I work "in the presumptive"...I know what I know, I know what I don't know.
I trust in my intuit, and allow logic, reason and deduction, guided by experience on the dark side to be the only Master.
Imagine THIS...Trump & West. New York Time Square 10,000 attend, MEDIA silent
Ok, lets get serious now.....
Published on Jul 22, 2015
Former
Congressman and US army veteran Allen West making a passionate and
emotional speech to over 12,000 people in Times Square at the 'Stop Iran
Deal Rally' tonight...
Wow...#picketmedia staying quiet on this ...QUITE SIMPLY ONE OF THE BEST SPEECHES EVER! https://youtu.be/i3lEO0ty6No
Time for a SHOT-GUN Election....click, click...PULL
The Media's TREASONIST support allows Subversion to exist
Rick Perry, a Conservative of NOTE...now no longer
NOTE Worthy.
YOU crossed the line!
#ConservativeCorrectness, the RINO's PC
If you can't handle the heat get the hell out of the KITCHEN. Ridicule is one thing.....
but to use the Power of Suggestion...strike that...
to use your influence to UNDERMINE a citizens RIGHT to be WRONG or Right...
is NOT YOUR PLACE.
That said...you have exposed yourself.
It is Obvious to us all who live NOT in a bubble but in the real world where LITTLE is fair and EVERYTHING is OK that is LEGAL.
Even being WRONG is legal Mr. Perry....
Intellectual Honesty is one who is NOT CHALLENGED by Truth
Who DIED, Mr. Perry and left YOU to re-Write the RULEs of the Road?
When a POLITICIAN is using the new Conservative Correctness to Silence We the PEOPLE it is apparent that the difference with a RINO and a Liberal becomes the NEW BLEND of Truth no LONGER runs on its own power...see how Mr. Perry lambastes a Patriot.
Meet the 39 Companies That Donate Directly to Planned Parenthood
ExxonMobil, along with 38 other companies,
donates directly to Planned Parenthood. The group is under fire after
two videos were released showing top Planned Parenthood executives
allegedly discussing the sale of aborted fetal body parts. (Photo:
Sebastien Pirlet//Reuters/Newscom)
In the wake of two videos allegedly showing Planned Parenthood
officials discussing the sale of aborted fetal body parts, Republicans
in Congress are working to ensure that Planned Parenthood is stripped of
its federal funding.
However, it’s not only the government that fills Planned Parenthood’s coffers. According
to 2nd Vote, a website and app that tracks the flow of money from
consumers to political causes, more than 25 percent of Planned
Parenthood’s $1.3-billion annual revenue comes from private donations,
which includes corporate contributions.
2nd Vote researched the corporations and organizations to find which
supported Planned Parenthood and found that more than three dozen
donated to the group. Some companies donated directly, while others
matched employee gifts.
Thirty-nine corporations and organizations directly contribute to the group.
Get our emails for free. We'll respect your inbox and keep you informed.
Planned Parenthood has come under heavy fire following the release of videos from the Center for Medical Progress.
The first video, released
last week, showed Planned Parenthood senior executive Dr. Deborah
Nucatola meeting with actors portraying buyers from a “human biologics
company.” The “buyers” discussed the sale of fetal body parts with
Nucatola over lunch.
In the second video, released
today, Dr. Mary Gatter, president of Planned Parenthood’s medical
directors council, is seen negotiating the price of aborted fetal body
parts.
Here are the 39 companies that have directly funded Planned Parenthood.
PLEASE PROMOTE THIS TO OTHER PATRIOTS & START SENDING POSTS TO THE LIST BELOW...ON AT A TIME...
Adobe
American Cancer Society
American Express
AT&T
Avon
Bank of America
Bath & Body Works
Ben & Jerry’s
Clorox
Coca-Cola
Converse
Deutsche Bank
Dockers
Energizer
Expedia
ExxonMobil
Fannie Mae
Groupon
Intuit
Johnson & Johnson
La Senza
Levi Strauss
Liberty Mutual
Macy’s
March of Dimes
Microsoft
Morgan Stanley
Nike
Oracle
PepsiCo
Pfizer
Progressive
Starbucks
Susan G. Komen
Tostitos
Unilever
United Way
Verizon
Wells Fargo
This story has been updated. Xerox was erroneously listed on Planned Parenthood’s website as having been a donor. “We have communicated with Planned Parenthood. They have removed Xerox from this list of companies that match gifts to the organization. It was not correct,” a Xerox representative told The Daily Signal.
Also, a Ford Motor Co. representative contacted The
Daily Signal claiming they had been erroneously listed on Planned
Parenthood’s website, and have contacted Planned Parenthood to be
removed.
Liberals USING black body parts enmasse - who loves you baby? er Your baby?
Whats MORE immoral ...Yesterdays "slavery" or Today's Abortions?
I wasn't there ...were you?
Seems Hypocritical to me to say "life on mars" with a HINT of
water...but Life in a womb is a fetus NOT a baby...see MURDER is ok
Seems to me...Unintended Consequences "in the positive" not given credit....Ali understood the benefit of slavery IN HIS case
Many
years ago I interviewed for a reporting job covering government waste,
fraud and mismanagement. The interview went well and my future employers
mentioned that they’d had trouble keeping the position filled as many
reporters had trouble coming up with story ideas. They wondered if that
would be a problem. I thought they were joking, so I chuckled. But they
were entirely serious.
A few reporters wrote an initial story on the undercover video that
caught the senior director for medical services at Planned Parenthood
discussing the harvesting of organs from the unborn children
killed by abortion. Another few reporters noted early political
repercussions that followed, including the launching of state and
federal investigations. A few reporters wrote up the apology (for the
“tone” used by the wine-drinking, salad-munching Dr. Deborah Nucatola as
she discussed harvesting lungs, livers, hearts and brains) offered by
Planned Parenthood’s president Cecile Richards.
But given the many angles that could be covered, the lack of ferocity
with which they’re tackling this story is noticeable. Compare, for
instance, what happened in the last month with coverage of Confederate
flags. The controversy over the flag arose after the man charged in the
Charleston church shooting was pictured with a Confederate flag.
