RE: Trump's speeches criminal? Very possibly!

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Trump's speeches criminal? Very possibly!

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Trump's speeches criminal? Very possibly!

Page: << < prev 10 11 [12] 13 14 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Trump's speeches criminal? Very possibly! - 3/17/2016 3:16:59 PM

thishereboi

Posts: 14463
Joined: 6/19/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Lol shows just how little you know.good god cd, are you in line for a sainthood?

Already a saint...

Still waiting for the articles about those Hillary and/or Bernie rallies disrupted by protestors from the right.

I have the feeling it's going to be a long wait.

when you can actually start a thread and give more than your opinion on posters, and not just shitting on a thread and then fly off...I may take either of you seriously.

CD, you arent owed a response....you dont command the respect, or the credibility to get me to respond to your idiocies, as we are not discussing violent rhetoric.
open your own bloody thread.
I could just as easily suggest that protesters at trump rallies are paid to get beat up...by trump
Prove Im wrong
you are a dipshit.

Like I give a shit if you take me seriously. LMFAO

_____________________________

"Sweetie, you're wasting your gum" .. Albert

This here is the boi formerly known as orfunboi

(in reply to Lucylastic)

Profile

Post #: 221

RE: Trump's speeches criminal? Very possibly! - 3/17/2016 3:17:41 PM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: AtUrCervix

(I already do).

We know you could give more if you were not so stingy.

(in reply to AtUrCervix)

Profile

Post #: 222

RE: Trump's speeches criminal? Very possibly! - 3/17/2016 3:26:14 PM

thishereboi

Posts: 14463
Joined: 6/19/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterBrentC

The only thing planned Parenthood does is abortions. They don't do pap smears. They don't do mamograms. How can people say they are for women's health when they don't provide the basic health services.

They do all kinds of things

https://www.plannedparenthood.org/files/4013/9611/7243/Planned_Parenthood_Services.pdf

"Health Care Services
The core of Planned Parenthood affiliate medical
service is prevention including STD testing and
treatment, contraception, and accompanying health
care, education, and information. In 2012, we provided
nearly 11 million medical services for nearly three
million people, and helped to prevent approximately
515,000 unintended pregnancies. Seventy-nine
percent of our clients have incomes at or below
150 percent of the federal poverty level. As of
December 2013, our more than 700 health centers are
operated by 68 affiliates, which have a presence in all
50 states and the District of Columbia (PPFA, 2013a;
PPFA, 2013b; PPFA, internal documents)."

Now if they provided services to nearly 3 million people and only aprox 500 thousand were for abortion services and that tells me that the other 2.5 million were what, that's right sparky, not an abortion.

But keep spewing the obvious bs, it makes it that much easier to conclude you are full of shit and stop paying attention when you squeak.

_____________________________

"Sweetie, you're wasting your gum" .. Albert

This here is the boi formerly known as orfunboi

(in reply to MasterBrentC)

Profile

Post #: 223

RE: Trump's speeches criminal? Very possibly! - 3/17/2016 3:31:15 PM

Lucylastic

Posts: 40310
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Lol shows just how little you know.good god cd, are you in line for a sainthood?

Already a saint...

Still waiting for the articles about those Hillary and/or Bernie rallies disrupted by protestors from the right.

I have the feeling it's going to be a long wait.

when you can actually start a thread and give more than your opinion on posters, and not just shitting on a thread and then fly off...I may take either of you seriously.

CD, you arent owed a response....you dont command the respect, or the credibility to get me to respond to your idiocies, as we are not discussing violent rhetoric.
open your own bloody thread.
I could just as easily suggest that protesters at trump rallies are paid to get beat up...by trump
Prove Im wrong
you are a dipshit.

Like I give a shit if you take me seriously. LMFAO

well you keep responding to my messages telling me off
You must do.
or do you like kicking yourself in the arse?

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to thishereboi)

Profile

Post #: 224

RE: Trump's speeches criminal? Very possibly! - 3/17/2016 3:32:37 PM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

But keep spewing the obvious bs, it makes it that much easier to conclude you are full of shit and stop paying attention when you squeak.

Adults have a responsibility to point out the errors of children...don't shirk.

