Planned Parenthood launching seven-figure pro-Clinton ad buy

[hoosierlib]

Planned Parenthood's political arms are launching a multi-platform, seven-figure ad buy in support of Democratic primary front-runnerHillary Clinton. 

Planned Parenthood Votes and Planned Parenthood Action Fund will promote Clinton’s pro-abortion-rights stance in videos, digital ads, phone banks and mailers, the groups said in a joint statement on Thursday.

The ads will target Michigan, Texas and Virginia ahead of their early March primaries.

“Hillary Clinton is the only candidate in this race who has made women’s health and rights a priority,” said Deirdre Schifeling, Planned Parenthood Action Fund's executive director, in a statement. “Hillary Clinton has been fighting for women and their families for her entire life.” 

In one ad, entitled “Champion,” a narrator says “we’re with Hillary, because she’s with us.”

“When they said our healthcare wasn’t important. When they tried to deny us cancer screenings. When they talked about our personal health decisions in ways meant to shame us. She spoke up. She was our champion."

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/270715-planned-parenthood-unfurls-seven-figure-clinton-ad-buy

Another spot, “Care that Drives,” features mothers playing with their children.

“You encourage. You listen. All to make sure your family succeeds,” the ads begins, showing a mother pulling a shirt over her son and another playing soccer with two daughters. 

“Care. It’s what’s most important. It’s why Hillary Clinton stood up for children without health insurance,” the ad continues. “To make sure they could see a doctor.”

“And when Congress threatened to block patients from Planned Parenthood’s basic services, Hillary Clinton stood up for cancer screenings and birth controls.”

WTF? Seriously? I guess they have plenty of money, since they are attacking a Pro-Choice Democratic candidate...

[oldandhappy]

1. WOW Guess they do not need my donation.

[nichomachus]

32. +1000

[Fawke Em]

78. Mine either.

Shouldn't they be spending that money on women who need healthcare?

[roguevalley]

168. no. this isn't about health care but if you look at the Hillary campaign

roster I am sure you could email the PP director's daughter and ask.

[PeaceNikki]

170. No, it's money that was donated to the POLITICAL ARM of PP.

Fuck, how hard is that to understand?

[MaggieD]

261. It's apparent that many of his supporters don't understand the difference

I'm surprised by that from people so devoted to politics, but that seems to be the case. Odd.

[PeaceNikki]

263. I know, then they "counter" this point in a manner that sounds EXACTLY like the Congressional R's

who were crying about Federal money being used for abortions.

[MaggieD]

267. Yep

SMH.

[Unknown Beatle]

324. When you donate to PP, they channel the money were they see it will be

more useful. PP is not going to tell you that they're going to be using your donation for Planned Parenthood Federal PAC. The donated money is going to go anywhere and everywhere within the organization, including the PAC.

The "POLITICAL ARM of PP" is still PP and they use your donation for that purpose if they see fit.

Fuck, how hard is that to understand?

[PeaceNikki]

329. That's completely false

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511335534#post265

Star Member still_one
265. I will try to make this simple, though I suspect some will ignore it because it doesn't fit into
their talking points

Planned Parenthood has two separate entities, one is the non-profit arm, and the other is the PP PAC.

Planned Parenthood Federation of America (and its regional counterparts) is a 501(c)(3) (a non-profit public benefit corporation). Their revenue comes from tax exempt donations, government grants, services fees, etc. They are not allowed to engage in campaigns, but can advocate on issues.

Planned Parenthood PAC (and its regional counterparts) is a "Non-Connected Political Action Committee." Their revenue is completely from taxable donations. PACs can act directly in elections, not just on issues.
Most social welfare organizations (and I use that term loosely) operate under an umbrella with a 501(c)(3), as well as a 501(c)(4) and/or an PAC. It's way easier to raise money for a (c)(3) because donations aren't taxable, but there's a lot more of a limit as to what you can do with the money. The gist is that (c)(3)s can only do 'public education on issues,' (c)(4)s can lobby, and PACs can do about anything they want, including intervening in elections. All the orgs operate under the same 'brand,' and often there is overlap in employees, but the money stays separate.

Planned Parenthood takes this separation seriously.

I suspect this important distinction will fall flat on those that choose to remain ignorant, which just highlights another point about accuracy verses misrepresentation and distortion if it doesn't fit into someone's agenda

I guess some of those critics could spam the PP Facebook page or post links to right wing anti-abortion sites to make their point. It wouldn't be the first time that has been done

[Jackie Wilson Said]

326. So now Planned Parenthood goes under that old bus.

Narrow minded attitudes like this will be very harmful.

Maybe my donations and my circle of friends and family donations can make up for your and the other's here who no longer support PP.

[libdem4life]

116. What? Your piddly $27...Pffft. n/t

[Lifelong Protester]

128. Mine,either.

[Lizzie Poppet]

173. Likewise.

Particularly when they spend it in a primary election in which the two candidates differ not one fucking iota on important women's issues. Spend in the GE? Okay...as long as it's not excessive. To help the corporate candidate in the Dem primary? Fuck you very much, PP.

[John Poet]

241. There IS a difference: Bernie never said he'd be willing to compromise

with Republicans on a woman's right to choose. Hillary DID.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/09/29/hillary_clinton_i_could_compromise_on_abortion_if_it_included_exceptions_for_mothers_health.html

[Lizzie Poppet]

244. Good point!

PP is actually supporting a less-reliable candidate. I wonder when their Stockholm branch will open...?

[polly7]

253. Shouldn't this be their most important consideration?

[MaggieD]

262. Bernie is for third trimester abortion on demand?

I had no idea. Do you have a link to that?

[kath]

334. THIS. HRC willing to compromise with Repubs on abortion, Bernie is NOT.

[jwirr]

207. Absolutely.

[840high]

247. Or mine.

[artislife]

335. hmm. money for mamograms or for h.

I can see where they would consider it the same topic.

[Cali_Democrat]

2. I can see why they wouldn't want to back the single-issue candidate. nt

[hoosierlib]

4. And the only candidate facing a potential criminal indictment is a better choice?

Or is it just because she has a uterus?

[okasha]

115. At the moment,

we have no candidate facing a criminal indictment.

That may change, of course, when the FEC reviews those thirty-seven pages of illegal donations to Sanders.

[libdem4life]

118. No, we have what they usually do...start with the lower minions and see how badly they want

to be charged and potentially face jail time. But like Chris Christie...It will find it's target in the end. Requiring depositions is no publicity stunt. That's where your words can really come back to haunt you...but I'm sure you know that.

Frankly, I think it's timed with the transcripts in some CT way...wait until she's nominated...bring out some "smoking guns" then she's out for good. That's prison to a career politician, IMO. Irrelevancy.

[roguevalley]

172. 37 pages of illegal donations to bernie? that's a new one.

I hope they review the 2 million pages of illegal donations to HRC. Oh wait. They are.

[okasha]

254. There should be more news

on Bernie's funny money shortly. He either has to show that the excess comtributions were somehow legal, or he has to start refunding the overage.

Or he can fire his campaign finance manager and claim that the money just somehow landed in his account because the banks' firewalls were down.

[SunSeeker]

255. LOL

[TM99]

268. Oh, please, I used to respect you but this is silly.

The NY Times report said this was common especially when there were a lot of small donations. They simply asked the campaign to make the necessary corrections which is naturally being seen to.

To try and turn that into some sort of smear about illegal contributions is just pathetically sad.

[okasha]

325. Other foot. Shoe.

Don't like it?

How about speaking out against the Sanders acolytes who are stirring shit (and have their. fingers and toes all crossed and their eyes screwed up pleasepleaseplease) about an "indictment" that isn't going to happen because no law has been broken?

This isn't going to help Sanders, but it does give aid and comfort to the Republicans.

Oh, and the overages the FEC is looking at are apparently substantially over the maximum, not change out of a kid's piggy bank.

[TM99]

330. Hardly.

The possible indictment is a real concern in the GE. What was supposed to be just a GOP dirty trick actually has legs when you have the FBI investigating it. Dismiss that if you will.

No new information on this has been released since the singular initial article in the New York Times earlier this month. To pretend you have more knowledge on it and to draw such conclusions is disingenuous at best. I am being generous.

[okasha]

332. The "indictment,"

like Benghazi!Benghazi!, is a will o'the wisp, and you can follow it into the Republican swamp if the prospect gives you warm fuzzies.

But the swamp is where you'll be, chin-deep in mud and keeping company with the Koch Bros. and Karl Rove.

Enjoy.

[TM99]

333. Hyperbolic nonsense.

The email server issue has nothing to do with Benghazi except as the GOP has tried to make it. But it is not the reality. To dismiss it as solely a fantasy of the right wing is very much the big problem with Clinton and apparently her supporters.

[Omaha Steve]

302. Seems the donors did it intentionally, which is a crime to be investigated

Right at the bottom of EVERY Act Blue link for Bernie. How did they all miss it?

https://secure.actblue.com/contribute/page/duforbernie

Contribution Rules
This contribution is made from my own funds, and funds are not being provided to me by another person or entity for the purpose of making this contribution.
I am making this contribution with my own personal credit card and not with a corporate or business credit card or a card issued to another person.
I am not a federal contractor.
I am at least eighteen years old.
I am a U.S. citizen or lawfully admitted permanent resident (i.e., green card holder).
To donate by check: Bernie 2016 PO Box 905 Burlington, VT 05402

[okasha]

249. You do realize, I hope, thst the feds are not going to indict Hillsry

just because you and the Republicans really, really, REALLY want them to? There has to be some reasonable indication of a criminal offense, first.

No pink unicorns. Sorry.

[libdem4life]

313. You do realize that you didn't read my post, or you would not have responded with such hubris.

Not one word was about indictment...in fact I said it would not likely happen. And this is a news item, not a Hillary Hater Bashing...news, like for everyone to read. And what's with the pink unicorns sorry...we are adults here.

[MaggieD]

269. LOL - not going to happen

Obama wouldn't have all but endorsed her, nor would she have 500 super delegates endorsing her if that was going to happen. I guess that disappoints you, just like it does republicans. But it's just not going to happen.

[BillZBubb]

17. Yes, can't support the SINGLE PAYER candidate.

Gotta back the NO WE CAN'T candidate.