Coverage was media-led and media-stoked. The media couldn’t stop finding
new angles to cover, including calling up retailers and pressuring them to stop selling merchandise with any Confederate flag depiction, such as a toy depicting the General Lee from the Dukes of Hazzard television show.
The shooting happened on June 17, about a month ago. The media
quickly moved on from the victims and the shooting itself, even though
there were many worthwhile angles to cover.
Instead they went for frenzied coverage of the presence of Confederate
flags. The Planned Parenthood video was released on July 14, about a
week ago. If the story of harvesting organs for sale from aborted babies
were deemed merely as important as the flag story, we’d expect to see many multiples of the levels of coverage we’re seeing now.
Using Nexis, I looked at a few media outlets to see how their
coverage of the Confederate flag compared to the Planned Parenthood
video. For my quick searches, I put in “Confederate” and “flag,” and
“Planned Parenthood” and “video,” with the appropriate dates. My search
of the media companies’ web sites showed higher counts for one or the
other entry than what showed up in Nexis, for what it’s worth. And for
CNN, I modified “video” with “undercover.” What I found was most
interesting, and goes a long way to show how the media can drum up
interest in a story or work to suppress a story:
CNN has had 493 mentions of the
Confederate flag since June 17 (only 188 of these even mention alleged
church shooter Dylann Roof), and managed 167 in the first six days. In
the first six days of the Planned Parenthood scandal, they managed 7
mentions, less than 5 percent what you’d expect if you considered those
stories only of equal importance.
The Washington Post
mentioned the Confederate flag 624 times in the last month (only 135 of
these mention Roof), and 126 times in the first six days. The
Washington Post has 28 stories mentioning the Planned Parenthood video
in the first six days, just over 22 percent of what you’d expect if you
considered the harvesting of organs from aborted babies to be merely as
important as the Confederate flag topic.
The New York Times has run
stories and essays on the Confederate flag 149 times since June 17 (and
only 39 of those mention Roof), 41 of those in the first six days. That
compares to three stories on Planned Parenthood during the same window,
just 7 percent of what you’d expect if the New York Times considered
those stories merely of equal importance.
Finally, Nexis shows 70 mentions of the Confederate flag on Politico.com
in the last month (only 18 mention Roof), 29 of those in the first six
days of the story. For the Planned Parenthood video, it shows 4 stories.
Don’t forget that many broadcasters were even more zealous in their
coverage of the Confederate flag, while running only the briefest
mentions, at best, of the Planned Parenthood story. I’d also be curious
how the pro/con arguments break down for the two issues in terms of
editorials and op-eds.
Clearly, our media are struggling to come up with any angles to cover
on this story. Perhaps they don’t want to be so disparate in their
coverage but, like my predecessors on the government waste, fraud and
mismanagement beat, they just don’t have any ideas.
I don’t have any of the resources of the Washington Post, the New
York Times, CNN, or Politico. If I did, here are just a few stories that
I might have reporters look into. Feel free to add your ideas in the
comments. Have at ’em, well-funded news teams:
We’ve heard about serial murderer/abortionist Kermit Gosnell keeping
trophies of his victims, abortion clinics dumping babies in the trash,
and now Deborah Nucatola working to do “a little better than break even”
in the sales of intact baby organs. What’s the standard procedure for
disposal of the unborn children killed in abortion? Are there abortion
clinic standards for this? Does it vary state by state? Do states even
have regulations? Does Planned Parenthood have uniform regulations? If
not, why not? If so, how are they enforced?
How much money does Planned Parenthood receive via sales of baby
organs? Do they keep records? Are those records trustworthy? How do we
know? How significant are these funds to the abortion portion of Planned
Parenthood’s operation? How does compensation for the children’s lungs,
livers, hearts and brains vary by state, if they do vary?
How far along in a pregnancy must a woman be for her child’s organs
to be considered worthwhile for procurement, sale and transfer? How much
does the value of a child’s liver, heart, lungs, etc., increase with time? Do the sales of baby organs form a significant enough part of Planned Parenthood’s business model to result in, say, filibustering of protections for late-term unborn children?
How did the Center for Medical Progress obtain the video? Who are
they? Why haven’t the media ask tough questions of abortion clinics,
historically? When Indiana passed a religious freedom bill, various
media outlets roamed the countryside searching for vendors with
religious objections to same-sex marriage, such as the owners of Memories Pizza.
What questions might be posed to abortion clinic owners and managers
around the country? Does the failure of the media to cover abortion well
encourage undercover journalism operations, such as the one by Center
for Medical Progress?
What are the laws on trafficking in human body parts? Who wrote
those laws? Was the abortion industry involved in writing those laws?
How much money is made throughout the organ sale process? How do
corporations make their way around laws prohibiting the express sale of
human organs? What do ethicists say about these loopholes and
workarounds?
Could expert observers take us through Planned Parenthood’s various
responses to the charges levied in the video? They don’t deny the
charges. How is that significant?
Clearly this was a story that generated tremendous interest among
critics of Planned Parenthood. Yet reports flooded in of Facebook
denying people the ability to share posts about the story or even “like”
ones they saw. What is the real story there? What was going on? What
does Facebook say about why that was happening? Similarly, Twitter
waited many hours before allowing Planned Parenthood to be a trending
topic on Twitter. Why? How is that focused? What role do social media
corporations play in controlling news? Who makes these calls, and what
are their criteria for doing so? How do they rate something as offensive
or unsuitable?
Who is Deborah Nucatola? What is her role at Planned Parenthood?
Does she have other significant roles? What are her political
contributions? Who are her political allies? If a young woman making
lightly disparaging comments about the Obama family on her Facebook page
merited a deep dive by the Washington Post into her high school records,
what can we learn from Nucatola’s childhood friends, boyfriends,
colleagues. Where did things go wrong for her? What did it mean, if
anything, when Planned Parenthood said Nucatola had been lightly
reprimanded for her comments recorded on the video? What, in particular,
did she do to deserve a reprimand? Will Cecile Richards tell us what
specific statements Nucatola said that were offensive?
