"not intended to be a factual statement"

[billvon 2,400]

We have a new euphemism from Congress.

During a recent speech, Sen, John Kyl attacked Planned Parenthood, saying:

"If you want an abortion, you go to Planned Parenthood, and that’s well over 90 percent of what Planned Parenthood does."

It turns out that the number is actually less than three percent, and that most of what they do is _preventing_ unwanted pregnancy, preventing and treating STD's, and performing cancer screening. When confronted with these facts, Kyl replied that his "remark was not intended to be a factual statement" but that he just used it to demonstrate how bad they were.

I like this new approach! I mean, here we have John Kyl, someone who voted to publicly fund abortions in his state only two years ago, criticizing Planned Parenthood for performing abortions - when most of what they do is intended to prevent the need for abortions.

[Arvoitus 1]

Isn't this the way politicians have always used numbers and statistics?

At least it sure seems like that.

Your rights end where my feelings begin.

[DaVinci 0]

To imagine a politician is not telling the truth!!!!

"More than 90 percent of the guns recovered in Mexico come from the United States, many from gun shops that line our shared border.-- Obama April 16, 2010.

"California Sen. Dianne Feinstein said at a Senate hearing: "It is unacceptable to have 90 percent of the guns that are picked up in Mexico and used to shoot judges, police officers and mayors ... come from the United States."

In 2007-2008, Mexico submitted 11,000 guns to the ATF for tracing of those, 90 percent (5,114) were found to have come from the U.S. - TRUE

BUT

According to the Mexican government, 29,000 guns were recovered at crime scenes in 2007-2008.

68% of the guns that were recovered were never submitted for tracing. Take out the 6k that could not be traced and you have 83 percent of the guns found at crime scenes in Mexico could not be traced to the U.S.

So why do some people keep trying to sell the 90% figure when the truth is about 18%?

[Remster 24]

Quote

At least it sure seems like that.

It is... well over 90% of the time.

Remster

[rehmwa 2]

Funny stuff indeed. I'm happy to see legislation that defunds Planned Parenthood......Because this is ANOTHER function taxes shouldn't pay for. And I believe the parents should have the right to choose----and be responsible for that decision. This is just one program of a huge list that should be canceled.

But I hate that the right is NOT doing it for fiscal reasons, rather for the social agenda. Even the fiscal hawks pander and say idiot things like "our spending should reflect our SOCIAL values" instead of "this isn't a program for the federal gov, it should be managed locally". Every guy that says that, i just assume is a religious nutjob that loses my attention.

We need defined, and FEW, specific missions for the feds and cancel everything else and not allow it to grow. The states are supposed to have the majority of the governance.

As long as subjective social crap keeps getting funded and fought over from both parties, how can we cut that $1T per year????

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[jakee 1,255]

Quote

68% of the guns that were recovered were never submitted for tracing. Take out the 6k that could not be traced and you have 83 percent of the guns found at crime scenes in Mexico could not be traced to the U.S.

Uh, how do you jump from 'weren't submitted for tracing' to 'could not be traced to the US'?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[airdvr 197]

The new political disclaimer

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[DiverMike 5]

Quote

Uh, how do you jump from 'weren't submitted for tracing' to 'could not be traced to the US'?

That isn't far of a leap. If it isn't submitted for tracing, it can't be traced to anywhere including the US. 68% of the guns could not be traced to any point on this (or any other) planet.

For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

When Live Action called the abortion giant a woman named Samantha answered the phone and when asked about mammograms she did something completely surprising. She told the truth.

“We don’t…um… deal with the health side of it so much…we’re mostly a surgical facility.”

Guess it's a bit more than 3% at that location, hmm?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[kallend 1,623]

www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/04/15/avlon.kyl.truth/?hpt=Sbin

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[wmw999 2,122]

No, if it wasn't submitted for tracing it doesn't mean anything about whether it can be traced. It probably means it's less likely to be traceable to the US (everyone loves to be able to blame someone else), but the two are completely separate from each other.

they weren't traced to any point on this planet -- that's very different from saying they couldn't be.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

Uh, how do you jump from 'weren't submitted for tracing' to 'could not be traced to the US'?

Number of guns submitted for tracing 2007-2008: 11,000
Number of guns successfully traced: 6,000
Number of guns traced to the US from that 6k: 5,114

The "90%" number comes from how many that were successfully traced that were traced to the US.

So, they tried to trace 11,000 guns.
They could only trace 6k of them.
90% of the ones they WERE ABLE TO TRACE came from the US.