[UglyGreed]

21. .

[roguevalley]

176. I remember when the Hillarians were all up in everyone's face who decided not

to donate to PP anymore because of their partisan support for HRC who hired the director's daughter because it would cut services to women. Now I suppose we can expect them to SCREAM about taking millions to put HRC into the white house, money from services because it isn't being used for patients. Oh right. They won't.

There is no low, no floor beneath HRC and her 1% friends.

[Agschmid]

312. Except it's not money from services to women... So?

[safeinOhio]

36. From PP web site

Let’s be clear — when it comes to issues like birth control, abortion, and access to services at Planned Parenthood, both leading Democratic candidates for president have great records, and would make a great president. In fact, Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton are both rated 100% on Planned Parenthood Action Fund’s congressional scorecard for their perfect voting records on women’s health and rights, and have been strong defenders of Planned Parenthood. - See more at: https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/elections-politics/blog/how-do-hillary-clinton-and-bernie-sanders-compare-womens-health/#sthash.Puf3lWOS.dpuf

I would think they would save all of their $ for the general elections. This makes no sense to divide the people, like me, that support PP.

[farleftlib]

49. This is insane

It's not like Bernie is anti-choice and the money is necessary to save women's lives. Save it for the general, indeed. WTH are they thinking?

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

68. Excellent point. Must be a girl thing.

[kristopher]

211. Cecil Richards, Daughter of Tx Gov Ann Richards = Establishment Insider

Ann Richards and Clintons best buds.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

218. Didn't know Ann was her mum

So what was Bernie talking about?

[brer cat]

229. "Must be a girl thing."

Singing in the Bernie choir while tone-deaf. smh

[dragonfly301]

131. Trying to figure out how many PAC's are affiliated with Planned Parenthood

I went to OpenSecrets and they show that the PPAF had roughly $967,000 by the end of January. I realize that these things are fluid but would they really have enough $$ on hand today to blow 7 figures on one ad? What happens in the General Election?

https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?strID=C00314617

[dragonfly301]

135. I'm gonna answer my own question (I think)

They have a another PAC Planned Parenthood Votes that had $1,582,000 at the end of January.

[dragonfly301]

292. I fell down the rabbit hole of Planned Parenthood on the open secrets website

is it possible that PPAF gave zero to Hillary in 08 but gave Obama and Edwards $1837 each? How can that be - aren't all of the strong accomplishments that Hillary has w/regards to PP from her time in the Senate? Wouldn't she have been a much stronger reproductive health candidate than Obama and Edwards in 08? I'm not getting this.

https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/pacgot.php?cycle=2008&cmte=C00314617

[Beowulf]

184. +1

A really stupid political move.

[jeff47]

89. Much better to back the one who says she'd compromise on abortion. (nt)

[polly7]

252. Right?!

[Bjornsdotter]

256. Single?

Bernie is setting forth a program that is by far the most sensible set of proposals for our nation:

Civil rights for all Americans: Racial justice, women’s rights, LGBT rights, disability rights
Reform of our justice system & prison system, including ending private prisons
A fair immigration and humane policy
Single payer health care
Free public colleges and universities
A living wage for all Americans
Public investment in infrastructure and energy to create decent paying jobs
Expanding social security by lifting the cap on payroll taxes
Financial regulation and Wall Street reform
Progressive taxation to reduce income inequality
Campaign finance reform to strengthen democracy
A rational foreign policy
Environmental policies to combat climate change

http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/02/24/slow-bern-sanders-candidacy-perspective?utm_campaign=shareaholic&utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=socialnetwork

[MaggieD]

264. I can see why, too

They need someone who is going to take women's issues seriously and make them the priority they need to be. Choice is under tremendous threat right now. Very important that we have a president who realizes that and has a history of standing up for women's issues.

[leftofcool]

3. Who is PP attacking?

[The Redheaded Guy]

71. Apparently, another Democrat who has 100% lifetime PP record...

Waste of money. I think my donation to PP has ended as of today, seeing that they can fork over a 7 figure ad instead of spending it on women's health. I guess we know where PP's priorities are.

[PeaceNikki]

76. Um, no. They are totally separate organizations. PPFA and PPAF.

I doubt you are very committed to poor women's health if you would penalize them for supporting a Democrat.

[The Redheaded Guy]

85. Excuse me? There was no reason for the early endorsement.

Planned Parenthood could have just stayed aside until the GE, and endorse as usual.

This unusual early endorsement has damaged their reputation.

I will support the local women's health clinic

[PeaceNikki]

88. I'm sure you will.

[roguevalley]

177. better them than this person who says she's open to compromise on abortion

[bettyellen]

227. Only if the decision was between a woman and her doctor- considering her health and life.

That is an awfully big "if" to leave out. Dishonest.

[PeaceNikki]

232. And IF the R's would budge. Which, let's be honest, is like saying "if pigs flew"

[bettyellen]

233. YES! She was pointing out how unreasonable conservatives were being, and drawing the correct line

in the sand. Only people who are uneducated and uncaring about the struggle for reproductive rights are buying that bullshit.

[PeaceNikki]

242. It's a joke that they are pretending to give a shit about reproductive freedom.

Unless it's about the "Third Way LOLigarchy" and/or Wall Street, they could give a shit.

[bettyellen]

245. Yeah, there is a lot of things and people that they are suddenly pretending to care about

Last edited Thu Feb 25, 2016, 10:36 PM - Edit history (1)

[SwampG8r]

336. As opposed to those who have been pretending for months?

[bettyellen]

337. Loved your BLM is a rat fucking plot thread. Not.

[SwampG8r]

342. I can tell you only read the header

I have yet to have anyone who actually read it see it other than what it was at the time
a defense of blm and an attempt to make sense of what was then going on
I know the squad searched and searched for something....anything...to try to make it look like i said something in opposition to blm but that was all you could find an op that defends blm attacks tbe rw and gives hillary a pass on the "artful smear"
If it makes yall feel smugger or lifts the saddle on your high horse to call me out over and over ( and lets be clear.here every time yall trot it out it is a tos violation as a call out especially when you mischaracterize what it says) then please governor proceed

[roguevalley]

305. any compromise is compromise. No one but the woman and doctor should talk and if that's the

point, why did she say she's good with restrictions and compromise. Dishonest? I don't think so. So what if its between and woman and doctor. That's not what restrictions on abortion are about. Its about the state deciding.

[bettyellen]

306. She was outlining the ONLY way she would support a restriction because that question was asked.

Anyone who has fought for reproductive rights KNOWS her conditions are completely unacceptable to the RW loonies.
The "concerns" are from the ill informed and those pretending to give a shit about the struggle for reproductive rights.

I have fought in the streets, and at the capitol- so have a large number roof my friends. None of them would denigrate Clinton for her stance here. Sorry- this criticism is out of ignorance or malice.

[thesquanderer]

120. It's not "penalizing them for supporting a democrat"

They are supporting one 100% supportive candidate over another 100% supportive candidate. What a dumb use of funds. Save it for the general, when you can use the money to support a 100% supportive candidate over someone who is anti-abortion or wants to defund PP. And if the PAC simply has so much money that they don't know what to do with it, I have an idea, they can contribute it to the actual PP organization that actually does the work they are fighting for.

Honestly, spending money to help defeat someone who is equally on your side is plain stupid, and even worse in this politically charged atmosphere where many PP supporters, themselves, support Sanders. So they're p*ssing off a bunch of their donor base as well. Just dumb. No benefit, just downside.

[PeaceNikki]

121. Please hold while I note your concern.

[thesquanderer]

138. One thing I never understood...

...is why people bother to reply at all if they don't want to discuss. It's a discussion board. If you don't want to discuss, why resort to the equivalent of sticking your middle finger out the car window? Why not just move on?

(BTW, feel free to treat that as a rhetorical question.)

[roguevalley]

178. condescension is the last refuge of someone who has nothing, thesquanderer

[wavesofeuphoria]

221. Absolutely a waste!

Dropping 7-fig ads to support a candidate running against a 100% pro-choice, single payer advocate?

Not saving that $ until the general to fight against the GOP?

I honestly thought the PAC money was used to combat anti-PP efforts and anti-PP candidates.

[questionseverything]

338. one thing i have learned this primary season is

pp has plenty of money,no need for me to worry about supporting them financially

[kristopher]

214. When you put money in your pocket and other money in a wallet...

...both stashes are still your money.

[PeaceNikki]

216. You sound like the R's in Congress who grilled her about federal $ being "commingled" for abortions.

[kristopher]

220. No, I don't.

But you sound like someone clutching at straws to avoid cognitive dissonance.

[PeaceNikki]

224. Yes, you really do.

[kristopher]

294. Are you saying that those donating to the PAC won't donate that same money to the clinics?

In that case I'd be grateful if you'd tell us who the donors are so that we can understand their motives for spending money to elect Hillary.

Is it Blankfein from Goldman Sachs? I image he might not care about the health care aspect of PP while being eager to support a proHillary ad buy.
Or perhaps it's Blackstone Capital?
Or General Electric?
Or Biotechnology Industry Organization?
Maybe Qualcomm Inc?
Pharmaceutical Care Management Assn?
The National Auto Dealers Assn?
Could it be the Advanced Medical Technology Association?
Or Ameriprise Financial?
Is it Novo Nordisk Pharmaceuticals?
Or Premier Health Alliance?
It might be the Council of Insurance Agents & Brokers, don't you think?
Deutsche Bank AG?
California Medical Association?

Or any one of the dozens and dozens of special interests wanting to keep Bernie out of office while having no interest at all in the MISSION of PP?

If it isn't a special interest like those listed, then I'm comfortable maintaining the belief that the money that the PAC spent is ultimately coming out of money that would have otherwise gone to their operating budget.

[PeaceNikki]

296. Ah, move the goalposts!!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1337716

Planned Parenthood has two separate entities, one is the non-profit arm, and the other is the PP PAC.

Planned Parenthood Federation of America (and its regional counterparts) is a 501(c)(3) (a non-profit public benefit corporation). Their revenue comes from tax exempt donations, government grants, services fees, etc. They are not allowed to engage in campaigns, but can advocate on issues.