Why has the media covered this salacious and scandalous story with
so much less rigor and enthusiasm than might be expected? What do
managing editors have to say about the treatment of this story? Many
promised to fix the problems after the Gosnell media blackout. What do they think went wrong with those efforts, if they were ever implemented?
Why have abortion rights groups and prominent activists been so silent about this story?
If asking every pro-life politician in the country to weigh in on
Todd Akin’s impolitic remarks on “legitimate rape” made sense, let’s
certainly find out what every pro-choice politician in the country
thinks about the harvesting of baby organs by abortionists for sale to
corporations. Hillary Clinton’s close ties to Planned Parenthood and
abortion rights extremists mean her response is the lead story.
How did sales of aborted children begin? Did Planned Parenthood seek
buyers or did the baby part buyers seek out Planned Parenthood? Does it
depend by affiliate? Planned Parenthood has a corner on the market of
freshly dead young humans. Does this market share make them significant
in the human organ trade? Who are the buyers? Who arranges the sales?
How much money changes hands? Do the buyers receive any federal funds?
What research is conducted?
Along those lines, what are the laws governing sale of tissue in
other circumstances? If it was a tumor that had been removed, would the
doctor have the right to sell it? Would they have the right to try and
do “a little better than break even”? What governs that? How does the
process specifically work and who oversees the regulation of this
industry? Specifically how are sales monitored? How confident are
observers and interested parties that the monitoring of this process is
stringent or effective?
What do corporations do with aborted baby parts? Is there any risk
that people have unknowingly been using products or research based on
parts harvested from the children killed in abortion? Do consumers have
the right to know when humans are killed and then have their parts used
for research?
The undercover journalists produced one example of a form Planned
Parenthood uses to obtain consent from mothers procuring abortions. Is
that form standard across all Planned Parenthood affiliates? If not, how
and why do they vary? Do other abortion corporations have similar
consent forms? How do they vary? The one example of Planned Parenthood’s
consent form specifically said that mothers understand they won’t be
compensated for “donating” their children’s tissue. However, in early
public relations materials from Planned Parenthood, they claimed that
Nucatola’s money discussion wasn’t about selling body parts to
corporations but, rather, about compensating women for their “donation.” Explain the disparity.
Do medical ethicists think that Planned Parenthood’s consent forms are sufficient?
Should women be told that abortionists may alter their abortion
procedures to procure valuable livers, lungs, hearts and brains? If not,
why not? If so, are any Planned Parenthood affiliates so informing the
women whose abortions they perform?
Is Planned Parenthood able to disclose which of its affiliates are
engaged in the harvesting of baby organs for sale to corporations? If
not, why not? If so, how reliable are their records? Since organ sales
are prohibited, organ harvesters typically charge for “shipping” or
“rental space” in a clinic. How does Planned Parenthood designate its
organ sales to be or appear to be reasonable? What is the range of
amounts charged for these things? How and why do they vary? What is
considered a reasonable amount? How is “reasonable” determined?
Explain the various federal and state laws governing organ
procurement and sales. What legal regime is in place that permits the
harvesting and sale of organs? How is it monitored?
What do medical experts say about the changes to the abortion
procedure mentioned by Nucatola for the sake of procuring organs. Do
these changes to the abortion procedure increase the chance of
complications for the mother? Is there an incentive on the part of
Planned Parenthood to target larger babies for “part conservation” by
inducing breach deliveries, as mentioned by Dr. Nucatola? What rights do
the mothers have to be informed about how their abortion process has
been altered to procure these parts? Dr. Nucatola claims that mothers
don’t have the right to be notified of her alterations to the procedure.
Is that true?
How has the Planned Parenthood video been received by those who have
seen it? What parts struck them the most? How do people who deny the
humanity of the unborn child explain the video discussions about
harvesting their organs?
How does the harvesting of organs fit into Planned Parenthood’s work
culture? Do people who work at Planned Parenthood clinics know that
this is going on? Do they all chat about it over salad or is it more a
covert wing of the operation? Do new workers or volunteers learn about
it and react poorly? Various prominent pro-life activists are former
Planned Parenthood employees and managers. What do they know about this
practice? Are secretaries at Planned Parenthood cheerfully arranging for
the delivery of fetal livers immediately after booking an abortion
appointment? Does Planned Parenthood have an employment hiring or
retention problem?
Tell us more about the “reimbursement” rates for various organs.
Which organs are most valuable? How do those organs change in value over
time? How does this relate to the late-term abortion debate?
Is there a price differential between white baby parts and black
baby parts? Is there a price differential between male organs and female
organs? If so, how much?
It’s just a few of the many angles that could be covered and should
be covered. The media may have gotten a tremendously late start, but
better late than never. Go get ’em, journalists! Do your jobs!
UPDATE: Readers suggest a few more questions reporters who want to do journalism might be interested in finding answers to:
Did the buyers of organs, either as companies or as individuals,
from Planned Parenthood donate back to Planned Parenthood or their
affiliates? Would be great to see donor records. Start with executives
at StemExpress. Are there lobbying ties to explore?
Why the difference in price for different parts (Nucatola discussed a
“menu” of options) if it doesn’t correlate to their value, there are no
changes to the abortion procedure and Planned Parenthood is merely
being “reimbursed” for their costs?
What laws govern organ harvesting, state and federal? How do they vary?
How widespread is the practice of organ harvesting in this country and elsewhere
The video mentions discussions regarding organ harvesting occurring
“behind closed doors” at Planned Parenthood. Tell us more about what
those conversations might entail.
Why doesn’t Planned Parenthood advertise that they harvest organs?
What are the uses of the organs and tissues obtained and where is
the end market? Medical research in what fields? In what countries? For
what end goals? What non research /non scientific uses are there if any,
and in what countries and by whom? Do these same markets exist in post
birth and/or adult tissue and how do the markets compare? How big is
the industry in terms of manpower and economic power? Are the
procurement procedures and markets in existence in other countries and
how do they compare? What are the international laws that govern this
industry and are there treaties for trade that include these markets? Is
there a black market In the US or elsewhere, and to what extent?