(in reply to thishereboi)

Profile

Post #: 225

RE: Trump's speeches criminal? Very possibly! - 3/17/2016 4:15:41 PM

Phydeaux

Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

http://www.redstate.com/streiff/2015/09/30/cecile-richards-abortion-86-planned-parenthoods-revenue/

quote:

Yesterday, under questioning by Representative Rep. Cynthia Lummis (R-WY), Richards admitted that a staggering 86% of non-government revenue [was abortion] and revealed Planned Parenthood for what it is: an organization devoted to increasing the number of abortions in the United States. And Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-SC) drew an admission that if Congress defunded Planned Parenthood that it would have no effect on health services provided

At a hearing on Planned Parenthood funding in the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on Tuesday, Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.) pointed out to Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards that the organization’s most recent tax report shows $127 million dollars of revenue in excess of expenses.

...In the course of her questioning, Richards told two whoppers. First, she admitted that Planned Parenthood did not provide mammograms. This was something we all knew but when people like Barack Obama keep mouthing the lie it is good to hear the head of Abortions-R-Us. Then she followed that up by saying Planned Parenthood had NEVER claimed to provide mammograms. This is not true. Here is video of Richards making that very claim. She also claimed she had never heard of a child being born alive after a botched abortion attempt. To believe this you have to believe that she has not been following the previous hearings on Planned Parenthood.

In a usual business, revenues in excess of costs are called profits.

So lets summarize here, shall we?

1. By law, the US doesn't fund abortions.
2. 86% of Planned Parenthood's non governmental moneys are derived from abortion.
3. Planned parenthood doesn't provide mammograms.
4. Planned parenthood does 20 abortions for every family planning service - and 200 abortions for every adoption referral.
5. The idea that Planned parenthood does a significant amount of women's health - outside of abortion is thereby revealed to be a lie. The fact that Planned Parenthood does any women's health is a smokescreen for the fact that Planned Parenthood is an abortion provider - period.
6. The US government is subsidizing a company that made $127 million dollars in profits last year. Corporate subsidies are bad, right liberals?

I didn't bother with reporting a few things -such as Planned Parenthood spent more than 40 million dollars on travel and entertainment including some quite a few parties. Which is all well and good, if you are a for profit corporation - not so much when you're using federal grant dollars to do it.

Bottom line: If the issue really were women's health there would be no problem redirecting those same grants to women's health providers that actually do provide womens health services, such as mammograms.

But any representation that this really is a women's health issue is simply a lie. This is an abortion issue. And why do we need to be subsidizing with federal dollars a corporation that made $127 million dollars, hmm?

LMAO that they are an abortion provider has never been argued.
well except in your head.
how many men have visited PP for birthcontrol or STDs? or family planning with their female partners??? Not to mention gay men.
Look at family planning in texas..... why are women having to drive to another state, or more than four -five hours away to get to a clinic?
Access is being cut, causing the need for later term abortions.
especially among poor women.
its so much more than abortion.

Except that by their own admission it is not.

Per her OWN words, 86% of the non government funds were abortion.

Again, except for abortion, can you show a single place where funds couldn't be funnelled to other women's health providers? Of course not.
So your argument is a lie, a fig leaf. The debate over planned parenthood funding is only about abortion - and since the company ran a profit of 127 million you can't advance a single case that it NEEDS the government money.

In which case - whats your objection to moving it to other (real) health care providers.

(in reply to Lucylastic)

Profile

Post #: 226

RE: Trump's speeches criminal? Very possibly! - 3/17/2016 4:22:19 PM

Lucylastic

Posts: 40310
Status: offline

Back to Videos
Rep. Lummis to Planned Parenthood: You Say 3% Of Procedures Are Abortions, Yet 86% Of Your Revenue Is From Abortions
Posted on September 29, 2015
1.9k Shares

At Tuesday's House hearing on Planned Parenthood, Rep. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyoming) questioned Cecile Richards, the organization's president, about mammogram machines, number of clinics, how much funding is appropriated to abortion and how much is for other services rendered.

"I would very much appreciate it if you would break it down," Lummis said about Planned Parenthood's accounting. "Because the taxpayers are funding over 40% of Planned Parenthood and my point is they just have a right to know how this money is being spent."

"If ta payer dollars are being used to free up services that you provide that are are a abhorrent services in the view of many taxpayers," Lummis said. "There are alternatives in this country."

Lummis quizzed Richards how abortion is only 3% of Planned Parenthood's services while it garners an overwhelming amount of revenue for the non-profit.