Planned Parenthood PAC (and its regional counterparts) is a "Non-Connected Political Action Committee." Their revenue is completely from taxable donations. PACs can act directly in elections, not just on issues.
Most social welfare organizations (and I use that term loosely) operate under an umbrella with a 501(c)(3), as well as a 501(c)(4) and/or an PAC. It's way easier to raise money for a (c)(3) because donations aren't taxable, but there's a lot more of a limit as to what you can do with the money. The gist is that (c)(3)s can only do 'public education on issues,' (c)(4)s can lobby, and PACs can do about anything they want, including intervening in elections. All the orgs operate under the same 'brand,' and often there is overlap in employees, but the money stays separate.

Planned Parenthood takes this separation seriously.

I suspect this important distinction will fall flat on those that choose to remain ignorant, which just highlights another point about accuracy verses misrepresentation and distortion if it doesn't fit into someone's agenda

I guess some of those critics could spam the PP Facebook page or post links to right wing anti-abortion sites to make their point. It wouldn't be the first time that has been done

[kristopher]

297. That isn't moving the goalpost nikki

I don't think you really appreciate how empty and unpersuasive your sophistry has become.

The issue is simple:
Bernie isn't the enemy of PP. He is, in fact, arguably a far better policy partner for them than Hillary would be because of his commitment to getting single payer health care implemented.

Those funds are not to attack friends of PP, they are to attack the enemies of PP.
I don't care who donated them to the PAC, in the view of the rest of the people who donate to support the the operation of PP clinics, Richards could have - if she chose - insisted that those PAC funds 1) not be spent except to defend PP from enemies or 2) be donated instead to the operation of the clinics.

That the funds were spent to attack (implicitly or directly) Bernie in the primary means that they were not spent in a way that furthers the mission of PP - again noting that going against Bernie and single payer is arguably hurting PP's mission of providing services to the poor.

Now, if you want to try and slip-slide your way around the ethical implications of what is happening here, you have at it. With the transparently dishonest nature of your arguments you are doing far more damage to PP and Hillary than any of the critics.

[PeaceNikki]

298. Nobody is saying or has said he's the enemy, kris.

Nobody at PP has or will attack your sacred St. Bernie.

Have a great day.

[kristopher]

300. Sure they are - they are attacking him to keep him out of the GE.

[shenmue]

171. The Sanders worshippers, in their minds

They picked Clinton, who is pro-choice, so in the imaginations of Sanders supporters, that is an attack on Sanders. Who has been a Democrat for a few months.

[MaggieD]

266. If you're not with Bernie, you're against him

And that is seen as an attack. Or so it seems.

[Robbins]

5. that is bullcrap

Bernie supports abortion rights for women and women's rights.

was she fighting for women's rights when she supported the gop wellfare reform her husband signed which hurt single mothers?

[workinclasszero]

6. “Hillary Clinton is the only candidate in this race who has made women’s health and rights a

...priority,” said Deirdre Schifeling, Planned Parenthood Action Fund's executive director, in a statement. “Hillary Clinton has been fighting for women and their families for her entire life.”

Thanks PP!

[BillZBubb]

9. Except we can't have SINGLE PAYER!

That stance is against poor women's health.

[w4rma]

123. Single Payer might put Planned Parenthood out of business.

Women could get their health care without having to find a PP outlet.

I'm sure that the executives of PP know this. Single payer could take away their huge salaries.

In the end, Planned Parenthood is just another corporation that is in it for the profit. Apparently, they'll attempt to torpedo single payer to protect their profit.

[zeemike]

166. Bingo

It is self interest. They and Hillary like things just the way they are thank you.

[hoosierlib]

10. They've lost my support...

Indirectly attacking one of their own...SMH

[PeaceNikki]

16. As if they had it.

[hoosierlib]

22. Yes...I donated $50 to them when my state attempted to strip funding...

Their primary endorsement is unprecedented...and not needed...both candidated are pro-choice and have supported women's healthcare

[PeaceNikki]

28. Both are TOTALLY pro-choice. One makes it a priority. Here's a detailed explanation:

Let’s be clear — when it comes to issues like birth control, abortion, and access to services at Planned Parenthood, both leading Democratic candidates for president have great records, and would make a great president. In fact, Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton are both rated 100% on Planned Parenthood Action Fund’s congressional scorecard for their perfect voting records on women’s health and rights, and have been strong defenders of Planned Parenthood.

So why did the Planned Parenthood Action Fund endorse Hillary Clinton? Because no other presidential contender in our nation’s history has demonstrated such a strong, proactive commitment to women or has such a clear and outspoken record on behalf of women’s health and rights. With so much at stake in this election, we need someone who will do more than just defend reproductive rights — we need a steadfast champion who will fight to expand them, and do so not just when it’s easy, but also when it’s hard.

Check out our chart to learn about both Sanders’ and Clinton’s records on some of the issues that are most important to reproductive rights advocates.

Chart: Hillary Clinton v. Bernie Sanders on Reproductive Health and Rights

Bottom Line: Sanders and Clinton are Both Good on Reproductive Health — But Clinton Pushes Harder

When you see their records side by side, there’s no question why the Planned Parenthood Action Fund endorsed Hillary Clinton for president. She has simply demonstrated the strongest record, clearest leadership, and most focused commitment to women’s health of any presidential candidate.

For anyone who supports Senator Sanders, know we are grateful for his strong record on reproductive rights. This endorsement doesn’t mean we’ll do anything negative about Sanders’ campaign. Instead it means that for the first time in history, we have the chance to help elect someone who’s been fighting to expand reproductive health and rights for decades to the White House, just when we need that kind of champion the most.


- See more at: https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/elections-politics/blog/how-do-hillary-clinton-and-bernie-sanders-compare-womens-health/#sthash.WLEC9zUK.dpuf

[PeaceNikki]

39. I don't believe you read it.

[hoosierlib]

47. Yeah, I read it...read it a month ago too

Doesn't change anything...no need to politically hurt an ally in the fight for women's healthcare rights...

[William769]

345. Your socks were found in the dryer.

See ya later!

[ieoeja]

46. Only one candidate is TOTALLY pro-choice.

Sanders has repeatedly stated that abortion is nobody's business but the woman and her doctor. Period. No exceptions.

Hillary has repeatedly denigrated abortion. She has repeatedly offered compromises. She has repeatedly spoken in support of limitations on abortion.

[PeaceNikki]

50. Go read the link. Look at the chart. Dispute the comparison of ACTIONS.

Or don't. Just let the hate for Clinton consume your ability to reason.

[safeinOhio]

53. I would think that nothing is more important than

Democrats win the general election for reproductive rights. They should save their $ for the general elections, unless there is some deal with HRC I don't know about.

[CTyankee]

243. I read the whole thing. It is an excellent job in preparation for the election.

They've done their homework.

I would say to all the naysers on this threqd, as long as you have politicians saying scary stuff about "legitimate rape"and other similar shit, we have to fight back at some very basic levels. And we have to have a national voice. We know how Roe has been chipped at the state level. and next is Federal foundation of Roe.

[JTFrog]

55. And that money helps men and women who need it.

It doesn't go to the PAC.

Not donating only hurts men and women who need PP services. Those donations don't go toward supporting any candidate. So I wouldn't be so quick to throw them under the bus and suggest that not donating is some kind of pay back to the PAC. It's petty, childish and vindictive.

[eShirl]

56. +1

thank you

[Beowulf]

13. Saying it doesn't make it true.

[TCJ70]

18. She prioritizes everyone's issues when she's talking to them

Remember the last town hall? She put immigration as a top priority. If everything is a priority, nothing is.

[PeaceNikki]

44. Look at the chart. This is what they mean. This is not "talk". It's action.

https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/elections-politics/blog/how-do-hillary-clinton-and-bernie-sanders-compare-womens-health/

[kristopher]

219. The Clintons, as a couple, have been more responsible for moving the US Rightward ...

... than anyone else on the ?left? that I know of.

How has their strategy of R-lite been working out for abortion rights?

[BernieforPres2016]

94. Thanks for what?

Telling a lie?

[askew]

192. And hasn't got anything to show for it. Bernie has gotten more done for women's healthcare

Than Hillary. But, they don't give a shit about that. The executive board is buddies with Hillary so they'll trash PP's reputation to smear Sanders, a great ally of PP.

[PeaceNikki]

199. weird...Click on the link, look at the chart.

Let’s be clear — when it comes to issues like birth control, abortion, and access to services at Planned Parenthood, both leading Democratic candidates for president have great records, and would make a great president. In fact, Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton are both rated 100% on Planned Parenthood Action Fund’s congressional scorecard for their perfect voting records on women’s health and rights, and have been strong defenders of Planned Parenthood.

So why did the Planned Parenthood Action Fund endorse Hillary Clinton? Because no other presidential contender in our nation’s history has demonstrated such a strong, proactive commitment to women or has such a clear and outspoken record on behalf of women’s health and rights. With so much at stake in this election, we need someone who will do more than just defend reproductive rights — we need a steadfast champion who will fight to expand them, and do so not just when it’s easy, but also when it’s hard.

Check out our chart to learn about both Sanders’ and Clinton’s records on some of the issues that are most important to reproductive rights advocates.

Chart: Hillary Clinton v. Bernie Sanders on Reproductive Health and Rights

Bottom Line: Sanders and Clinton are Both Good on Reproductive Health — But Clinton Pushes Harder

When you see their records side by side, there’s no question why the Planned Parenthood Action Fund endorsed Hillary Clinton for president. She has simply demonstrated the strongest record, clearest leadership, and most focused commitment to women’s health of any presidential candidate.

For anyone who supports Senator Sanders, know we are grateful for his strong record on reproductive rights. This endorsement doesn’t mean we’ll do anything negative about Sanders’ campaign. Instead it means that for the first time in history, we have the chance to help elect someone who’s been fighting to expand reproductive health and rights for decades to the White House, just when we need that kind of champion the most.


- See more at: https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/elections-politics/blog/how-do-hillary-clinton-and-bernie-sanders-compare-womens-health/#sthash.WLEC9zUK.dpuf

[BillZBubb]

8. The most powerful way to support women's health is SINGLE PAYER. CARE!????

But we CAN NEVER GET THAT! Oh, no we CAN'T.

PP is backing the wrong horse.