If a women is ‘gifting’ her baby’s body parts to Planned Parenthood,
and then Planned parenthood is then, supposedly, ‘gifting’ these parts
to research, what value is placed on the gift? I can’t gift something of
significant value to another person or organization without the IRS
being involved. Can a women claim the ‘gift’ as a donation to a tax
exempt organization and if so how much can be claimed on IRS forms? My
question is, with all this ‘gifting’ going on, what is the possible
requirement for IRS involvement? Are body parts considered a tax exempt
donation when passed from Planned Parenthood to a public for-profit
corporation doing research? If it can and should be claimed, how much is
Planned Parenthood claiming on their IRS forms for each of their
‘donations’ to corporations and/or research organizations for each body
part? Do these companies then declare the receipt of the organs as
donations which are assigned a monetary value and then taxed?
What is the history of Planned Parenthood and in particular how have
Margaret Sanger’s principles and ideas about social classes and races
influenced PP? Does Sanger have any thoughts about medical ethics with
regards to aborted babies? Or aborted babies of “inferior classes”?
Are abortions ever delayed and pregnancies allowed to continue until
fetal development reaches a particular stage that makes harvesting of
organs more viable?
Since this is all scientific research, can we expect video of the
research? Can we get access to video documentation of the transport of
fetal remains and harvesting of the organs? Is there a timeline
available in how this material is handled? Are harvested fetal organs
treated in the same way as other donated organs? Does the mother have
any involvement in the release of such organs to researchers? How is
authorization given for such usage
What sort of benefits does PP receive that are not directly
financial? Are there other forms of compensation that we do not know
about?
What about the use of ultrasound technology? If it’s considered
torture to the recipient of the procedure to make her watch it, how does
she feel about doctors using it to reposition the fetus for maximum
extraction rewards? Should the recipient be giving consent for the
sonogram for this portion of the procedure? Why is there no backlash
against PP doctors using ultrasounds to better obtain intact body parts,
while there was a huge backlash against the Texas law requiring
ultrasounds to provide the mothers with a more thorough understanding of
their bodies and the procedure they were signing up for? How is one
invasive and whatnot, but not the other?
The original video had the doctor quoting the worth of the ’tissue’
as $30-$100 per SPECIMEN. What is the breakdown on that? If the doctor
‘crushes’ the correct parts and the harvest includes a healthy,
undamaged liver, two lungs, a brain, at least one kidney, a heart and
‘lower extremities’, would the end results be perhaps hundreds of
dollars for one abortion?
how much time do Planned Parenthood staff spend on encouraging
adoption over abortion? After all, a major source of their income comes
from abortion.
Are these “business lunches” a typical part of the operation for
both Planned Parenthood and the organ brokers? Who picks up the tab? Are
they part of Planned Parenthood’s budget, and how much is budgeted for
them?
How many brokers are there for tissue and organs? Where do the
organs ultimately end up– hospitals, universities, big pharma companies?
How much taxpayer money ultimately ends up in the process? Who are the
real companies buying the parts from PP? What type of volume are we
talking about? Are they private independent labs or University labs? Any
public research involved? What is so important about having more than
just the tissue? What are the experiments?
Do arguments in support of harvesting organs from the unborn apply
to prisoners who die or are executed? If so, how so? If not, how do they
not apply? What are the rules governing organ harvesting of the
incarcerated who die in prison?
How were the actors portraying biologics buyers so knowledgeable and
able to be so convincing? Was a disillusioned staffer at one of the
purchasing companies helping them? Did someone from the Komen Foundation
have anything to do with these videos as revenge for what Planned
Parenthood did to them a few years ago when they tried to stop funding
Planned Parenthood? Did they have someone inside Planned Parenthood
helping them out?
Cargo and passenger airlines have specific policies regarding the
packaging and transport of human remains. What is the method of
conveyance and tracking for harvested human tissues? How are they
protected against damage or loss? Do they constitute a biological hazard
if broken open?
Canvas district attorneys throughout the country. What do they have to say about the possibility of criminal charges?
As I write this, my children are asleep in their room, Loretta
Lynn is on the stereo, and my wife is out on a date with a man named
Paulo. It’s her second date this week; her fourth this month so far. If
it goes like the others, she’ll come home in the middle of the night,
crawl into bed beside me, and tell me all about how she and Paulo had
sex. I won’t explode with anger or seethe with resentment. I’ll tell her
it’s a hot story and I’m glad she had fun. It’s hot because she’s
excited, and I’m glad because I’m a feminist.
Before my wife
started sleeping with other men, I certainly considered myself a
feminist, but I really only understood it in the abstract. When I quit
working to stay at home with the kids, I began to understand it on a
whole new level. I am an economically dependent househusband coping with
the withering drudgery of child-rearing. Now that I understand the
reality of that situation, I don’t blame women for demanding more for
themselves than the life of the housewife.
Still, as a man, I could, if I wanted to, portray what I’m doing as
“work,” and thus claim for myself the prestige men traditionally derive
from “work.” Whenever I tell someone I stay home with the kids, they
invariably say, “Hardest work in the world.” They say this because the
only way to account for a man at home with the kids is to say what he’s
doing is hard work. But there’s a subtext in the compliment that makes
it backhanded: We both know no one ever says it to a woman. Mothers
care; fathers provide care. The difference is crucial.
Despite my total withdrawal from the economy and the traditional sources
of masculine identity, I can still argue I am a provider. I provide
care.
In this way, my masculine self-image was stretched but not broken.
Diaper bag notwithstanding, I was still a Man. It wasn’t
until my wife mentioned one evening that she’d kissed another man and
liked it and wanted to do more than kiss next time that I realized
how my status as a Man depended on a single fact: that my wife fucked
only me.
***
When people ask how it started, I say this: We married young. She’d
had sex before me, but only with a handful of people a handful of times.
