Planned Parenthood Endorses Hillary Clinton

  • Thread starter Thread starter JimR-OCDS
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JimR-OCDS

Guest
Planned Parenthood has endorsed Hillary Clinton, with a formal announcement set to come at a campaign event in Manchester, New Hampshire on Sunday, a Clinton spokesman told ABC News – the first time the nonprofit has backed a candidate in a primary.
Click to expand...
The group’s decision to do so comes amid recent efforts by Republicans to defund the organization.
Click to expand...
“Hillary Clinton holds the strongest record on reproductive rights of all presidential contenders in not just this election, but in American history,” Planned Parenthood Action Fund, the political arm of the group, said in a statement. “She doesn’t just support women’s health — she has been a proactive leader on expanding access to women’s health care.”
Click to expand...
abcnews.go.com/Politics/planned-parenthood-endorses-hillary-clinton/story?id=36149024
Click to expand...
OK, besides the fact that Clinton hired Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards’ daughter Lily Adams for her campaign in Iowa, I’m confused on how a 501c non-profit organization like PP, can publicly endorse candidates?

Anyway, we see where Hillary Clinton is on the issue of not only abortion, but feminist issues. She’ll serve feminists issues at the cost of the Nation’s welfare.

Jim
 
JimR-OCDS said:
OK, besides the fact that Clinton hired Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards’ daughter Lily Adams for her campaign in Iowa, I’m confused on how a 501c non-profit organization like PP, can publicly endorse candidates?

Anyway, we see where Hillary Clinton is on the issue of not only abortion, but feminist issues. She’ll serve feminists issues at the cost of the Nation’s welfare.

Jim
Click to expand...
I’m also a tad confused as to how they can endorse anyone but presumably there’s nothing actually illegal about it - it’s just that usually it is “just not cricket”. (One more nail in campaign convention excused by the desperate desire to win at all costs, even civility 😦 ). But I must say this is by far and away the least surprising thing about the campaigns for either main party nomination, so far…
 
Looks like they are putting that half a billion in taxpayer money to evil use.

The endorsement is completely unsurprising. Evil bands together.
 
zz912 said:
Looks like they are putting that half a billion in taxpayer money to evil use.

The endorsement is completely unsurprising. Evil bands together.
Click to expand...
Any Catholic should think twice before voting for her over this alone.
 
I expect PP to start getting viscous, they’ve seen over a 50% decline in their profitability.
and private donations dropped 10%

Planned Parenthood released its 2014-15 annual report in late December.
  • The claimed number of patients served dropped from 2.7 to 2.5 million.
  • The number of abortions dropped from 327,653 to 323,999, a 1.1 percent decrease.
  • The number of total “medical services” dropped from 10,590,433 to 9,455,582, a 10.7 percent decrease.
  • Abortions rose from 3.1 percent to 3.4 percent of “medical services.”
  • Total revenue dropped from $1.3034 billion to $1.2961 billion, a 0.6 percent decrease.
  • Private contributions and bequests fell from $391.8 million to $353.5 million, a 9.8 percent decrease.
  • Government revenue rose from $528.4 million to $553.7 million, a 4.8 percent increase.
  • The government share of total revenue increased from 40.5 to 42.7 percent.
  • Total expenses rose from $1.1763 billion to $1.2373 billion, a 5.2 percent increase.
  • “Medical services” expenses rose from $769.1 million to $782.3 million, a 1.7 percent increase.
  • The rest of Planned Parenthood’s expenses therefore rose from $407.2 to $455 million, an 11.7 percent increase, including management and general expenses, which rose from $145.9 to $164.4 million, a 12.7 percent increase.
  • Revenue in excess of expenses (i.e. “profit” in almost any other context) fell from $127.1 million to $58.8 million, a 53.7 percent decline in one year.
 
^ The above figures are encouraging. Hopefully this vile organisation will be bankrupt in a few years. As for Hillary, evil attracts evil. Anyone endorsed by planned parenthood is essentially endorsed by the devil.
 
Not only is this yet another reason not to vote for her, but how is an organization relying on taxpayer money allowed to endorse political candidates?

Well, these are the same people getting away with illegally selling the parts of their victims and “disposing of” their bodies in landfills. Evil.
 
JimR-OCDS said:
OK, besides the fact that Clinton hired Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards’ daughter Lily Adams for her campaign in Iowa, I’m confused on how a 501c non-profit organization like PP, can publicly endorse candidates?