[notadmblnd]

104. No, they're not.

If we ever got single payer for everyone- Planned Parenthood would be out of business. The people who run the organization are looking out for their own best interests. They know as long as HRC runs the show- they'll always have their jobs.

[kristopher]

230. Why would they be out of business?

Local clinics are an integral and important part of the health care delivery system that single payer would reimburse.

[notadmblnd]

236. With everyone afforded health care, there wouldn't be a need for facilities for those who now can't

seek medical attention through normal channels because of their lack of income.

Planned Parenthood, does provide women's health services to low income and the uninsured, does it not?

[kristopher]

295. Others in this thread have explained why your understanding is inaccurate.

Please read on.

[bigbrother05]

248. Single payer doesn't pick the providers. PP should be able to compete with any local clinic.

They often are the only ones with the resources to provide service in isolated, underserved areas. PP's challenge will remain the same, fighting off the RW attempts to restrict access to women's health care under the guise of being anti-abortion.

While I might wish they had remained neutral in the primary, these sound like pro Hillary ads, not anti Bernie ads.

That they chose a strong woman to represent a woman's cause is not too surprising. As long as they willingly admit that Bernie is their friend too, their choice is just that and aren't we all pro-choice?

[liberal_at_heart]

163. Yes, with their bad leadership and partisan politics I think I will send my PP donation to

Bernie and other politicians who support single payer from now on. Getting politicians who support single payer elected is a great way to support women's health.

[Wilms]

11. So they're spending money AGAINST someone who fights for Democrats.

Who do they think they are? The DNC?

[PeaceNikki]

14. No, they're spending money supporting a Democrat who has made women's health a priority.

[hoosierlib]

25. And indirectly attacking another...

[Wilms]

26. By getting in the way of Single-Payer.

I ain't buying it.

[PeaceNikki]

12. Thank you, Planned Parenthood!!

[LexVegas]

15. Shameless women. Strongly supporting a female candidate. What the fuck are they thinking? nt

[workinclasszero]

23. IKR?

Only in Bizarro World is this a problem. SMH

[panader0]

19. Who pays for that ad?

[Le Taz Hot]

20. Link?

[hoosierlib]

29. Added as requested

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/270715-planned-parenthood-unfurls-seven-figure-clinton-ad-buy

[Le Taz Hot]

42. Thank you!

[jwirr]

217. This is not smart of them to do this. In past years I would

look through my email and consider donating to some of the many Democratic ads. This election I am more selective. I do not intend to donate to anything this year that does not support Bernie and candidates who are obviously progressive.

If PP thinks we donated to them so they can put out ads for Hillary they have a think coming. We donate to them for the service they provide not to side with one candidate or the other.

So unless I find out this story is not true - PP is off my list until after the election is over.

[PeaceNikki]

223. Did you donate to PPFA or PPAF?

Funds donated to PPFA are not used to "put out ads for Hillary". Funds donated to PPAF are not used to provide services - that is the political arm.

Here's their full statement:

Let’s be clear — when it comes to issues like birth control, abortion, and access to services at Planned Parenthood, both leading Democratic candidates for president have great records, and would make a great president. In fact, Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton are both rated 100% on Planned Parenthood Action Fund’s congressional scorecard for their perfect voting records on women’s health and rights, and have been strong defenders of Planned Parenthood.

So why did the Planned Parenthood Action Fund endorse Hillary Clinton? Because no other presidential contender in our nation’s history has demonstrated such a strong, proactive commitment to women or has such a clear and outspoken record on behalf of women’s health and rights. With so much at stake in this election, we need someone who will do more than just defend reproductive rights — we need a steadfast champion who will fight to expand them, and do so not just when it’s easy, but also when it’s hard.

Check out our chart to learn about both Sanders’ and Clinton’s records on some of the issues that are most important to reproductive rights advocates.

Chart: Hillary Clinton v. Bernie Sanders on Reproductive Health and Rights

Bottom Line: Sanders and Clinton are Both Good on Reproductive Health — But Clinton Pushes Harder

When you see their records side by side, there’s no question why the Planned Parenthood Action Fund endorsed Hillary Clinton for president. She has simply demonstrated the strongest record, clearest leadership, and most focused commitment to women’s health of any presidential candidate.

For anyone who supports Senator Sanders, know we are grateful for his strong record on reproductive rights. This endorsement doesn’t mean we’ll do anything negative about Sanders’ campaign. Instead it means that for the first time in history, we have the chance to help elect someone who’s been fighting to expand reproductive health and rights for decades to the White House, just when we need that kind of champion the most.


- See more at: https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/elections-politics/blog/how-do-hillary-clinton-and-bernie-sanders-compare-womens-health/#sthash.WLEC9zUK.dpuf

Click on the link, look at the chart.

[kristopher]

234. What a patently obvious piece of sophistry you're attempting.

Where did I put that $5 bill, my left pocket or my right pocket?

[PeaceNikki]

240. You sound like the R's in Congress who grilled her about federal $ being "commingled" for abortions.

It's worth repeating because you really do.

[kristopher]

299. Your end of the communications process is broken

You are hearing only what you want to hear, not what is being said.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1338284

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1337308

[PeaceNikki]

301. Back atcha. I am done. The author of this OP is flagged for review.

And I hope admins are reviewing his alerts, hides and the alert on the nasty PM he sent me.

I have said my piece, you've said yours, have a great day.

[gordianot]

24. Remember this next time Planned Parenthood wants a donation.

I am a life long Democrat, although I favor Sanders in the Primary I would vote for Hillary. Right now the there is no amount of publicity or campaign spin bought by money that would compel me to think better of Hillary Clinton. For the first time in 44 years I may be compelled to vote for someone other than the Democratic candidate for President. Planned Parenthood will never get another cent from me.

[leftofcool]

30. No problem, the rest of us will just triple our donations.

Most Democrats will always give so that women can get breast cancer screenings for free, no matter who the organization supports.

[nichomachus]

40. But if they can spend millions on campaign donations, why do they need donations from us?

They can just divert the money from supporting politicians to breast cancer screening. Right now, if I give them money, it will go to support a candidate I think is unfit. I'm not going to waste money like that.

It's like someone asking you to give them money for medical care while they're losing money at the casino every day.

Huge bad move for PP.

[JTFrog]

70. If you aren't donating to the PAC then your money isn't going toward supporting any candidate.

I wish people would at least look for the facts before launching into misleading attacks on an organization that is vital to men and women who can't otherwise get those vital services.

[PeaceNikki]

34. That's petty. I will send them MORE.

Which is what I do every time the right fucks with them. This is worse than them doing it.

I'm not a fair weather, when shit is going my way supporter. Either I'm in or I'm out. Fuck that. I'm not one them...

[LexVegas]

43. Can you believe some of this shit? nt

[PeaceNikki]

45. Yes. They've shown they are petty, vindictive, selfish people.

[JTFrog]

72. Have you ever donated directly to their PAC?

No?

Didn't think so. So you're money has only helped men and women who needed it.

If you want to believe some misleading bullshit about an organization that provides vital services to men and women, that's one thing. But attempts to continue the spread of this misleading bullshit will not go unchecked.

[Beowulf]

27. What a risky move!

What GOP politician won't say, "if PP has millions to spend in a primary election, why do they need federal money?" It doesn't matter that the political side of PP is separate from the care side. To the lay person it's all PP.

[hoosierlib]

35. Exactly...they are just asking to get attacked by the right

[brooklynite]

37. And apparently, it's all PP to some Sanders supporters...

[Beowulf]

62. What an odd response!

There's not a dollop of difference between Hillary and Bernie on women's health issues. If the issues are what matters, why pick a side now? As a Clinton supporter who should know how important the visuals are. On issues of women's health, I and other Bernie supporters are not your adversary. But treat us like one....

How does this move advance the cause of women's health? Alienate a portion of your supporters and provide ammunition to your true adversaries.

[PeaceNikki]

65. There is, though.PP went into great detail about it.

Let’s be clear — when it comes to issues like birth control, abortion, and access to services at Planned Parenthood, both leading Democratic candidates for president have great records, and would make a great president. In fact, Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton are both rated 100% on Planned Parenthood Action Fund’s congressional scorecard for their perfect voting records on women’s health and rights, and have been strong defenders of Planned Parenthood.

So why did the Planned Parenthood Action Fund endorse Hillary Clinton? Because no other presidential contender in our nation’s history has demonstrated such a strong, proactive commitment to women or has such a clear and outspoken record on behalf of women’s health and rights. With so much at stake in this election, we need someone who will do more than just defend reproductive rights — we need a steadfast champion who will fight to expand them, and do so not just when it’s easy, but also when it’s hard.

Check out our chart to learn about both Sanders’ and Clinton’s records on some of the issues that are most important to reproductive rights advocates.

Chart: Hillary Clinton v. Bernie Sanders on Reproductive Health and Rights

Bottom Line: Sanders and Clinton are Both Good on Reproductive Health — But Clinton Pushes Harder

When you see their records side by side, there’s no question why the Planned Parenthood Action Fund endorsed Hillary Clinton for president. She has simply demonstrated the strongest record, clearest leadership, and most focused commitment to women’s health of any presidential candidate.

For anyone who supports Senator Sanders, know we are grateful for his strong record on reproductive rights. This endorsement doesn’t mean we’ll do anything negative about Sanders’ campaign. Instead it means that for the first time in history, we have the chance to help elect someone who’s been fighting to expand reproductive health and rights for decades to the White House, just when we need that kind of champion the most.


- See more at: https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/elections-politics/blog/how-do-hillary-clinton-and-bernie-sanders-compare-womens-health/#sthash.WLEC9zUK.dpuf

Click on the link, look at the chart.

[Beowulf]

87. That's the difference?

Clinton pushes harder. Why am I hearing echoes of "not good enough, Bernie"?

And PP isn't going negative on Bernie? My god! Well, keep it up! I'm sure being pragmatists who get things done, you've got a winning strategy.

[PeaceNikki]

90. Because you're looking for negativity? Because you're bitter that it's not "your" candidate they

are endorsing?