She never had a boyfriend, never had a lover. I was the first man she
ever had the chance to get to know intimately. By her mid-30s, having
already had our children and entering her sexual prime, she felt keenly
her lack of sexual experience. Happily for me, she was willing to talk
about it, willing to ask if I’d be open to exploring other options. We
opened a bottle of wine and started talking, and talking, and talking.
She didn’t present it as an issue of feminism to me, but after much
soul-searching about why the idea of my wife having sex with other men
bothered me I came to a few conclusions: Monogamy meant I controlled her
sexual expression, and, not to get all women’s-studies major about it,
patriarchal oppression essentially boils down to a man’s fear that a
woman with sexual agency is a woman he can’t control. We aren’t afraid
of their intellect or their spirit or their ability to bear children. We
are afraid that when it comes time for sex, they won’t choose us. This
petty fear has led us as a culture to place judgments on the entire
spectrum of female sexual expression: If a woman likes sex, she’s a
whore and a slut; if she only likes sex with her husband or boyfriend,
she’s boring and lame; if she doesn’t like sex at all, she’s frigid and
unfeeling. Every option is a trap.
Feminism always comes back to sex, even when we’re talking about
everything else. The point isn’t that all women should be sexual
adventurers. Celibacy is as valid an expression of sexuality as
profligacy. The point is that it should be women who choose, not men —
even the men they’re married to. For my wife, the choice between
honoring our vows and fulfilling her desires was a false choice, another
trap. She knew how deep our love was, and knew that her wanting a
variety of sexual experiences as we traveled through life together would
not diminish or disrupt that love. It took me about six months — many
long, intense conversations, and an ocean of red wine — before I knew
it, too.
When my wife told me she wanted to open our marriage and take other
lovers, she wasn’t rejecting me, she was embracing herself. When I
understood that, I finally became a feminist.
***
That was two years ago, and today we’ve never been happier, more in
tune, closer, tighter, stronger. Whatever power I surrendered, I don’t
miss. I wouldn’t recommend it for everyone, but I tell everyone it works
for us.
How does it work? We take turns going out. Because we have small
children (ages 6 and 3), one of us stays home. (We don’t like to use
babysitters because it gives us a curfew; we’d rather go out unfettered
than worry about turning into a pumpkin at midnight.) Going out alone to
hooking up with others was an easy transition. It does work both ways
and, yes, I too enjoy sexual carte blanche. I just don’t use mine as
much as my wife uses hers. What’s important is equality of opportunity,
not outcome.
How does it feel? It feels great ... mostly. Most of the time, it
feels like a mature, responsible way to address our needs and desires
within our loving, mutually supportive marriage. It feels very adult,
especially because it depends on open, honest communication. We take
great pride in all the talking we do. I meet a lot of people who say
they’ll never get married because they don’t want to get divorced, and
hearing it always makes me sad, because they are cutting themselves off
from the possibility of the magic that happens when two people share
their lives. People don’t divorce because they can’t stand sharing
anymore; they divorce because they feel like they can’t share enough. I
never forget that my wife is a whole person unto herself, a complete and
dynamic individual, and though we are together, we’re not one. Too
often people get trapped in the roles of husband and wife, and a gulf
opens between what they think they should be and who they really are.
Opening our marriage has allowed us to close that gap so that the person
I call “wife” is the same person my wife sees in the mirror. Lying to
each other begins with lying to yourself, and now we don’t have to lie
to anyone.
There are of course moments of jealousy, resentment, and insecurity.
Recently, my wife went on a date and fell asleep at his apartment. I
hadn’t heard from her since 10 p.m., she still wasn’t home at 6
a.m. My texts went unanswered and my calls went to voicemail. A tight
knot of dread lodged in my stomach as I imagined all kinds of dire
scenarios and realized that I not only didn’t know where she was, I had
no idea whom she was with. I pictured myself going to the police saying,
“I think she’s in Red Hook with a guy named Ryan. I don’t know his last
name, but I think he’s a graphic designer?” I’m not sure there’s
actually a word for the unique blend of acute terror and unforgivable
shame I felt that morning imagining that I’d lost my wife to Ryan, the
maybe graphic designer. When she finally texted me at 7:30 a.m., relief
coursed through me like morphine. She wrote, “fuckfuckfuckfuck Im
soooooo sorry. Fell asleep.” I replied, “Just glad you’re ok, but next
time, no radio silence. Remember: you’re not alone.”
What surprises most people is when I tell them it’s not the
sex-with-other-men that bothers me. The sex is the easy part, the fun
part. It’s what the sex connects to, stands for, reveals that can be
difficult. I don’t want her to fall in love with anyone else, and every
time she goes on a date, I confront the possibility that she might. It
happened at the beginning: The first person she dated after we opened up
fell hard in love with her, and my wife, overwhelmed by his ardor,
tried to love him back. Watching it happen, I was confused, angry, and
terrified that she wanted to leave me. She assured me she didn’t, and
whatever feelings she had for him didn’t lessen what she felt for me.
Believing her then was the ultimate trust exercise. We survived because
eventually I did believe her, and also because I learned to trust
myself.
This has been the great challenge of my open marriage: to draw
strength from vulnerability. Doing so requires supreme self-confidence.
You must first really, truly love yourself; it is the foundation upon
which all the other love is built. From everywhere comes the message
that what I’m doing is for weaklings, losers, failures, pussies; that if
I had money and status, I could keep my wife “in line”; that her
self-discovery comes at the expense of my self-esteem. My open marriage
has made heavy demands on my ability to silence the voice of doubt
in my head, that gnawing feeling of worthlessness. But I find I can meet
those demands, and that I am able to build my self-confidence out of
nothing more than the basic dignity we all possess. I’m grateful
to my wife for pushing us to take this leap, and whatever happens to us
in the future I would do it all again. And when she comes home tonight
and crawls into bed beside me with a hot story about her date with
Paulo, she’ll do it all again, too.
A Mangina is a self-depreciating man who subconsciously hates himself
and blindly believes women are superior to him. He has been raised to
think masculinity is inherently wrong - perhaps even a
genetic/evolutionary/social flaw - and must be corrected by embracing
his "feminine side" to the point of losing the very qualities that make
him male. He believes women are beautiful, innocent angels and men are
filthy animals who need to be controlled.