Anyway, we see where Hillary Clinton is on the issue of not only abortion, but feminist issues. She’ll serve feminists issues at the cost of the Nation’s welfare.

Jim
Click to expand...
this does not surprise me. Hillary Clinton and PP have been in bed together for a long time.
 
I thought it was a given that PP was supporting Hillary Clinton. Why did they need a Press Release to state the Obvious?

For years, PP has been a taxpayer subsidized slush fund for the DNC. It is time for the money allocated to PP to go to the 9000 Women’s Health Centers that are not receiving any funding. Those places actually perform women’s healthcare, and are not abortion mills. :mad:
 
That’s another reason I definitely wouldn’t vote for Hilary – they’re killing babies – if they were doing this to animals the country would be up in arms!!!
 
OK, I found out how PP gets around the 501c3 on this issue.

PP itself is not endorsing Hillary it would be a violation of their non-profit 501c3 status, but Planned Parenthood Action Fund, which is a 501c4 which is a PAC.

That being said, its still Cecil Richards who is president of both.

Now imagine if the USCCB’s set up a 501c4 PAC and the president of the USCCB endorsed a candidate under the 501c4 PAC, imagine what would happen to the Church’s tax exempt status?

What a scam PP gets away with.

Jim
 
As I understand it, it was the PP Action Fund, a political organization, that actually endorsed Hillary Clinton yesterday in NH. Or at least when I was channel surfing and came across the live event on C-span, that is who she thanked. PP is classified 501c3. But PPAF is classified 501c4. There’s a difference between the two. The PAC, like any other PAC receives funding thru donations of Americans who share their politics. Besides possible differences in tax exemption status, a 501c4 can engage in political activities.
 
Sy_Noe said:
As I understand it, it was the PP Action Fund, a political organization, that actually endorsed Hillary Clinton yesterday in NH. Or at least when I was channel surfing and came across the live event on C-span, that is who she thanked. PP is classified 501c3. But PPAF is classified 501c4. There’s a difference between the two. The PAC, like any other PAC receives funding thru donations of Americans who share their politics. Besides possible differences in tax exemption status, a 501c4 can engage in political activities.
Click to expand...
You are correct, but in my opinion, its a work around for PP to involve themselves in politics without losing their tax exempt status.

So, why can’t religions do the same ?

Jim
 
Barb3 said:
That’s another reason I definitely wouldn’t vote for Hilary – they’re killing babies – if they were doing this to animals the country would be up in arms!!!
Click to expand...
I’ve never understood how such inflammatory rhetoric (Democrats are “killing babies” and are the party of death which I’ve also seen on this forum) helps the cause. It might even be counterproductive. Instead of pitting one against the other by painting with such a broad brush, it might be more useful to tone down the rhetoric some. But that’s just my opinion.
 
Sy_Noe said:
I’ve never understood how such inflammatory rhetoric (Democrats are “killing babies” and are the party of death which I’ve also seen on this forum) helps the cause. It might even be counterproductive. Instead of pitting one against the other by painting with such a broad brush, it might be more useful to tone down the rhetoric some. But that’s just my opinion.
Click to expand...
You are correct and the last election, the USCCB’s asked pro-life Catholics to tone down their rhetoric.

Jim
 
JimR-OCDS said:
You are correct, but in my opinion, its a work around for PP to involve themselves in politics without losing their tax exempt status.

So, why can’t religions do the same ?

Jim
Click to expand...
Yes I hadn’t seen your post about 501c3 compared to 501c4 before submitting mine. But I guess I just don’t find Catholics being all that short on organizations working for their causes. CatholicVote.org is a conservative group. I know independent of the CC but it acknowledges the authority of the Magisterium. There is also Bill Donahue’s Catholic League. And I certainly don’t see Bill Donahue as one who minces his words. We even have CAF and its posters. Where many are politically in line with Republicans and are not shy to let the world know. 🙂
 
As bad as PP is for it’s abortion (which is reason enough to shut them down), I think they should be prosecuted for fraud, as they are clearly a “for profit” organisation masquerading as a non-profit, even to the point of using their blood money to fund electoral campaigns. Even worse they traffic in human organs, which is illegal in almost every country in the world the last time I checked.

ACORN got shut down for doing far less than PP (although it was still corrupt and immoral).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top