Planned Parenthood Jumps the Shark. Then Blames the Shark.

Komen planned parenthood story body

It’s time for every brainless knee-jerk Planned Parenthood supporter to line up and recite “right wing lies.” 

A Planned Parenthood lobbyist (I’m leaving her name out because she’s just one of many) spoke against a bill requiring that infants who are born alive after abortions be given medical care instead of just dumped in the trash and allowed to die.

Planned Parenthood has opposed bills to protect the lives of infants who survive abortions every time I’m aware of. What’s different is that the Florida lobbyist seems to be a political amateur. Planned Parenthood’s lobbyist here in Oklahoma would never do anything this stupid. Their Oklahoma lobbyist knows how to play for-real political hardball.

Unfortunately for Planned Parenthood, their too-honest and far-too-inept Florida lobbyist got drawn out in question and answers, and the testimony ended up on the internet.

Jump the technolove

That’s how Planned Parenthood jumped the shark.

Here’s the video:

YouTube Preview Image

It turns out not everyone supports the Planned Parenthood position about killing babies after they are born. In fact, there was widespread public outrage, including allusions to this video by members of Congress in calls to defund Planned Parenthood. Anyone who has ever dealt with Planned Parenthood knows that they are all about funding.

Blame the shark That’s when Planned Parenthood started to blame the shark.

First they issued one of their usual we-didn’t-say-what-we-said statements on April 1 (which is an appropriate day for it.) When that didn’t work, they moved to Plan B (pun intended.)

They issued another statement, claiming that their only concerns with the bill were “health and safety issues” in some of the bill’s language and that “biased media reports reported our position inaccurately.” They then go on with the standard Planned Parenthood women’s-health-our-great-services boilerplate. You can follow the links to read both their statements if you want, but I warn you: It’s political schlock.

This business of jumping the shark and then blaming the shark for having been jumped is becoming a standard Planned Parenthood two-step. I don’t know about you, but I could write their shark-blaming statements for them.

Their trouble isn’t biased media. It also isn’t inept lobbyists who don’t know how to kill a bill behind closed doors the way their Oklahoma lobbyist does. Their problem is that they are lying. They keep getting caught out in their lies because they are telling lies.

Their real position seems to be simple and straightforward: A baby’s life is forfeit from conception through post abortion. The woman’s right to kill her child at any time during pregnancy, including after pregnancy if the baby survives an abortion, is absolute. If a baby survives an abortion, it must be killed because the baby’s mother has already decided to kill it.

I believe that what’s at stake here is not the life of the child, or even the mother’s “right to chose” so much as Planned Parenthood’s determination to fulfill its contractual obligations. If a woman contracts with them for an abortion that results in a dead baby, then she’s entitled to a dead baby, even if that means killing the baby after the abortion itself.

Do you get that?

The life of the child appears to be a non sequitur to Planned Parenthood. What seems to matter to them is that they told the woman they’d kill her baby, took her money with the promise they’d kill her baby, and they are going to Kill That Baby. They may be liars to the general public, but in this grisly instance, they keep their word.

When they get baited out into an excess of truth-telling and almost admit this as their lobbyist did in this video, they resort to obfuscation, lies and the use of their well-oiled media/political/social support machine to blame the shark they just jumped for their predicament.

I haven’t written about this story before because I’m so tired of it. It’s tough for me because I have to argue with these numbskull lies all day at work. I’ve been doing it for years and I am bone-weary with the lies.

However, I want you to understand this because I think it’s important for everyone, including Planned Parenthood’s supporters, to understand one simple thing: They are lying. Their lies are so obvious that it makes my teeth ache to read them. 

The next time Planned Parenthood jumps the shark and then blames the shark for having been jumped, just turn down the volume on your television, click over onto another page on the internet. No need to hear it/read it again. It’s always the same.

 

  • http://youngevangelicalandcatholic.blogspot.com Brantly

    Another great piece. Rebecca Hamilton for President in 2016! Seriously, have you ever thought about running for President?

    • Rebecca Hamilton

      Thank you, but no. :-)

      • http://youngevangelicalandcatholic.blogspot.com Brantly

        Why not?

      • Theodore Seeber

        You could always do a more honest Newt Gingrich impersonation- have a book on pro-life issues ghostwritten, then use a failed-on-purpose Democrats for Life attempt to win the Democratic nomination to promote the book.

        It’s only more honest because it is pro-life.

        • Rebecca Hamilton

          Huh? You lost me Ted.

          • Theodore Seeber

            It’s based on a libertarian conspiracy theory about why Newt Gingrich actually bothered to put his name forth in the Republican primary last term: he felt he had something important to say, and his entire campaign was just sales pratter for _Rediscovering God in America_.

            It occurs to me that a courageous Pro-life Democrat such as yourself could do something similar. You’d never make it past the primary, of course, but winning isn’t the point of such a run; getting the message out there is.

            • Rebecca Hamilton

              Interesting thought Ted. This has been done by another pro life woman a long time ago, back in the 1970s, I think. (I may be wrong about the date.) Not that I’m volunteering. I ain’t. :-)

  • Bert

    This sounds like it is strictly a legal issue. Since planned parenthood was contracted to kill someone’s baby, they fully intend to kill that baby in order to protect themselves. In their minds (and maybe legally) if the child survives, then they (PP) are in breach of contract. Therefore, in order to protect them legally, the baby must die.

    I don’t think that I have heard anything more heartless in my life.