Manginas see women as
the ultimate being and place them on a pedestal, focusing only on sex or
the satisfaction of women all the while not giving a damn about his
fellow man. Chivalry and being illogical are two traits of being a
mangina.
Manginas support women's issues which are against his
fellow men. Someone who espouses feminism but is really being suckered
into a form of chivalry in which women's interests take precedence over
men's. Unaware that they are merely "useful idiots", doing what women
want in the vain/hope of getting laid. When his usefulness is over she
tosses him out with the rest of the rubbish.
Manginas are betrayers and enemies of men
Man·gi·na
-noun-
1. A women-firster.
2. A pussy-worshipper.
3. A male who behaves or acts toward men in an overly aggressive way once feminist Maxims are questioned.
4. One who believes violence against women is more wide spread than violence against men.
comes to the light to many who CAN'T bare it one more minute.
#liberalhypocrisy #PerVisionaries #perVersionaries #democratsEVIL All who are NOT opposed to Planned Parenthood...now known as butcher-hood ARE butchers by default, if NOT BY DESIGN... I include all those of "you" who care more about the LION killed and more about #inflategate over the butchers in America... #butchersINamerica
Many
years ago I interviewed for a reporting job covering government waste,
fraud and mismanagement. The interview went well and my future employers
mentioned that they’d had trouble keeping the position filled as many
reporters had trouble coming up with story ideas. They wondered if that
would be a problem. I thought they were joking, so I chuckled. But they
were entirely serious.
A few reporters wrote an initial story on the undercover video that
caught the senior director for medical services at Planned Parenthood
discussing the harvesting of organs from the unborn children
killed by abortion. Another few reporters noted early political
repercussions that followed, including the launching of state and
federal investigations. A few reporters wrote up the apology (for the
“tone” used by the wine-drinking, salad-munching Dr. Deborah Nucatola as
she discussed harvesting lungs, livers, hearts and brains) offered by
Planned Parenthood’s president Cecile Richards.
But given the many angles that could be covered, the lack of ferocity
with which they’re tackling this story is noticeable. Compare, for
instance, what happened in the last month with coverage of Confederate
flags. The controversy over the flag arose after the man charged in the
Charleston church shooting was pictured with a Confederate flag.
Coverage was media-led and media-stoked. The media couldn’t stop finding
new angles to cover, including calling up retailers and pressuring them to stop selling merchandise with any Confederate flag depiction, such as a toy depicting the General Lee from the Dukes of Hazzard television show.
The shooting happened on June 17, about a month ago. The media
quickly moved on from the victims and the shooting itself, even though
there were many worthwhile angles to cover.
Instead they went for frenzied coverage of the presence of Confederate
flags. The Planned Parenthood video was released on July 14, about a
week ago. If the story of harvesting organs for sale from aborted babies
were deemed merely as important as the flag story, we’d expect to see many multiples of the levels of coverage we’re seeing now.
Using Nexis, I looked at a few media outlets to see how their
coverage of the Confederate flag compared to the Planned Parenthood
video. For my quick searches, I put in “Confederate” and “flag,” and
“Planned Parenthood” and “video,” with the appropriate dates. My search
of the media companies’ web sites showed higher counts for one or the
other entry than what showed up in Nexis, for what it’s worth. And for
CNN, I modified “video” with “undercover.” What I found was most
interesting, and goes a long way to show how the media can drum up
interest in a story or work to suppress a story:
CNN has had 493 mentions of the
Confederate flag since June 17 (only 188 of these even mention alleged
church shooter Dylann Roof), and managed 167 in the first six days. In
the first six days of the Planned Parenthood scandal, they managed 7
mentions, less than 5 percent what you’d expect if you considered those
stories only of equal importance.
The Washington Post
mentioned the Confederate flag 624 times in the last month (only 135 of
these mention Roof), and 126 times in the first six days. The
Washington Post has 28 stories mentioning the Planned Parenthood video
in the first six days, just over 22 percent of what you’d expect if you
considered the harvesting of organs from aborted babies to be merely as
important as the Confederate flag topic.
The New York Times has run
stories and essays on the Confederate flag 149 times since June 17 (and
only 39 of those mention Roof), 41 of those in the first six days. That
compares to three stories on Planned Parenthood during the same window,
just 7 percent of what you’d expect if the New York Times considered
those stories merely of equal importance.
Finally, Nexis shows 70 mentions of the Confederate flag on Politico.com
in the last month (only 18 mention Roof), 29 of those in the first six
days of the story. For the Planned Parenthood video, it shows 4 stories.
Don’t forget that many broadcasters were even more zealous in their
coverage of the Confederate flag, while running only the briefest
mentions, at best, of the Planned Parenthood story. I’d also be curious
how the pro/con arguments break down for the two issues in terms of
editorials and op-eds.
Clearly, our media are struggling to come up with any angles to cover
on this story. Perhaps they don’t want to be so disparate in their
coverage but, like my predecessors on the government waste, fraud and
mismanagement beat, they just don’t have any ideas.
I don’t have any of the resources of the Washington Post, the New
York Times, CNN, or Politico. If I did, here are just a few stories that
I might have reporters look into. Feel free to add your ideas in the
comments. Have at ’em, well-funded news teams:
We’ve heard about serial murderer/abortionist Kermit Gosnell keeping
trophies of his victims, abortion clinics dumping babies in the trash,
and now Deborah Nucatola working to do “a little better than break even”
in the sales of intact baby organs. What’s the standard procedure for
disposal of the unborn children killed in abortion? Are there abortion
clinic standards for this? Does it vary state by state? Do states even
have regulations? Does Planned Parenthood have uniform regulations? If
not, why not? If so, how are they enforced?
How much money does Planned Parenthood receive via sales of baby
organs? Do they keep records? Are those records trustworthy? How do we
know? How significant are these funds to the abortion portion of Planned
Parenthood’s operation? How does compensation for the children’s lungs,
livers, hearts and brains vary by state, if they do vary?