[Beowulf]

111. No, I'm bitter they endorsed. As I stated

it's a risky move. And I still don't see an upside for doing it. The risks would be the same if they had endorsed Bernie. This is an issue you should be building coalitions, not driving away supporters. What if PP asked all candidates for a pledge? That would have invited people to join them. And PP could have taken on the GOP with a united party. Instead they picked a side and they really didn't need to, not at this point, not if the issue is paramount.

[PeaceNikki]

114. Did you read their statement about it? It was pretty clear.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1335923

[Beowulf]

126. Yes, I read it. Don't insult me.

PP had a win-win situation. Two candidates with their highest rating. I understand the leadership could feel more comfortable with Hillary and think she would fight harder, but I think that's as much conjecture as anything.

I have daughters and granddaughters. I've worked for the welfare of children for over 40 years. This matters to me and I'm shocked PP would risk so much at this point in the process for such little potential gain.

[PeaceNikki]

130. Risk pissing off Sanders supporters who are turning into petty children about it?

I am sure Cecile Richards is shakin' in her boots.

[Beowulf]

143. Apparently you are the one who didn't read.

I said quite clearly that PP shouldn't have endorsed anyone. It's a risky move that anyone should be able to see could cost it support. Calling Sanders supporters children is so helpful to building coalitions to protect and advance women's health issues. Again, we are not the enemy. Stop treating us like we are.

Is any political candidate worth the risks PP is taking? PP and Hillary are now inseparable. If she goes down either in the primary or the general, PP is fucked.

[PeaceNikki]

144. I'm certainly not calling all Sanders supporters children. Just those who say they're not donating

to PPFA anymore because of this.

I know most aren't that petty. Sanders would be ashamed of that stance.

[Beowulf]

162. I don't think it's as petty as you do.

Yes, it's spiteful, but why would PP expect a different reaction? If you are going to endorse the candidate of one faction of your support, why wouldn't the other faction feel not appreciated, that their candidate and their support aren't good enough for PP? Anyone should have seen that coming. Richards and the leadership could have endorsed as individuals. I doubt many would feel as negative as they do now. But the leadership chose to put the reputation of PP on the line for one specific candidate. All that's going to do is confirm what the Right already suspects and create resentment among a chunk of its support. If PP felt Bernie could be working harder on his issues, then meet with the campaign and help it understand. Instead of building a coalition, PP chose a side.

[thesquanderer]

117. And yet, she's the only one of the two who has said she could compromise on abortion

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511316086

Bernie also supports Gillebrand's paid family leave bill. Hillary supports the goal, but is against the bill because she doesn't like how it is paid for... but she offers no specific alternative for how should would pay for her own version. Instead she offers a "unicorn" version that talks only about the benefit, but not specifically how to finance it.

I agree, both candidates are strong for women, but you can find things to give either candidate that little extra edge.

[PeaceNikki]

119. I believe that clip was blown way out of proportion.

Cecile Richards and Ilyse Hogue are not fools. They know HRC much better than you do.

[questionseverything]

340. abortion is a decision for the woman and no one else

once hc goes down the slippery slope of compromise, there will be no turning back

[PeaceNikki]

341. She didn't go down the slope.

And I trust she won't. So do Cecile, Ilyse and all of my greatest heroes in the abortion rights movement.

I criticized the hell out of the "safe, legal, rare" phrase. The party removed it from the platform and she seems to have stopped using it recently. And that's good. That was far more harmful than that dumb clip being posted here.

Abortion rights are my passion. You don't need to shake your finger at me. I know of slippery slopes and who's decision it is.

[Thinkingabout]

160. Sounds just like the Republicans who want to defund PP, they don't realize there is more to

PP than abortions.

[ladjf]

33. Tell me what has Clinton done for planned parenthood? nt

[hoosierlib]

38. She was born with a uterus...

[ladjf]

48. Come on. Get serious. I really want to know if Hillary has done any more for Planned Parenthood

than Bernie. And if so, how?

[leftofcool]

41. Thank you Planned Parenthood and thanks for all you do for women

You will always have my money and my support no matter which candidate you support.

[workinclasszero]

59. Before I met my wife she and her child were in pretty dire straits

The ONLY PLACE she could get health care was PP.

They help the poor everyday, not just spew hot air about it!

[leftofcool]

81. +1

[JTFrog]

75. + infinity n/t

[bbgrunt]

51. one begins to wonder what they even

need government funding for if they have resources to inject in a primary.

[Avalux]

52. No more donations from me. I donate to help with SERVICES, not to help Hillary win. n/t

[eShirl]

54. I think this will discourage donations

People won't realize it's the Planned Parenthood PAC (or whatever) money going toward this. They'll think their donations to the main Planned Parenthood organization are funding political attack ads.

IMHO it would have been better if they had waited until after the primary is all settled.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

155. Yup.

You can see it in this thread. Lots of folks assuming the money is fungible, and that money that should be going to provide healthcare is instead being used to elevate one pro-choice candidate over another pro-choice candidate.

[PeaceNikki]

157. Um, no. They are totally separate organizations. PPFA and PPAF.

Any person who is truly a strong supporter of PP knows this.

[TM99]

273. What is it y'all Clinton supporters always say?

It is optics and perception?

Yes, it is. And this is bad optics. You don't spend 7 figures on a fucking ad to attack another pro-choice 100% endorsed Democrat during the primary. You save that fucking money for attack ads against Trump, Cruz, or Rubio who are anti-choice.

And the perception that is being given is that if PP has 7 figures to spend on ads, well they don't need Federal funding. It doesn't matter that this is a PAC. The facts don't matter. It is how it looks.

PP has for 100 years avoided getting into party politics on the left. They have studiously avoided endorsements during the primary and then threw their weight behind the obviously best candidate (from the left) during the general election.

They have shot themselves in the face. The optics suck. The perceptions are horrible. They are splitting their own base of supporters. In a desire to help Clinton win against any and all challengers, they have made a serious long term mistake.

Talk about being penny smart, and fucking pound foolish!

[PeaceNikki]

275. Please show me where they have attacked Sanders. They have not and will not.

Let’s be clear — when it comes to issues like birth control, abortion, and access to services at Planned Parenthood, both leading Democratic candidates for president have great records, and would make a great president. In fact, Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton are both rated 100% on Planned Parenthood Action Fund’s congressional scorecard for their perfect voting records on women’s health and rights, and have been strong defenders of Planned Parenthood.

So why did the Planned Parenthood Action Fund endorse Hillary Clinton? Because no other presidential contender in our nation’s history has demonstrated such a strong, proactive commitment to women or has such a clear and outspoken record on behalf of women’s health and rights. With so much at stake in this election, we need someone who will do more than just defend reproductive rights — we need a steadfast champion who will fight to expand them, and do so not just when it’s easy, but also when it’s hard.

Check out our chart to learn about both Sanders’ and Clinton’s records on some of the issues that are most important to reproductive rights advocates.

Chart: Hillary Clinton v. Bernie Sanders on Reproductive Health and Rights

Bottom Line: Sanders and Clinton are Both Good on Reproductive Health — But Clinton Pushes Harder

When you see their records side by side, there’s no question why the Planned Parenthood Action Fund endorsed Hillary Clinton for president. She has simply demonstrated the strongest record, clearest leadership, and most focused commitment to women’s health of any presidential candidate.

For anyone who supports Senator Sanders, know we are grateful for his strong record on reproductive rights. This endorsement doesn’t mean we’ll do anything negative about Sanders’ campaign. Instead it means that for the first time in history, we have the chance to help elect someone who’s been fighting to expand reproductive health and rights for decades to the White House, just when we need that kind of champion the most.


- See more at: https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/elections-politics/blog/how-do-hillary-clinton-and-bernie-sanders-compare-womens-health/#sthash.WLEC9zUK.dpuf

And, despite your insistence that they don't. Facts do matter.

[TM99]

277. Come on!

You keep posting this over and over again yet aren't paying attention.

They are taking out a seven fucking figure ad against Sanders in the primary. THAT will be the 'attack' as they try to support Clinton.

Stop deflecting from this reality here and now with some fluff blog piece about why they broke a 100 year non-endorsement record by going all in for Clinton now.

We have all read this, you know!

[PeaceNikki]

282. They didn't. And they won't be attacking him. That's the reality.

That's not deflection, it's a fact. They are lifting her up, not knocking him down. Some people here could take a fucking lesson from them on how to be adults.

[TM99]

284. Are you naive?!

Political ads that 'lift up' one candidate are by their very nature 'pushing down' the other one. Clinton is better than Sanders is the secondary message, when in actuality, the only difference between them is she is OK with some abortion restrictions apparently.

We are the adults. We see the future risks of these choices. We see the potential negative consequences. We are seeing how the GOP is going to use this in the GE.

[PeaceNikki]

286. Nope.

[TM99]

288. Apparently yes, you are.

Such a pithy return. It almost sounded like an adult reply.

[PeaceNikki]

291. lol

[kristopher]

309. +1

[liberal_at_heart]

159. PACs are just a way for people and organizations to do their dirty work and yet keep their

hands clean.

[jwirr]

237. I am one of those people who do not think there is a whole

lot of space between a PAC and the organization they represent.

But what I really agree with in your post is the last line. We the people have had so many establishment officials and groups walk right over us regardless of what we think or want that this is just another in a long line that takes the power of the people out of our hands.

[JTFrog]

57. Locked out of your own thread? These attacks on PP are pathetic.

And all the people saying they are going to withhold their donations are being just as mislead as those who wanted to shut down PP because of O'keefe's videos. It's the same tactics.

Donations to PP do not go to the PAC. They do not go toward supporting any candidate. The money goes toward services provided to men and women who couldn't get the services otherwise.

[PeaceNikki]

61. He just sent me a nasty PM. I alerted on it.

[JTFrog]

66. Not surprised.

I hope the admins do something about it.

These attacks are pathetic and I can't imagine they come from any real liberal or Democrat.

[OilemFirchen]

79. He's Flagged for Review. (n/t)

[PeaceNikki]

80. He should be fucking banned.

[OilemFirchen]

84. Months ago, IMO.

I expect the Admins will give the matter careful consideration.

[leftofcool]

105. He should be after all the uterus posts!

[LexVegas]

110. Its a joke....

She was born with a uterus...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1335757

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

YOUR COMMENTS

Blatant sexism.