    • Rebecca Hamilton

      Bert, that’s my interpretation. What opponents of infant born alive acts have said is that saving the baby if it survives an abortion would undo the decision that the woman made when she decided to abort. Since this is being said by people who perform abortions, (as well as politicians like our own president when he was a state senator in Illinois) I don’t see any other way to interpret it than that they agreed to kill the baby and they are going to fulfill that commitment, even if it means tossing a baby who survives in the trash or just laying it on a table and letting it die as happened here in Oklahoma, or snipping their spinal cords as at least one abortionist who is now trial is said to have done. Same difference, so far as I can see.

      • Bert

        To me, it’s even more heinous than that. It is basically PP saying “We said that we would kill your baby for you. If we let this one live, you can sue us for breach of contract. Therefore, to protect our own asses, we will finish the job and kill your child in some other way”.

        For the life of me, O can’t see how even the most hard line pro-choice person can support this kind of behavior. It ranks right up there (past,, actually) with gender based abortion. It is simply indefensible by any reasonable person.

        • Rebecca Hamilton

          I don’t get it either Bert.

        • Ted Seeber

          It is attitudes like this that make me say that the pro-choice side is unreasonable. It is because the atheist side is largely pro-choice that I was forced to reject atheism and turn back towards Catholicism in my 20s.

  • Doc Kimble

    The abortionist is the state-sponsored executioner of pre-born children. The abortionist doesn’t “commit” an abortion, as has been suggested by others in the Pro Life movement, because abortion is a legal act, and no laws have been broken by the executioner. If an abortion executioner fails to execute the child, he is breaking the law. I think this is consistent with Senator Obama’s position on the matter. Simple as that. Once the abortion-seeking woman signs that consent form, she is no more involved in the execution than is the rope that hangs the murderer. She may even be seen by those in the “legal profession” or the “judges” as a law-breaker if she changes her mind on the execution table.

    Tangentially, if the remains of the executed are routinely destroyed and placed in landfills, or ground up and sent to the sewage system, or their parts sold to researchers, then it would be perfectly legal for any executioner to keep souvenirs of his work in jars of formaldehyde. The “Born Alive Infants Protection Act” is merely a legal artifice, a smoke-screen intended only to allow abortion executioners to remain above any law of the land which they may choose to break in pursuit of their state-sponsored, legal goal of executing abortions. The state has an interest in allowing abortion executioners to remain above the law, simply because abortion, after 40 years of practice in the US, has become a service upon which our public has become dependent, the same as if we had been routinely executing, for instance, jay-walkers on legal principle for 40 years. Bottom Line: No one is above the law; executors of legal acts are the law.

  • Guest

    I actually see this very differently or at least see another side to it. PP’s dilemna with these bills is that a born-alive baby, the same human they were trying to kill a moment ago, is no longer a killable human once born alive. This strikes far too close to exposing the reality that abortion really is murder. Who wants to argue that the same baby living and breathing independent of it’s mother and now under protection of the law isn’t EXACTLY the same baby it was moments before as they were trying to kill it?

    I actually think PP just wrote their own death warrant when their bumbling lobbyist forced them to come out and admit that:
    “… of course a Planned Parenthood doctor would provide appropriate care to both the woman and the infant.”
    We just need people willing to take this and run with it in our legislatures and courts – pointing out that PP admits they know they are murdering INFANTS. Rebecca? Rebecca? Please don’t give up. The tide is turning and it will wash that shark back out to the depths of hell where it belongs.

  • Bill S

    From my own personal perspective, I am repulsed by late term abortions. If a woman is going to carry a baby into the third trimester without deciding whether or not to have an abortion, she should be forced to deliver the baby and give it up for adoption. This is just a gut feeling. And I know it is part of our survival mechanism to feel this way. The other day, I saw a 5-pound baby and I just could not imagine killing her, no matter how hard I tried to overcome my instincts.

    I honestly don’t understand how a viable baby can be killed through action or neglect. When I was 20, my ex=girlfriend had an abortion of a 10 week old fetus that we had conceived on our last night together. I have reconciled that what she did was OK, although, at the time, I am sure I would have been against it had I known she was going to do it. Ten weeks gave her plenty of time to decide. I can’t see the need for much more time than that.

    • Theodore Seeber

      Ah, this is a bit of personal information that was missing. Thank you for sharing. It explains a lot. Many men feel hypocritical on the subject of pro-life because of what happened when they were teenagers. Many women too. That’s why this ministry exists:

      http://www.projectrachelboston.com/contactinfo.htm

      If this had happened to me, I’d have a hard time believing in a loving God also.

      • Bill S

        Thanks Ted. That is right here in Boston. I heard of it before but I didn’t even know it was local.

        • Theodore Seeber

          There are local chapters all over the country! Project Rachel is now nationwide.

    • pagansister

      Yes, Bill S. I agree with your post—and it’s no surprise that I’m pro-choice–but there is a limit as you mentioned above in which a woman should be able to decide–my limit, as I have stated previously, is 3 months. I am NOT for late term abortions—and I disagree with PP if indeed they do the procedure after 3 months.

  • http://reluctantliberal.wordpress.com Reluctant Liberal

    I think this post would be much improved if you quoted what PP actually said. If I came on here complaining about something a conservative organization said, wouldn’t you want to hear an actual quote?

    • Rebecca Hamilton

      I linked to it. That’s enough.

  • Pingback: Shark Jumping Planned Parenthood Lobbyist was on Local Catholic Charities Board of Directors

  • Pingback: Obama to keynote Planned Parenthood fundraiser | Grumpy Opinions


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X