How far along in a pregnancy must a woman be for her child’s organs
to be considered worthwhile for procurement, sale and transfer? How much
does the value of a child’s liver, heart, lungs, etc., increase with time? Do the sales of baby organs form a significant enough part of Planned Parenthood’s business model to result in, say, filibustering of protections for late-term unborn children?
How did the Center for Medical Progress obtain the video? Who are
they? Why haven’t the media ask tough questions of abortion clinics,
historically? When Indiana passed a religious freedom bill, various
media outlets roamed the countryside searching for vendors with
religious objections to same-sex marriage, such as the owners of Memories Pizza.
What questions might be posed to abortion clinic owners and managers
around the country? Does the failure of the media to cover abortion well
encourage undercover journalism operations, such as the one by Center
for Medical Progress?
What are the laws on trafficking in human body parts? Who wrote
those laws? Was the abortion industry involved in writing those laws?
How much money is made throughout the organ sale process? How do
corporations make their way around laws prohibiting the express sale of
human organs? What do ethicists say about these loopholes and
workarounds?
Could expert observers take us through Planned Parenthood’s various
responses to the charges levied in the video? They don’t deny the
charges. How is that significant?
Clearly this was a story that generated tremendous interest among
critics of Planned Parenthood. Yet reports flooded in of Facebook
denying people the ability to share posts about the story or even “like”
ones they saw. What is the real story there? What was going on? What
does Facebook say about why that was happening? Similarly, Twitter
waited many hours before allowing Planned Parenthood to be a trending
topic on Twitter. Why? How is that focused? What role do social media
corporations play in controlling news? Who makes these calls, and what
are their criteria for doing so? How do they rate something as offensive
or unsuitable?
Who is Deborah Nucatola? What is her role at Planned Parenthood?
Does she have other significant roles? What are her political
contributions? Who are her political allies? If a young woman making
lightly disparaging comments about the Obama family on her Facebook page
merited a deep dive by the Washington Post into her high school records,
what can we learn from Nucatola’s childhood friends, boyfriends,
colleagues. Where did things go wrong for her? What did it mean, if
anything, when Planned Parenthood said Nucatola had been lightly
reprimanded for her comments recorded on the video? What, in particular,
did she do to deserve a reprimand? Will Cecile Richards tell us what
specific statements Nucatola said that were offensive?
Why has the media covered this salacious and scandalous story with
so much less rigor and enthusiasm than might be expected? What do
managing editors have to say about the treatment of this story? Many
promised to fix the problems after the Gosnell media blackout. What do they think went wrong with those efforts, if they were ever implemented?
Why have abortion rights groups and prominent activists been so silent about this story?
If asking every pro-life politician in the country to weigh in on
Todd Akin’s impolitic remarks on “legitimate rape” made sense, let’s
certainly find out what every pro-choice politician in the country
thinks about the harvesting of baby organs by abortionists for sale to
corporations. Hillary Clinton’s close ties to Planned Parenthood and
abortion rights extremists mean her response is the lead story.
How did sales of aborted children begin? Did Planned Parenthood seek
buyers or did the baby part buyers seek out Planned Parenthood? Does it
depend by affiliate? Planned Parenthood has a corner on the market of
freshly dead young humans. Does this market share make them significant
in the human organ trade? Who are the buyers? Who arranges the sales?
How much money changes hands? Do the buyers receive any federal funds?
What research is conducted?
Along those lines, what are the laws governing sale of tissue in
other circumstances? If it was a tumor that had been removed, would the
doctor have the right to sell it? Would they have the right to try and
do “a little better than break even”? What governs that? How does the
process specifically work and who oversees the regulation of this
industry? Specifically how are sales monitored? How confident are
observers and interested parties that the monitoring of this process is
stringent or effective?
What do corporations do with aborted baby parts? Is there any risk
that people have unknowingly been using products or research based on
parts harvested from the children killed in abortion? Do consumers have
the right to know when humans are killed and then have their parts used
for research?
The undercover journalists produced one example of a form Planned
Parenthood uses to obtain consent from mothers procuring abortions. Is
that form standard across all Planned Parenthood affiliates? If not, how
and why do they vary? Do other abortion corporations have similar
consent forms? How do they vary? The one example of Planned Parenthood’s
consent form specifically said that mothers understand they won’t be
compensated for “donating” their children’s tissue. However, in early
public relations materials from Planned Parenthood, they claimed that
Nucatola’s money discussion wasn’t about selling body parts to
corporations but, rather, about compensating women for their “donation.” Explain the disparity.
Do medical ethicists think that Planned Parenthood’s consent forms are sufficient?
Should women be told that abortionists may alter their abortion
procedures to procure valuable livers, lungs, hearts and brains? If not,
why not? If so, are any Planned Parenthood affiliates so informing the
women whose abortions they perform?
Is Planned Parenthood able to disclose which of its affiliates are
engaged in the harvesting of baby organs for sale to corporations? If
not, why not? If so, how reliable are their records? Since organ sales
are prohibited, organ harvesters typically charge for “shipping” or
“rental space” in a clinic. How does Planned Parenthood designate its
organ sales to be or appear to be reasonable? What is the range of
amounts charged for these things? How and why do they vary? What is
considered a reasonable amount? How is “reasonable” determined?
Explain the various federal and state laws governing organ
procurement and sales. What legal regime is in place that permits the
harvesting and sale of organs? How is it monitored?
What do medical experts say about the changes to the abortion
procedure mentioned by Nucatola for the sake of procuring organs. Do
these changes to the abortion procedure increase the chance of
complications for the mother? Is there an incentive on the part of
Planned Parenthood to target larger babies for “part conservation” by
inducing breach deliveries, as mentioned by Dr. Nucatola? What rights do
the mothers have to be informed about how their abortion process has
been altered to procure these parts? Dr. Nucatola claims that mothers
don’t have the right to be notified of her alterations to the procedure.
Is that true?
How has the Planned Parenthood video been received by those who have
seen it? What parts struck them the most? How do people who deny the
humanity of the unborn child explain the video discussions about
harvesting their organs?