JURY RESULTS

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Thu Feb 25, 2016, 11:39 AM, and voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT ALONE.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: FACT. LEAVE IT.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: It is rude, sexist, disruptive, insensitive, over-the-top, and totally inappropriate. It is intended to smear Hillary Clinton for unjustified reasons.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I agree with the alerter.

[DCBob]

107. Good.

He should be banned for some of the crap he has posted here.

[sarge43]

148. Then PP can put that seven figure amount into services

PP should not be supporting any candidate.

[HooptieWagon]

58. I guess all lower income women have all the healthcare they need.

Mission accomplished. PP no longer needs donations.

[kstewart33]

60. Good to know. Thanks for posting nt

[stonecutter357]

63. Are you a true Bernie supporter ?

[Betty Karlson]

64. Is that where our donations go?

So much for women's health... F*cking establishment cons.

[PeaceNikki]

67. Um, no. They are totally separate organizations. PPFA and PPAF.

The political arm is the one campaigning for a strong advocate of women. Your donations to PPFA don't go towards that.

[JTFrog]

74. Nope. But that won't stop the spreading of misleading information on a Democratic website. n/t

[elehhhhna]

69. why not save the $ for the GE? wtf?

[kracer20]

179. My thoughts exactly

[FlatBaroque]

73. It will backfire for them and for the CLinton's. /

[Betty Karlson]

77. Overplaying their hands seems to happen to a lot of those establishment supporters of Clinton's. eom

[Major Nikon]

82. Results...

On Thu Feb 25, 2016, 11:35 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Planned Parenthood launching seven-figure pro-Clinton ad buy
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511335534

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Attacking Planned Parenthood is completely beyond the pale and it's really getting sick to continually read these attacks here at DU. None of the pac money these people raise comes from donations to Planned Parenthood and this kind of crap is only being posted to get people to stop supporting Planned Parenthood. It's bullshit and it's completely inappropriate for DU.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Feb 25, 2016, 11:44 AM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Please stop complaining about innocuous posts. Eventually you'll have to learn that there are people who do not agree with you on everything. You'll get over it.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This is hardly an "attack." Nor do I agree that the PP ads are an "attack", though I am disappointed to see PP taking sides in the Dem primary when their money would be better spent attacking the Republicans and their ridiculous "investigation." Both Hillary and Berne will be good for PP If elected.

Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Series?
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: using PP's own words is attacking them? just like using Hillary's own words is attacking her? victim complex abound!!!
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This kind of alert is a sign of someone coming unhinged. Why would Planned Parenthood try to diminish Bernie Sanders?
At this point he is the only one they can be talking about. And he has supported them 100%. And for someone to call this an attack on Planned Parenthood like all the others is insane.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

[riversedge]

83. time for me to kick in a few dollars. Thank you PP

[Kentonio]

86. Cecile Richards must have anticipated this kind of backlash, unless she's completely naive.

So why do it? Why pick a side in a fight between two groups of people who both completely support you? People keep talking about how unfair it is on the women who will suffer if donations are withheld, but did Cecile Richards not have any obligation to those same women to not risk their healthcare by splitting their support base like this?

[PeaceNikki]

93. lol, yeah, a handful of bitter people on the internet...

who were probably not supporting them in any meaningful way anyway are now going to "withhold" their alleged donations because they don't understand the difference between PPAF/PPFA or don't care.

I am sure Cecile is shakin' in her boots.

[Kentonio]

96. It was a large backlash, not a 'handful of people on the internet'

And it was completely avoidable. Interesting to see your faux outrage is so selective though.

[PeaceNikki]

98. I would say the same to you abour "faux outrage" !!

[Kentonio]

133. I made my opinion very clear the day the story broke

And it had not a thing to do with the particular candidate.

[PeaceNikki]

136. Neat. Please hold while I note your concern.

[workinclasszero]

97. No doubt

[UglyGreed]

91. Hillary and Planned Parenthood should

make it clear that this is PAC and that the organization has stayed neural. If not then the PAC is to blame for any backlash the organization receives. And those who say they will donate more I hope you are willing to pay a little more taxes if Bernie wins to help all people access proper healthcare. Many are still suffering including myself and I will not be silent about it any longer......

[PeaceNikki]

95. It's pretty clear.

[UglyGreed]

99. Hillary did not make that clear

at all when she said planned parenthood endorsed her SMH!!!!

[PeaceNikki]

102. Anyone who is even a LITTLE active/interested in the topic should know that.

[UglyGreed]

106. LOL

most people are working many many hours struggling to survive and do not have the "luxury" to sit on a PC all day like myself but you knew that already.......

[PeaceNikki]

109. I suspect you have the "luxury" to read the first few words of the OP to which you replied. No?

[UglyGreed]

112. That has nothing to do with

Hillary's statement at the Town Hall where many, many people only hear that little soundbite and accept it as a fact.........

[UglyGreed]

101. BTW my girlfriend and now

wife used planned parenthood when we were younger......

[BernieforPres2016]

92. What a load

“Hillary Clinton is the only candidate in this race who has made women’s health and rights a priority,” said Deirdre Schifeling, Planned Parenthood Action Fund's executive director"

I've seen 4 or 5 of Bernie's stump speeches in the last week, one in person and the others online. In every one of them, he has talked about how Republicans want to cut all funding to Planned Parenthood and he wants to INCREASE funding to Planned Parenthood.

Given that, and knowing the Republicans are coming after them, why would PP throw more fuel on the fire by spending millions on ads for Hillary Clinton against another candidate who is an advocate for them?

[kracer20]

188. Good question, but I think I know why...

Seems every time the "Establishment" takes a crap on Sanders, it only makes him stronger and sends more donations his way. I'd bet Planned Parenthood is thinking that their best shot at a Democrat winning in November is Bernie. They are just supporting him in a round a bout way.

[Alfresco]

100. Great News! Thanks Planned Parenthood.

[ismnotwasm]

103. Thank you Planned Parenthood

For saving my life. Time for another donation.

[sheshe2]

129. ***

[TexasMommaWithAHat]

108. They could use that money against anti-choice candidates

Bad, bad move.

[madfloridian]

113. Since they became a partisan political group they don't need my donations.

I will never understand why they did this. They are a medical care group for women.

[PeaceNikki]

122. Um they are totally separate organizations. PPFA and PPAF.

This is the political arm of Planned Parenthood so political action is their entire reason to exist. I thought Democrats would understand this very basic fact.

[madfloridian]

132. Go to the PAC website. Cecile Richards and one other lady are IT. They are only names on PAC

That makes the 2 synonymous in my mind.

[PeaceNikki]

137. k. It's like the Republicans in Congress who grilled her about federal $ being "commingled" for

abortions.

[Tarc]

124. "Planned Parenthood backed someone other than my candidate!"

[madfloridian]

134. No, not true.

They should have stayed out of the political games. They are there for women's health.

[Tarc]

139. And they picked the candidate who they felt is the best one to advance that

[Vinca]

125. Surprising given her recent comments on abortion.

[Prism]

127. PP shit the bed

And if you have the gall to say, "Hey, what's that smell?" you're a horrible person and don't support women.

Is there literally any cause that remains untainted by the drive for Hillary Clinton's ego?

Someone just give her a damn trophy already so we can go back to being sane liberals.

[TTUBatfan2008]

140. The only candidate?

That seems like a misleading statement. Maybe if it was a general election that would be true. Bernie has a 100% voting record on women's issues and he has been a lot more supportive of gay women's rights than Hillary was up until very, very recently.

[MisterP]

201. same with the Human Rights Campaign and League of Conservation Voters numbers

[liberal_at_heart]

141. Bad leadership. This will lose them a lot of political support and donations and with the

Republicans trying everyday to defund them they can use all the allies they can get. They should have stayed neutral.

[stupidicus]

142. well, there goes likely thousands from me and mine

and likely the same from thousands more.

3rdwayers have the political acumen and foresight of an earthworm, and integrity to match....

[leftofcool]

164. No problem, hubby and I will make up the difference.

Let us know how many thousands you intended to send to PP and I will do it for you, and add mine on top.

[PeaceNikki]

180. .

[wavesofeuphoria]

239. Cool. Add another $2000 to your donation.

[kristopher]

258. Tell you what...

Post your address and I'll create a webpage for all the past donors who plan to pull their support to send you information about the amount lost. You can then fill in for all of us. When it happens, I'll also extend the page with an analysis of the amount of state and federal funding that this move costs PP so that you can write a check for that also.

[stupidicus]

318. indeed, the poor thing stepped in it

lol

[TM99]

274. So you are wealthy enough to

fully fund PP for exactly how long?

And if you are and care that much about women, children, and families, have you donated this extra previously? Or is it just a little 'look at me, I am wealthy' game right now?

[PeaceNikki]

276. Most regular PP donors aren't that petulant

[TM99]

278. I didn't ask you the question.

And this is not the answer to the question.

[PeaceNikki]

279. TFB

[TM99]

283. Don't have the guts

to say it without a slang internet term? Are you fearing the hide?

You weren't asked. Period.

[PeaceNikki]

285. This is a discussion board. I don't need your permission to post in a thread. You are free to

ignore me.

[TM99]

287. I am also free to dismiss you as well.

I am also free to tell you that I didn't ask you the question.

I am also free to push back against any bullshit I see too.

Feel free to put me on Ignore.

[PeaceNikki]

289. Amen.

[stupidicus]

319. yep, likely some of that "1%er", looking out for their own stuff

too funny

[stupidicus]

315. what an insulting and asinine suggestion

while you may be accustomed to undermining yourself, it's pretty silly and unreasonable to expect others to follow your less than admirable example.

[moondust]

145. How about some refunds?

I doubt many have donated to PP expecting their money to be used for partisan political ads.

Poor leadership IMO. Back when Cecile Richards openly endorsed Hillary and campaigned for her on the ground in Iowa I had to wonder if she might be playing for a political job in a Hillary administration; her pathway into politics like her mother. Should have stayed neutral.

[PeaceNikki]

149. Um, no. They are totally separate organizations. PPFA and PPAF.

[moondust]

153. Right.

[PeaceNikki]

154. You sound like the R's in Congress who grilled her about federal $ being "commingled" for abortions.

[moondust]

158. Right.

[obamanut2012]

226. They are -- laughing doesn't change that fact

PP and the PAC are two totally different organizations and "money" organizations.