BUT, 29,000 guns were found at crime scenes.

So they only TRIED to trace 38% of the weapons found.

Of the 11,000 (38% of the total) they TRIED to trace, they could only trace 6k (20% of the total)

Of the 6K they could trace, 5114 (90%) were from the US, but 5114 is only 17.6% of the total number of guns found at crime scenes (29000)

Quote

Uh, how do you jump from 'weren't submitted for tracing' to 'could not be traced to the US'?

They were not submitted because they had no markings that could be traced. Weapons made (for sale) or imported into the US have to have markings. The same is not true for many other areas of the World. Also, if the weapon WAS marked, but marked in a way that shown that it was not from the US (say in Russian) they didn't even try to trace them to the US.

"Not every weapon seized in Mexico has a serial number on it that would make it traceable, and the U.S. effort to trace weapons really only extends to weapons that have been in the U.S. market," Matt Allen, special agent of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)

But any gun in the US (minor exceptions) has to have a serial number.

The Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA), at Title 18, United States Code (U.S.C.), section
923(i), and the National Firearms Act (NFA), at Title 26, U.S.C., section 5842(a), require
all licensed importers and manufacturers to identify each firearm imported or
manufactured by means of a serial number engraved or cast on the frame or receiver of the
weapon, in such manner as the Attorney General shall by regulations prescribe. Federal
regulations at 27 CFR 478.92(a) and 479.102(a) prescribe the requirements for
serialization and other marks of identification that must be placed on firearms.

Minimum height of 1/16th inch1 and a minimum depth of .003 inch for serial numbers and a minimum depth of .003
inch for all other required markings

It must include:
1. The model, if such designation has been made;
2. The caliber or gauge;
3. The name (or recognized abbreviation of same) of the manufacturer and also, when applicable, of the importer;
4. In the case of a domestically made firearm, the city and State (or recognized abbreviation thereof) where the licensed
manufacturer maintains its place of business; and
5. In the case of an imported firearm, the name of the country in which manufactured and the city and State (or recognized
abbreviation thereof) where the importer maintains its place of business


18 U.S.C. 923(i): IDENTIFICATION OF FIREARMS
26 U.S.C. 5842(a): IDENTIFICATION OF FIREARMS
27 CFR 478.92(a): IDENTIFICATION OF FIREARMS
27 CFR 478.92(a)(4)(i): ALTERNATE MEANS OF IDENTIFICATION
27 CFR 479.102(a): IDENTIFICATION OF FIREARMS
27 CFR 479.102(c): ALTERNATE MEANS OF IDENTIFICATION

So, if it came from or through the US since 1968, it had to be marked. If it was not marked, it didn't come from/through the US.

[rushmc 18]

Not to mention all of Obama latest speach

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Quote

When Live Action called the abortion giant a woman named Samantha answered the phone and when asked about mammograms she did something completely surprising. She told the truth.

“We don’t…um… deal with the health side of it so much…we’re mostly a surgical facility.”

Guess it's a bit more than 3% at that location, hmm?

I Googled this, and got 108 hits repeating the exact quote, which apparently was first published in the National Catholic Register. From this quick research, I see that that was supposedly a from phone call to a Planned Parenthood location made by Lila Rose, 22 year old founder of Live Action.

All the stories I scanned were silent as to whether the call was either recorded or overheard by other people (so as to verify Ms. Rose's account), or whether Ms. Rose is the sole source of "Samantha's" existence and comment (meaning we either take Ms. Rose at her word or we don't).

Can you shed any light on whether the occurrence of the conversation, and the words spoken during it, have been verified?

[billvon 2,400]

>Can you shed any light on whether the occurrence of the conversation, and the
>words spoken during it, have been verified?

Well, to be fair, it wasn't intended to be a factual statement.

[Southern_Man 0]

This should now be a required standard disclaimer on every political ad, right after the candidate appears with the "I'm Candidate Bob and I approved this ad"

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

>Can you shed any light on whether the occurrence of the conversation, and the
>words spoken during it, have been verified?

Well, to be fair, it wasn't intended to be a factual statement.

I guess the statement by the CEO of PP wasn't, either:

Quote

Last month, Planned Parenthood’s Cecile Richards appeared on CNN’s Joy Behar Show and argued that if federal funding was removed from her corporation, it would lose its ability to provide healthcare services such as mammograms:

If this bill ever becomes law, millions of women in this country are going to lose their health care access, not to abortion services, to basic family planning — you know, mammograms.