"So abortion is included in surgical services. But I want to find out where you get your 3% figure that you cite for abortion procedures. That's your self-reported abortion statistic," Lummis said.

"It is 3% of all the procedures we provide," Richards responded. "All the services we provide."

"Let's talk about Planned Parenthood revenue from abortions. If you look at the 2013 statistics that you report, abortions revenue would have been over 86% of your non-government revenue. How do you explain this massive disparity between the amount of revenue you collect from abortion and the fact that you only report 3% of your services being abortion?" Lummis asked

"Well, I think there's two questions you sort of mixed in there so let me try to address both," Richards answered. "One is, as we've already stated, federal money does not go for abortions. So the federal portion that we were discussing is reimbursement for preventive care services."

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to Phydeaux)

Profile

Post #: 227

RE: Trump's speeches criminal? Very possibly! - 3/17/2016 4:32:53 PM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

Except that by their own admission it is not.

Per her OWN words, 86% of the non government funds were abortion.

Nobody gives the glimmer of a good goddamn fuck what the mattress backed slut Limmers or lummers or whatever that ignorant nutsuckers name is. The Planned parenthood person did not say that, and said nothing of the kind, was not allowed to answer.

That is toiletlicking propaganda and pathetically craven felch. No such thing was said by people who know, only by innumerate nutsucker whores in the legislature gumming their own pissflaps.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to Phydeaux)

Profile

Post #: 228

RE: Trump's speeches criminal? Very possibly! - 3/17/2016 4:53:20 PM

PeonForHer

Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline

quote:

He is unfiltered and does not tell you what you want to hear.

What are you talking about, CG? It's exactly the opposite of that. He *only* says what he thinks people want to hear.

His schtick is brilliant - almost everything he says boils down to "Hey, all the others are scared to say what they feel. But I'm not. I'm gutsy and I speak my mind. And I say...'You are right!'.

He *always* says what will please the crowd in front of him, and he *never* makes that crowd furrow its brow by saying anything that will actually make them think.

_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com

(in reply to Cinnamongirl67)

Profile

Post #: 229

RE: Trump's speeches criminal? Very possibly! - 3/17/2016 5:00:34 PM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cinnamongirl67

Look stupid boy. You have no idea what is like to be a woman.
We tire of your eternal talk of nutsackers:
In fact, shut up now.

Bob, go have a bit of a lie down, I'll watch the Goreans for you.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to Cinnamongirl67)

Profile

Post #: 230

RE: Trump's speeches criminal? Very possibly! - 3/17/2016 5:03:53 PM

BamaD

Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

He is unfiltered and does not tell you what you want to hear.

What are you talking about, CG? It's exactly the opposite of that. He *only* says what he thinks people want to hear.

His schtick is brilliant - almost everything he says boils down to "Hey, all the others are scared to say what they feel. But I'm not. I'm gutsy and I speak my mind. And I say...'You are right!'.

He *always* says what will please the crowd in front of him, and he *never* makes that crowd furrow its brow by saying anything that will actually make them think.

That bombastic stance is what people want to hear.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to PeonForHer)

Profile

Post #: 231

RE: Trump's speeches criminal? Very possibly! - 3/17/2016 5:12:06 PM

ThatDizzyChick

Posts: 5490
Status: offline

What the fuck does Planned Parenthood's finances have to do with the topic?

_____________________________

Not your average bimbo.

(in reply to BamaD)

Profile

Post #: 232

RE: Trump's speeches criminal? Very possibly! - 3/17/2016 5:17:16 PM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

Well, Uh.....we are waiting for Faux Nuze and the inthecloset Harry Gowdy to slap Hillary in chains over the email shit, and sorta ran out of things to talk about.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to ThatDizzyChick)

Profile

Post #: 233

RE: Trump's speeches criminal? Very possibly! - 3/17/2016 5:33:18 PM

Lucylastic

Posts: 40310
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick

What the fuck does Planned Parenthood's finances have to do with the topic?

that would be my fault..someone said something about wanting smallgovernment, I came back with, small enought to fit in a womans uterus, then brent came up with PP ONLY performing abortions...it hit my idiot scanner and I had to respond...

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to ThatDizzyChick)

Profile

Post #: 234

RE: Trump's speeches criminal? Very possibly! - 3/17/2016 5:36:43 PM

rkfdbdsm

Posts: 26
Joined: 4/15/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick

What the fuck does Planned Parenthood's finances have to do with the topic?