You can disagree with the endorsement, but not one cent is coming from PP donations. NOT ONE CENT.

[SoapBox]

146. The Elites can spend all they want.

The VOTERS will select the nominee.

Too bad for Planned Parenthood users.

[Gothmog]

147. It is time for me to give PP some more money

[Cryptoad]

150. Does this mean...

that u Bernbots are now antiabortionist?

Are yall going to start posting pics of little dead fetuses

I just donated more $ to pph!

[Beowulf]

182. No, it means

PP is spurning a portion of it supporters for a questionable advantage. PP needs all the friends it can muster, but instead choses to alienate a chunk of its supporters. PP shouldn't have endorsed anyone. There are two candidates who have earned its highest rating. choosing one over the other was a really stupid political move. PP is a cause Hillary and Bernie supporters should be uniting on. PP had a win-win situation, but instead they chose a side.

[great white snark]

151. Thank you Planned Parenthood and don't be dissuaded by confused or vindictive Sanders' supporters.

You get my support regardless.

[Beacool]

152. Good.......I guess they didn't like being called part of the establishment.

[SidDithers]

156. Good...

PP is a fantastic organization, and they're supporting the correct candidate.

Sid

[AzDar]

161. Sad. So many icons and institutions crashing/burning needlessly and stupidly against Mt. Clinton...

[HooptieWagon]

165. She doesn't want to get her hands dirty...

...so she sends her surrogates out to do her smears and dirty work. Naturally, they catch all the flak...that is by her design. Hopefully they were well-paid enough to be worth losing their legacies and integrity for.

[liberal_at_heart]

167. yet another example of leaders caring more about power and money than about

the people they are supposed to be helping.

[Gene Debs]

169. You know why Planned Parenthood has thrown in their lot with Hillary Clinton?

I would bet that it's something to do with the fact that, if Sanders were to win the nomination and the General election, and if his plan for a national, single-payer, Medicare-for-all system could actually be implemented, Planned Parenthood would become redundant and unnecessary, since all of its services would then be covered under the national health care system.

You know what would also go away? Planned Parenthood executives' six-figure salaries. THAT's what they're protecting.

[mmonk]

174. I personally find it offensive to pretend the other

Democratic candidate does not support abortion rights by inference.

[PeaceNikki]

175. Did you read their statement about it?

Let’s be clear — when it comes to issues like birth control, abortion, and access to services at Planned Parenthood, both leading Democratic candidates for president have great records, and would make a great president. In fact, Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton are both rated 100% on Planned Parenthood Action Fund’s congressional scorecard for their perfect voting records on women’s health and rights, and have been strong defenders of Planned Parenthood.

So why did the Planned Parenthood Action Fund endorse Hillary Clinton? Because no other presidential contender in our nation’s history has demonstrated such a strong, proactive commitment to women or has such a clear and outspoken record on behalf of women’s health and rights. With so much at stake in this election, we need someone who will do more than just defend reproductive rights — we need a steadfast champion who will fight to expand them, and do so not just when it’s easy, but also when it’s hard.

Check out our chart to learn about both Sanders’ and Clinton’s records on some of the issues that are most important to reproductive rights advocates.

Chart: Hillary Clinton v. Bernie Sanders on Reproductive Health and Rights

Bottom Line: Sanders and Clinton are Both Good on Reproductive Health — But Clinton Pushes Harder

When you see their records side by side, there’s no question why the Planned Parenthood Action Fund endorsed Hillary Clinton for president. She has simply demonstrated the strongest record, clearest leadership, and most focused commitment to women’s health of any presidential candidate.

For anyone who supports Senator Sanders, know we are grateful for his strong record on reproductive rights. This endorsement doesn’t mean we’ll do anything negative about Sanders’ campaign. Instead it means that for the first time in history, we have the chance to help elect someone who’s been fighting to expand reproductive health and rights for decades to the White House, just when we need that kind of champion the most.


- See more at: https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/elections-politics/blog/how-do-hillary-clinton-and-bernie-sanders-compare-womens-health/#sthash.WLEC9zUK.dpuf

Click on the link, look at the chart.

[bettyellen]

257. No, it is just that she has worked harder on healthcare for women and infants.

She has been a stauncher advocate, and it matters.

[lark]

181. Disagree. To be pro-HRC isn't to be anti-Bernie.

They don't say one negative thing about Bernie but because they don't praise him you take this as an attack. I'm a Bernie supporter, but I've got to tell you I'm really tired of the HRC hate. Bernie doesn't hate her, why should we? Hate Trump, Cruz, Rubio, they've earned it 1,000,000 times over. Work for Bernie's nomination, absolutely, donate to him - of course, but why do you demonize his opponent worse than you do the real villains? Why demonize PP (a totally wonderful organization, BTW) just because they are supporting her with positive uplifting ads? I could see your point if they said even one thing bad about him, but NO they didn't.

[PeaceNikki]

186. Thank you for being a voice of reason!

Sanders would be ASHAMED of the way some people in here are claiming to withhold donations to PPFA because they are supporting HRC.

[lark]

194. Thank you.

I totally agree. Bernie still supports PP and so do I.

[liberal_at_heart]

187. “Hillary Clinton is the only candidate in this race who has made women’s health and rights a

priority,” said Deirdre Schifeling.

[lark]

190. Still not a slam on Bernie at all.

Notice the word - "priority". They didn't say she's the only one that supports this.

[liberal_at_heart]

195. Give me a break. I'm not buying that crap.

[lark]

196. Hate sees only hate.

[liberal_at_heart]

197. Good bye. You are going on my ignore list.

[lark]

323. YAY, good news.

Wish the poster would also block his/her hate.

[mikehiggins]

307. notice the word - "only"

Do we have to have another debate about the meaning of the word "is"?

If two people are running and a group says "only" one of them do some specific thing that is considered good, you suggest they aren't saying the other person is not as good?

Interesting.

[lark]

343. No, not talking about "is", lol.

You are focusing on the word "only", while I focus on the word "priority". Bernie does not make this the priority that HRC does. Now, is Bernie totally fine policy wise in this area, yes, and I do absolutely trust him to protect my daughter's reproductive choices! But it's not one of his major talking points while it is Hillary's.

[PeaceNikki]

191. Here's the full statement

Let’s be clear — when it comes to issues like birth control, abortion, and access to services at Planned Parenthood, both leading Democratic candidates for president have great records, and would make a great president. In fact, Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton are both rated 100% on Planned Parenthood Action Fund’s congressional scorecard for their perfect voting records on women’s health and rights, and have been strong defenders of Planned Parenthood.

So why did the Planned Parenthood Action Fund endorse Hillary Clinton? Because no other presidential contender in our nation’s history has demonstrated such a strong, proactive commitment to women or has such a clear and outspoken record on behalf of women’s health and rights. With so much at stake in this election, we need someone who will do more than just defend reproductive rights — we need a steadfast champion who will fight to expand them, and do so not just when it’s easy, but also when it’s hard.

Check out our chart to learn about both Sanders’ and Clinton’s records on some of the issues that are most important to reproductive rights advocates.

Chart: Hillary Clinton v. Bernie Sanders on Reproductive Health and Rights

Bottom Line: Sanders and Clinton are Both Good on Reproductive Health — But Clinton Pushes Harder

When you see their records side by side, there’s no question why the Planned Parenthood Action Fund endorsed Hillary Clinton for president. She has simply demonstrated the strongest record, clearest leadership, and most focused commitment to women’s health of any presidential candidate.

For anyone who supports Senator Sanders, know we are grateful for his strong record on reproductive rights. This endorsement doesn’t mean we’ll do anything negative about Sanders’ campaign. Instead it means that for the first time in history, we have the chance to help elect someone who’s been fighting to expand reproductive health and rights for decades to the White House, just when we need that kind of champion the most.


- See more at: https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/elections-politics/blog/how-do-hillary-clinton-and-bernie-sanders-compare-womens-health/#sthash.WLEC9zUK.dpuf

Click on the link, look at the chart.

[That Guy 888]

183. Wow is that a colossal mistake, they should save the buys for the general.

Especially if they think

Bottom Line: Sanders and Clinton are Both Good on Reproductive Health

[askew]

185. This really angers me as someone who has given money to them in the past.

They are engaging in an all out attack against a candidate who has a 100% NARAL/PP record because they are pals with Hillary.

It is just shocking.

[PeaceNikki]

189. Did you donate to PPFA or PPAF? Also, where have you seen any "all out attack against" BS?

[askew]

198. When you spend 7 figures saying Hillary is the 1 candidate who has made women's healthcare

A priority, you are dissing the other candidate in the race. Not hard to figure out.

And in the past, I've donated to both their political arm and PP itself. I won't donate to their political arm ever again as they are wasting my money attacking an ally to prop up a candidate who has done less for women's healthcare just because they are buddies with her.

[PeaceNikki]

200. They have not attacked BS and will not be attacking BS.

Let’s be clear — when it comes to issues like birth control, abortion, and access to services at Planned Parenthood, both leading Democratic candidates for president have great records, and would make a great president. In fact, Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton are both rated 100% on Planned Parenthood Action Fund’s congressional scorecard for their perfect voting records on women’s health and rights, and have been strong defenders of Planned Parenthood.

So why did the Planned Parenthood Action Fund endorse Hillary Clinton? Because no other presidential contender in our nation’s history has demonstrated such a strong, proactive commitment to women or has such a clear and outspoken record on behalf of women’s health and rights. With so much at stake in this election, we need someone who will do more than just defend reproductive rights — we need a steadfast champion who will fight to expand them, and do so not just when it’s easy, but also when it’s hard.

Check out our chart to learn about both Sanders’ and Clinton’s records on some of the issues that are most important to reproductive rights advocates.

Chart: Hillary Clinton v. Bernie Sanders on Reproductive Health and Rights

Bottom Line: Sanders and Clinton are Both Good on Reproductive Health — But Clinton Pushes Harder

When you see their records side by side, there’s no question why the Planned Parenthood Action Fund endorsed Hillary Clinton for president. She has simply demonstrated the strongest record, clearest leadership, and most focused commitment to women’s health of any presidential candidate.

