We Finance Barbarism

House Republicans refusing to share unedited Planned Parenthood videos with Democrats

House Republicans have the unedited footage from the Planned Parenthood attack videos, and apparently they don't want Democrats to get too close a look.

"Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz has in his possession right now, a computer hard drive that contains videos produced by David Daleiden, the head of the group that tried to entrap Planned Parenthood," Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.) declared from the House floor on Wednesday, interrupting the chamber's debate on legislation expanding the investigation into Planned Parenthood.

Chaffetz, who is running for House Speaker, received a copy of the videos on Sept. 25, and has since declined to share a copy with the Democrats, according to a Democratic committee aide.

Instead, Chaffetz has said he will set up a “viewing room” for Democratic members and staff to view the videos. Republicans have not yet hosted a screening, the aide said, calling the move a "direct violation" of the Democrats' recent subpoena of Daleiden's unedited footage.
 
goldfly said:
House Republicans refusing to share unedited Planned Parenthood videos with Democrats

House Republicans have the unedited footage from the Planned Parenthood attack videos, and apparently they don't want Democrats to get too close a look.
"Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz has in his possession right now, a computer hard drive that contains videos produced by David Daleiden, the head of the group that tried to entrap Planned Parenthood," Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.) declared from the House floor on Wednesday, interrupting the chamber's debate on legislation expanding the investigation into Planned Parenthood.
Chaffetz, who is running for House Speaker, received a copy of the videos on Sept. 25, and has since declined to share a copy with the Democrats, according to a Democratic committee aide.

Instead, Chaffetz has said he will set up a “viewing room” for Democratic members and staff to view the videos. Republicans have not yet hosted a screening, the aide said, calling the move a "direct violation" of the Democrats' recent subpoena of Daleiden's unedited footage.
Click to expand...

I am curious - did the PP folks negotiate on the body parts or not? I frankly don't care if the videos are doctored, or taken out of context, or don't show everything. The video clearly shows the disgusting acts of PP.

Just like Mitt Romney's 47% comments, where the left was extremely eager to show the 10 second clip. I've seen all I need to see from PP
 
sturg33 said:
"Thought and care" is not an objective point of the law. It seems to me PP never errs on the caution of thought and care.

And for the man? I see... So his choice was sex (I guess the woman didn't have that choice?), but even though the baby we're discussing his half his, he has absolutely no say in the matter.

Gotta love it
Click to expand...

So what you're saying is a man carries half the burdens of the pregnancy? I'd really love to see you make that case to women who've been through pregnancy. They'd probably laugh you off whatever stage you think you're on
 
BedellBrave said:
That's what I mean by begging the question. Sure it's legal. Just like owning slaves was once legal.

I do think it is "unlawful" though, because I'm appealing to a higher law.
Click to expand...

But it's not unlawful because it's not against the law.

Islam thinks that eating bacon is wrong. Does that mean that essentially every restaurant in America is unlawful? Does that make you an "unlawful" person.

It's dumb to ignore the legal meaning of the word and apply your holier than thou meaning, and you think we're having a sincere debate. We're not, you're pontificating and think you're being rational.
 
zitothebrave said:
So what you're saying is a man carries half the burdens of the pregnancy? I'd really love to see you make that case to women who've been through pregnancy. They'd probably laugh you off whatever stage you think you're on
Click to expand...

Let me steal a line from you... "reading comprehension isn't your strong suit"

The baby is half the man's. How can you, on one hand, say the man has no say on whether or not the baby deserves the chance to live, and then on the other hand, that the man is equally responsible financially for the baby?
 
sturg33 said:
Let me steal a line from you... "reading comprehension isn't your strong suit"

The baby is half the man's. How can you, on one hand, say the man has no say on whether or not the baby deserves the chance to live, and then on the other hand, that the man is equally responsible financially for the baby?
Click to expand...

very easily actually
 
sturg33 said:
Of course it's easy to say... but it's extraordinarily hypocritical. Just own it and move on
Click to expand...

Own what?

You gave your sperm to her

What she does after that isn't your call

If you wanted to make sure for her to create a baby with you, maybe you should have planned better

There is a place called planned parenthood that you could go talk to them about that
 
goldfly said:
Own what?

You gave your sperm to her

What she does after that isn't your call

If you wanted to make sure for her to create a baby with you, maybe you should have planned better

There is a place called planned parenthood that you could go talk to them about that
Click to expand...

So again, I have no say in the baby process, but if she decides she wants to keep the baby, I'm now 50% responsible?

LOL own the hypocrisy man
 
sturg33 said:
So again, I have no say in the baby process, but if she decides she wants to keep the baby, I'm now 50% responsible?

LOL own the hypocrisy man
Click to expand...

Well if it helps any, if you run over her with your car (after she's pregnant) you get charged with two counts of murder, manslaughter, littering, or whatever is appropriate under those circumstances.
 
Oklahomahawk said:
Well if it helps any, if you run over her with your car (after she's pregnant) you get charged with two counts of murder, manslaughter, littering, or whatever is appropriate under those circumstances.
Click to expand...

Of course... the baby is always considered a human unless some uneducated woman decides it's not.
 
sturg33 said:
Let me steal a line from you... "reading comprehension isn't your strong suit"

The baby is half the man's. How can you, on one hand, say the man has no say on whether or not the baby deserves the chance to live, and then on the other hand, that the man is equally responsible financially for the baby?
Click to expand...

THe man has no say in the pregnancy. His contribution to the pregnancy is DNA. He's responsible for the child if the woman chooses to come to term to it because he's the parent. But he has 0% of the pregancy burdens. You can't even understand simple logic sometimes.
 
zitothebrave said:
THe man has no say in the pregnancy. His contribution to the pregnancy is DNA. He's responsible for the child if the woman chooses to come to term to it because he's the parent. But he has 0% of the pregancy burdens. You can't even understand simple logic sometimes.
Click to expand...

I CAN'T EVEN UNDERSTAND IT!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top