not stated in the document.

Planned Parenthood receives over $500 million dollars a year from taxpayers, yet despite its dwindling health services and customer base, it is invested in placing radical activists on the court who will continue to force Americans to fund and uphold its abortion empire, while striking down any and all abortion restrictions.

Planned Parenthood has been embroiled in multiple scandals: accusations of fraud and abuse of taxpayer dollars like those given to it through Medicaid; failure to report child sexual abuse despite it being required to do so to receive Title X funding; referral for an FBI investigation into the illegal selling of aborted baby body parts — and the list goes on. Yet, with its half a billion in tax dollars yearly, it is clear that the abortion corporation’s influence over judicial nominations at the local and federal levels would only serve to benefit its own abortion business.

    • This article is reprinted with permission. The original appeared here at Live Action News.

Media enables Planned Parenthood prez to ignore organization’s eugenics past

Posted in Leana Wen, Media Bias, Planned Parenthood and Eugenics, Planned Parenthood Self Abortion with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on November 20, 2018 by saynsumthn

Planned Parenthood prez says nation’s #1 abortion provider ‘promotes life’

Planned Parenthood, abortion corporation

In November 2018, the New York Times (NYT) interviewed recently appointed Planned Parenthood president Dr. Leana Wen, who replaced political organizer Cecile Richards — the woman who presided over declining patient services and an aborted baby parts scandal. In her interview, Wen dodged topics such as eugenics — a largely racist philosophy — and self-managed abortions, all while claiming she has never done anything in her medical career but save lives. If this is the case, and Dr. Wen values human lives and desires to save lives, she’s working for the wrong organization.

Image: Leana Wen Planned Parenthood President

Leana Wen Planned Parenthood President

QUESTION #1: Eugenics

The NYT asked Wen, “How do you consider the misinformation — such as, say, that Planned Parenthood furthers eugenics — that can proliferate about the organization?” The paper’s use of the term “misinformation” is intellectually dishonest and a denial of history, which granted Wen the ability to pretend the organization’s known eugenics roots were just part of some vast, pro-life conspiracy.

Wen’s only mention of eugenics was to claim, “The same individuals who are making these eugenics claims are often the ones who want to deprive our communities of evidence-based education like teen-pregnancy prevention programs….”

Now that Dr. Wen is president, does the NYT intend for the public to believe it is “misinformation” that Planned Parenthood’s founder, Margaret Sanger, had strong eugenics connections, Klan interactions, rants about immigrants, and promoted the idea of forced sterilization? Are we to diminish the horrific effects all those victimized by eugenics as we scrub Planned Parenthood’s well-documented history of it from the public sphere?

Image: New York Times asks Leana Wen about eugenics and Planned Parenthood (Image NYT Dr. Leana Wen Dislikes the Politicization of Health Care 11/6/2018)

New York Times asks Leana Wen about eugenics and Planned Parenthood (Image NYT Dr. Leana Wen Dislikes the Politicization of Health Care 11/6/2018)

Apparently, this liberal press outlet would prefer to rewrite history.

The philosophy of eugenics negatively affected many Black Americans, such as Elaine Riddick, who was forcibly sterilized in North Carolina in 1968. Her tearful testimony encouraged lawmakers to vote for reparations for those like her, who were eugenically sterilized. One of the prominent supporters of that horrific eugenics program was Clarence Gamble, a director of Margaret Sanger’s American Birth Control League, which later changed its name to Planned Parenthood.

But today’s abortion-friendly media appears to have become far more activist than investigative, and the New York Times refused to dig any deeper into Wen’s claims.

Live Action News has documented the following:

  • Planned Parenthood had direct ties to eugenics.
  • The organization was founded by Margaret Sanger, an enthusiastic member of the American Eugenics Society who metwith members of the Klan, writing in her autobiography: “I accepted an invitation to talk to the women’s branch of the Ku Klux Klan…. I saw through the door dim figures parading with banners and illuminated crosses….”
  • Planned Parenthood brought on officials who were leading eugenics proponents.
  • Planned Parenthood received free rent from the Eugenics Society, according to the Eugenics Review.
  • Eugenic boards were sometimes operated by Planned Parenthood associates and some boards referred to the organization (watch Maafa21 clip below):

Year after year, Planned Parenthood has presented its most prestigious Margaret Sanger Award, named after its eugenicist founder, to journalists, to politicians like Democrat Nancy Pelosi, and to members of the media. (Perhaps for its softball Wen interview, the NYT will receive one as well.)

Image: Margaret Sanger Award given out by Planned Parenthood (Screen Planned Parenthood website Nov 13, 2018)

Margaret Sanger Award given out by Planned Parenthood (Screen Planned Parenthood website Nov 13, 2018)

If Dr. Leana Wen truly wants to continue in her pattern of saving human lives, then why is she working for an organization established by people who promoted the idea of forced sterilizations for those arbitrarily deemed “less than”?

QUESTION #2: Self Abortion

The NYT asked Wen, “…[H]ow do you feel about self-induced abortions?” Despite claiming she treated a woman who died from an illegal “home abortion,” Wen passed up the opportunity to denounce the push for self-managed abortions.

Image: New York Times asks Planned Parenthood prez about self-managed abortion

New York Times asks Planned Parenthood prez about self-managed abortion

Wouldn’t more unsupervised, at-home abortions have the potential to lead to even more emergency room visits like the one she describes in her interview? But instead of defending lives like a medical doctor concerned about women’s safety, Wen answered like a pro-abortion activist: “What I have a problem with is when they — or the government — impose their will on women’s bodies and health.”

Image: Leana Wen , Planned Parenthood president on The View

Leana Wen , Planned Parenthood president on The View

 

Wen pivoted further by redirecting the topic to an attack on pro-lifers — who, by the way,  regularly document transports of women from Planned Parenthood facilities to emergency rooms by ambulance, after so-called “safe” abortions.

“It’s insulting when people describe their anti-choice stance as “pro-life…” said the new leader of the organization killing 320,000 human beings every year.

While the NYT erroneously titled this sad excuse of an interview, “Dr. Leana Wen Dislikes the Politicization of Health Care,” it is beyond clear that Wen is in lockstep with Planned Parenthood, the inventor of abortion politicization, which has enabled the organization to rake in half a billion annually taxpayer dollars that may very well help to pay Wen’s salary. 

After all, it was Planned Parenthood, not those pesky “anti-choice” pro-lifers, who recently unveiled a new plan to expand abortion on demand in 2019. How’s that for politicization?

But perhaps Dr. Wen missed that memo.

Image: Planned Parenthood plan to expand abortion 2019

Planned Parenthood plan to expand abortion 2019

As delusional as it sounds, Dr. Wen and the media present abortion as “healthcare” and claim that Wen’s job as the abortion provider’s president is to “promote life and the well-being of women and families and communities” because, she claims, “I’m a physician. I went to medical school. Everything I’ve ever done is to save lives.”

Not all physicians save lives, Dr. Wen — including the ones working for Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry as a whole. They’re physicians who went to medical school, too — and some of them fully admit that they’re taking lives for a living.

Dr. Wen would have the public believe that abortion, the deliberate taking of human life in the womb at any stage of pregnancy, for any reason imaginable, committed 900 times per day by her organization, is “promot[ing] life.”

    • This article is reprinted with permission. The original appeared here at Live Action News.