For anyone who supports Senator Sanders, know we are grateful for his strong record on reproductive rights. This endorsement doesn’t mean we’ll do anything negative about Sanders’ campaign. Instead it means that for the first time in history, we have the chance to help elect someone who’s been fighting to expand reproductive health and rights for decades to the White House, just when we need that kind of champion the most.


- See more at: https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/elections-politics/blog/how-do-hillary-clinton-and-bernie-sanders-compare-womens-health/#sthash.WLEC9zUK.dpuf

Click on the link, look at the chart.

[askew]

203. Spending 7 figures on a deceitful ad campaign that tries to argue Hillary is the best candiate

On women's issues is bullshit. They won't get a penny from me.

And yes, they are spending money to defeat Sanders by propping up Hillary. That's how it works.

[PeaceNikki]

204. Fine, I will make up the difference.

Let me know how many thousands you intended to send to PP and I will do it for you, and add mine on top.

[angrychair]

193. I'm sure women in desperate need

Of healthcare and fighting for their healthcare rights of women in their respective state legislatures find this an excellent use of the limited funds.

[PeaceNikki]

202. For the 100th FUCKING TIME, it's the POLITICAL ARM of PP.

Political action is their entire reason to exist. I thought Democrats would understand this very basic fact.

[angrychair]

208. I understand that

That is why I said "fighting for healthcare rights in their respective state legislatures"

That is what "naughty word here" political arms of organizations like PP or unions do through their political arms...and legs...heads...hearts....

[George II]

205. Where are the "attacks"? Now advocating for one candidate is an attack on the other?

[TTUBatfan2008]

222. The statement "only candidate"

...basically says that the other Democratic candidate is not on the correct side of the issues, which is not true at all. I think they would be better off running this kind of ad in the general election against the Republicans who are on the wrong side of the issues. Also I don't believe Hillary needs any big money ads from outside organizations at this point. She is going to be the nominee. The state polling has her way out in front in a lot of big states across the country. Why not save that money for ads in the general election?

[George II]

238. And that is why Sanders supporters think their candidate is being "attacked", when everyday.....

....normal discussion of issues and candidates are ssstttrrreeetttccchhheeeeddd into being "attacks".

And that is why the "Sanders surge" has stalled - people have just grown tired of being afraid of saying anything that isn't 110% laudatory toward Sanders, lest it be assailed as an "attack".

Believe me, in the real world this attitude has done much more harm than good.

[TTUBatfan2008]

246. I see the same around here from Hillary people.

Any criticism of her is a labeled a right wing smear even when it's not. The bottom line is that the statement claiming she's the only candidate that cares about women's issues is not really true. Plain and simple. She's not the only one who cares.

But again, I think it's a misallocation of funds in the sense that she will be the nominee regardless of this advertising and I think it would help her a lot more in the general election, especially in the purple/swing states.

[George II]

259. Weight the Sanders "smears" vs. the Clinton "smears" here. Just look at the DU home page, under....

..."Trending now" and "Greatest threads" - check it again every few hours.

What do you see?

[LanternWaste]

206. Donations to PP do not go to its PAC.

Donations to PP do not go to its PAC. You may still assist women's access to health services without tacitly endorsing any particular politician.

However, if your bias outweighs rational thought, by all means, tacitly assist the GOP in your denial of any planned donation, and maintain the pretense of purity of righteousness-- regardless of its fiction.

[PeaceNikki]

210. Bernie Sanders would be ashamed of his supporters who are claiming to withhold donations to PPFA

[obamanut2012]

231. It is shocking, isn't it?

Especially not one cent is coming from PP donations.

[jalan48]

209. Money's tight here at my house.

This year's PP donation will have to be put on hold.

[Yallow]

212. Your Tax Dollars At Work

This is sick

[PeaceNikki]

225. oh, bullshit.

[obamanut2012]

228. zero tax dollars at work

No tax dollars go toward this. Zero.

[Stuckinthebush]

213. Excellent

That'll help Hillary a lot.

[0rganism]

215. "Care. It’s what’s most important." - nice line there

i think HRC could really get some mileage from using this as a campaign slogan, and she really does need something juicy that voters can grab onto for the GE.

[Android3.14]

235. Looks like they received the memo from Clinton headquarters

[jillan]

250. Oh so this is where our donations are going.

Sorry ladies! Guess you can just burn in hell.

[PeaceNikki]

251. Um, no. They are totally separate organizations. PPFA and PPAF.

Funds donated to PPFA are not used to "put out ads for Hillary". Funds donated to PPAF are not used to provide services - that is the political arm.

[MaggieD]

260. Excellent!

Also, it seems folks here don't know the difference between PP funding that goes to patient care, and the PAC they also run to promote women's health issues and choice. Completely separate.

Another important item of note - it pays to be a coalition builder like Hillary. She has stood up for women's rights for her entire career. And now those same folks are standing up for Hillary. That is why political parties and coalitions are needed to win. Sanders doesn't seem to have ever appreciated that.

[still_one]

270. absolutely right Maggie, and I gave a detailed explanation of that in my post below. Thanks

[still_one]

265. I will try to make this simple, though I suspect some will ignore it because it doesn't fit into

their talking points

Planned Parenthood has two separate entities, one is the non-profit arm, and the other is the PP PAC.

Planned Parenthood Federation of America (and its regional counterparts) is a 501(c)(3) (a non-profit public benefit corporation). Their revenue comes from tax exempt donations, government grants, services fees, etc. They are not allowed to engage in campaigns, but can advocate on issues.

Planned Parenthood PAC (and its regional counterparts) is a "Non-Connected Political Action Committee." Their revenue is completely from taxable donations. PACs can act directly in elections, not just on issues.
Most social welfare organizations (and I use that term loosely) operate under an umbrella with a 501(c)(3), as well as a 501(c)(4) and/or an PAC. It's way easier to raise money for a (c)(3) because donations aren't taxable, but there's a lot more of a limit as to what you can do with the money. The gist is that (c)(3)s can only do 'public education on issues,' (c)(4)s can lobby, and PACs can do about anything they want, including intervening in elections. All the orgs operate under the same 'brand,' and often there is overlap in employees, but the money stays separate.

Planned Parenthood takes this separation seriously.

I suspect this important distinction will fall flat on those that choose to remain ignorant, which just highlights another point about accuracy verses misrepresentation and distortion if it doesn't fit into someone's agenda

I guess some of those critics could spam the PP Facebook page or post links to right wing anti-abortion sites to make their point. It wouldn't be the first time that has been done

[MaggieD]

271. Folks that don't know this....

Are the same people that think banks can donate unlimited funds to candidates when the reality is that corporations can't donate directly to candidates, and the individual limit is $2700 per cycle.

I don't understand why folks so involved in politics don't understand these basic things.

[PeaceNikki]

272. Because those people are not *really* involved. They are slackivists.

Most don't belong to their local party or work for their candidates. Or work at the polling places on election day. Or volunteer for charitable causes. They sit at their keyboards and fight with people they don't know.

[MaggieD]

280. Well I agree completely, but can't say it

Because they would alert and hide me saying something like that. By "politically involved" I mean keyboard warriors.

[still_one]

310. Yes

[peace13]

327. Please do explain PAC's for all of the good people.....

[MaggieD]

328. See post #265

[TM99]

281. We know this.

Most do not.

It is optics and perception.

Do you think Trump telling his supporters next fall that PP had 7 figures to spend on ads in the primary is going to be corrected by his supporters and the media?

No fucking way! The GOP will run with this for all its worth. It is incredibly short sighted just like their breaking of their tradition of holding an endorsement until the GE.

[still_one]

311. When the PP pac endorsement came out, the majority of outrages were not aware of the two separate

divisions

Even in this thread they are assuming the same with comments that PP has enough money and doesn't need their donation

[TM99]

316. Have you disputed my discussion

on optics and perception with this reply?

No, you are simply reaffirming my correctness.

[still_one]

320. I am just reaffirming that you are aware, not others

[TM99]

321. Again, my point. n/t

[winter is coming]

290. Odd that they're throwing away their money on MI, TX, and VA.

I thought Hillary had the nomination all sewn up.

[TM99]

293. Even odder still

is that they are throwing away this money in 3 states in the primary.

What are they going to do against Trump in the fall nationwide?

[dr60omg]

303. I don't want my donations going to a commercial there are people who need their health services

I am disappointed that Planned Parenthood would do this. I donate to them because there are people who need their services and I am appalled that they would use money for commercials. Is it a separate PAC? I hope that it is! That way they couldn't use my donation to attack someone who has always stood for choice. That would be unconscionable because there are people who need their services not their commercials

[PeaceNikki]

304. Yes, it's completely seperate

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511335534#post265

[grntuscarora]

314. Don't Care.

If a "charity" chooses to lend its name to a primary candidate, then I, by association am lending MY name, too.
I don't give a rat's ass if it's the charity's PAC. From now on, if PP's charitable wing needs $$ they can go hit up their rich PAC donors, and my husband and I will find another charity to give our small donation to.

[dr60omg]

317. I am concerned that it is separate and yet associated with the organizations name

That should be of concern to everyone.
Suffice to say I find this problematic at best!

[Owl]

308. Why not support both Hillary and Bernie? Why is Bernie excluded?

[tokenlib]

322. It's a foolish and stupid waste of money..

Treating one of your best allies as an enemy IS MORONIC. Would it not be better to save it for the general election to defend against an anti choice candidate? This is going to be counterproductive and irresponsible. Long time supporters of PP are going to wonder why their money is being squandered on bolstering Hillary which does nothing to advance women's health as Bernie is an ally not an enemy. Fools! Finite funds should be used to oppose further restrictions on choice..not on Bernie. How many checkbooks are slamming shut..at least for the next nine or ten months?

[SusanCalvin]

344. Exactly.

Even though it's the PAC, that money could have been much better spent.

[Matariki]

331. That money would be better spent on health services for low income women

Than for supporting Cecile Richards' daughter's employer.

[kenfrequed]

339. This is crazy

They should be investing more of this money on local elections. Throwing "all in" on Hillary in primary when Bernie is far more electable seems silly.

[riversedge]

346. I feel the same way about Sanders and his NOT keeping his promise to

help collect funds for down ticket Dems. Instead he keeps all the donations

[PeaceNikki]

347. Bye, Felicia!