Anyone who has actually visited the company’s website to check knows that Planned Parenthood doesn’t actually provide mammograms. Under the section“Where Can I Get a Mammogram?” it clearly states: “Ask your health care provider, health department, or staff at your local Planned Parenthood health center about where you can get a mammogram in your area.” Translation: We don’t do that here.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[jakee 1,255]

Quote

Quote

Uh, how do you jump from 'weren't submitted for tracing' to 'could not be traced to the US'?

That isn't far of a leap. If it isn't submitted for tracing, it can't be traced to anywhere including the US. 68% of the guns could not be traced to any point on this (or any other) planet.

Uh, no. Was not is not the same thing as could not.

DV has provided very little background info, but if the selection of guns handed over for tracing by the US is a random selection, then it's way, way more than you would need to have confidence in the results. OTOH, if they've done their own tracing first and only handed over the ones they didn't already know were from Mexico/wherever else, then DV has a point.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[SpeedRacer 1]

Quote

This should now be a required standard disclaimer on every political ad, right after the candidate appears with the "I'm Candidate Bob and I approved this ad"

+1
It should be a requiirement just like the Surgeon General warning on cigarettes.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[devildog 0]

Quote

We have a new euphemism from Congress.

During a recent speech, Sen, John Kyl attacked Planned Parenthood, saying:

"If you want an abortion, you go to Planned Parenthood, and that’s well over 90 percent of what Planned Parenthood does."

It turns out that the number is actually less than three percent, and that most of what they do is _preventing_ unwanted pregnancy, preventing and treating STD's, and performing cancer screening. When confronted with these facts, Kyl replied that his "remark was not intended to be a factual statement" but that he just used it to demonstrate how bad they were.

I like this new approach! I mean, here we have John Kyl, someone who voted to publicly fund abortions in his state only two years ago, criticizing Planned Parenthood for performing abortions - when most of what they do is intended to prevent the need for abortions.

Guy definitely deserves a face palm for that remark and it sounds like he tried to repeat a stat, got hammered on fudging it, and then tried to wiggle out with some lame remark w/o trying to track down the real number. My guess is he was trying to repeat the stat that if you look at services planned specifically for pregnant women (vs all pts in general) abortion makes up 97% (2009).

You stop breathing for a few minutes and everyone jumps to conclusions.

[jakee 1,255]

Quote

Quote

When Live Action called the abortion giant a woman named Samantha answered the phone and when asked about mammograms she did something completely surprising. She told the truth.

“We don’t…um… deal with the health side of it so much…we’re mostly a surgical facility.”

Guess it's a bit more than 3% at that location, hmm?

So what if it was, at that particular location? What point are you trying to make?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[popsjumper 2]

Funny how a Planned Parenthood thread quickly got twisted to a gun thread.

Gun fanatics, on BOTH sides of the fence...gotta love 'em.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Number of guns submitted for tracing 2007-2008: 11,000
Number of guns successfully traced: 6,000
Number of guns traced to the US from that 6k: 5,114

The "90%" number comes from how many that were successfully traced that were traced to the US.

5114/6000 = 85%. Was this a case of rounding, either of 85 of a number that became 6000 and 11000?

[kallend 1,623]

Quote

My guess is he was trying to repeat the stat that if you look at services planned specifically for pregnant women (vs all pts in general) abortion makes up 97% (2009).

Why stop there? If its services provided to women who use their services to have abortions, it's 100%.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[devildog 0]

Quote

Quote

My guess is he was trying to repeat the stat that if you look at services planned specifically for pregnant women (vs all pts in general) abortion makes up 97% (2009).

Why stop there? If its services provided to women who use their services to have abortions, it's 100%.

Well that's sort of a non stat, which I'm sure is your point. But it is a little silly to equate a 30 second visit of here have some condoms with a multi-hour, fund taking abortion procedure. After all, the original remark (and others like it) was given to show that a large part of PP's business is providing abortions. And given thats they provide something like a quarter of all abortions in the US, it is. What would be a much more telling stat (which I don't have or know off hand) is not how many abortions are given vs total services provided, but how much of their revenue comes from the procedure.

Otherwise, you'd be claiming something like because Dr. Bob performs only 2 heart transplants at 100k a piece and does 98 well visits @ 100$ a piece, Dr. Bob's scope of practice for heart transplants is only 2% and thus heart transplants really aren't a big piece of his practice.

You stop breathing for a few minutes and everyone jumps to conclusions.