Nothing! Actually, most of this thread is off topic. I was hoping to have a civil, if spirited, discussion of lawbreaking among the candidates, but instead, the same 5 or 6 members that have trolled all the other political threads have brought their never-ending flame war here.

(in reply to ThatDizzyChick)

Profile

Post #: 235

RE: Trump's speeches criminal? Very possibly! - 3/17/2016 5:42:07 PM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

lol. never gonna happen.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to rkfdbdsm)

Profile

Post #: 236

RE: Trump's speeches criminal? Very possibly! - 3/17/2016 5:56:12 PM

Lucylastic

Posts: 40310
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rkfdbdsm

Nothing! Actually, most of this thread is off topic. I was hoping to have a civil, if spirited, discussion of lawbreaking among the candidates, but instead, the same 5 or 6 members that have trolled all the other political threads have brought their never-ending flame war here.

Right now this forum is dead.... Compared to what it was like five months ago.
The fact that the 5 or six same people are "always" posting is because its quiet, but then again, the whole board is deader than it has been in years.
Thats all there is...
well except that the dungeon has always been less moderated than other sections.
When we had moderation that is.

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to rkfdbdsm)

Profile

Post #: 237

RE: Trump's speeches criminal? Very possibly! - 3/17/2016 8:08:38 PM

Phydeaux

Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: rkfdbdsm

Nothing! Actually, most of this thread is off topic. I was hoping to have a civil, if spirited, discussion of lawbreaking among the candidates, but instead, the same 5 or 6 members that have trolled all the other political threads have brought their never-ending flame war here.

Right now this forum is dead.... Compared to what it was like five months ago.
The fact that the 5 or six same people are "always" posting is because its quiet, but then again, the whole board is deader than it has been in years.
Thats all there is...
well except that the dungeon has always been less moderated than other sections.
When we had moderation that is.

Yep, you and thompson with your insults, lacking any creditable cites. Ditto mnottertail with his everfelching gobstoppers. Toss in tklman's insults, joether, peon.

I'd be willing to bet that back when we were moderated you liberal posters had quite a few vacations....

(in reply to Lucylastic)

Profile

Post #: 238

RE: Trump's speeches criminal? Very possibly! - 3/17/2016 11:32:02 PM

Lucylastic

Posts: 40310
Status: offline

I got banned by mod 3 once. For being a bitch to sanity...she was full on bonkers by then. Sanity was always bonkers
For a week.
So yeah sorry but true.
So keep your money close

Otherwise you would be utterly penniless.

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to Phydeaux)

Profile

Post #: 239

RE: Trump's speeches criminal? Very possibly! - 3/17/2016 11:44:26 PM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: rkfdbdsm

Nothing! Actually, most of this thread is off topic. I was hoping to have a civil, if spirited, discussion of lawbreaking among the candidates, but instead, the same 5 or 6 members that have trolled all the other political threads have brought their never-ending flame war here.

Right now this forum is dead.... Compared to what it was like five months ago.
The fact that the 5 or six same people are "always" posting is because its quiet, but then again, the whole board is deader than it has been in years.
Thats all there is...
well except that the dungeon has always been less moderated than other sections.
When we had moderation that is.

Yep, you and thompson with your insults, lacking any creditable cites. Ditto mnottertail with his everfelching gobstoppers. Toss in tklman's insults, joether, peon.

I'd be willing to bet that back when we were moderated you liberal posters had quite a few vacations....

Look, you are an insult, nobody has to silently listen to your lying propaganda. You insult peoples intelligence, their dignity, their honesty, their sense of reality with every post. Post horseshit in every venue, such as walking into a fission reactor with paper and drywall and you are going to be ok. I am going to point out the notion is fucking cretinous.

I fail to understand how you with your constant and continuous affronts can say anything on this subject.

I call nutsuckers nutsuckers because they are. They are not republicans, they are not conservatives, they dont cite facts, they felch, they toiletlick, they shiteat. They named themselves nutsuckers, unintended consequences of their imbecility, teabaggers one and all, their only skill. I think when moderated, it was a horse apiece between nutsuckers and 'liberals' (which is whatever a nutsucker aint, by nutsucker definitions).

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to Phydeaux)

Profile

Post #: 240