How does the harvesting of organs fit into Planned Parenthood’s work
culture? Do people who work at Planned Parenthood clinics know that
this is going on? Do they all chat about it over salad or is it more a
covert wing of the operation? Do new workers or volunteers learn about
it and react poorly? Various prominent pro-life activists are former
Planned Parenthood employees and managers. What do they know about this
practice? Are secretaries at Planned Parenthood cheerfully arranging for
the delivery of fetal livers immediately after booking an abortion
appointment? Does Planned Parenthood have an employment hiring or
retention problem?
Tell us more about the “reimbursement” rates for various organs.
Which organs are most valuable? How do those organs change in value over
time? How does this relate to the late-term abortion debate?
Is there a price differential between white baby parts and black
baby parts? Is there a price differential between male organs and female
organs? If so, how much?
It’s just a few of the many angles that could be covered and should
be covered. The media may have gotten a tremendously late start, but
better late than never. Go get ’em, journalists! Do your jobs!
UPDATE: Readers suggest a few more questions reporters who want to do journalism might be interested in finding answers to:
Did the buyers of organs, either as companies or as individuals,
from Planned Parenthood donate back to Planned Parenthood or their
affiliates? Would be great to see donor records. Start with executives
at StemExpress. Are there lobbying ties to explore?
Why the difference in price for different parts (Nucatola discussed a
“menu” of options) if it doesn’t correlate to their value, there are no
changes to the abortion procedure and Planned Parenthood is merely
being “reimbursed” for their costs?
What laws govern organ harvesting, state and federal? How do they vary?
How widespread is the practice of organ harvesting in this country and elsewhere
The video mentions discussions regarding organ harvesting occurring
“behind closed doors” at Planned Parenthood. Tell us more about what
those conversations might entail.
Why doesn’t Planned Parenthood advertise that they harvest organs?
What are the uses of the organs and tissues obtained and where is
the end market? Medical research in what fields? In what countries? For
what end goals? What non research /non scientific uses are there if any,
and in what countries and by whom? Do these same markets exist in post
birth and/or adult tissue and how do the markets compare? How big is
the industry in terms of manpower and economic power? Are the
procurement procedures and markets in existence in other countries and
how do they compare? What are the international laws that govern this
industry and are there treaties for trade that include these markets? Is
there a black market In the US or elsewhere, and to what extent?
If a women is ‘gifting’ her baby’s body parts to Planned Parenthood,
and then Planned parenthood is then, supposedly, ‘gifting’ these parts
to research, what value is placed on the gift? I can’t gift something of
significant value to another person or organization without the IRS
being involved. Can a women claim the ‘gift’ as a donation to a tax
exempt organization and if so how much can be claimed on IRS forms? My
question is, with all this ‘gifting’ going on, what is the possible
requirement for IRS involvement? Are body parts considered a tax exempt
donation when passed from Planned Parenthood to a public for-profit
corporation doing research? If it can and should be claimed, how much is
Planned Parenthood claiming on their IRS forms for each of their
‘donations’ to corporations and/or research organizations for each body
part? Do these companies then declare the receipt of the organs as
donations which are assigned a monetary value and then taxed?
What is the history of Planned Parenthood and in particular how have
Margaret Sanger’s principles and ideas about social classes and races
influenced PP? Does Sanger have any thoughts about medical ethics with
regards to aborted babies? Or aborted babies of “inferior classes”?
Are abortions ever delayed and pregnancies allowed to continue until
fetal development reaches a particular stage that makes harvesting of
organs more viable?
Since this is all scientific research, can we expect video of the
research? Can we get access to video documentation of the transport of
fetal remains and harvesting of the organs? Is there a timeline
available in how this material is handled? Are harvested fetal organs
treated in the same way as other donated organs? Does the mother have
any involvement in the release of such organs to researchers? How is
authorization given for such usage
What sort of benefits does PP receive that are not directly
financial? Are there other forms of compensation that we do not know
about?
What about the use of ultrasound technology? If it’s considered
torture to the recipient of the procedure to make her watch it, how does
she feel about doctors using it to reposition the fetus for maximum
extraction rewards? Should the recipient be giving consent for the
sonogram for this portion of the procedure? Why is there no backlash
against PP doctors using ultrasounds to better obtain intact body parts,
while there was a huge backlash against the Texas law requiring
ultrasounds to provide the mothers with a more thorough understanding of
their bodies and the procedure they were signing up for? How is one
invasive and whatnot, but not the other?
The original video had the doctor quoting the worth of the ’tissue’
as $30-$100 per SPECIMEN. What is the breakdown on that? If the doctor
‘crushes’ the correct parts and the harvest includes a healthy,
undamaged liver, two lungs, a brain, at least one kidney, a heart and
‘lower extremities’, would the end results be perhaps hundreds of
dollars for one abortion?
how much time do Planned Parenthood staff spend on encouraging
adoption over abortion? After all, a major source of their income comes
from abortion.
Are these “business lunches” a typical part of the operation for
both Planned Parenthood and the organ brokers? Who picks up the tab? Are
they part of Planned Parenthood’s budget, and how much is budgeted for
them?
How many brokers are there for tissue and organs? Where do the
organs ultimately end up– hospitals, universities, big pharma companies?
How much taxpayer money ultimately ends up in the process? Who are the
real companies buying the parts from PP? What type of volume are we
talking about? Are they private independent labs or University labs? Any
public research involved? What is so important about having more than
just the tissue? What are the experiments?
Do arguments in support of harvesting organs from the unborn apply
to prisoners who die or are executed? If so, how so? If not, how do they
not apply? What are the rules governing organ harvesting of the
incarcerated who die in prison?
How were the actors portraying biologics buyers so knowledgeable and
able to be so convincing? Was a disillusioned staffer at one of the
purchasing companies helping them? Did someone from the Komen Foundation
have anything to do with these videos as revenge for what Planned
Parenthood did to them a few years ago when they tried to stop funding
Planned Parenthood? Did they have someone inside Planned Parenthood
helping them out?
Cargo and passenger airlines have specific policies regarding the
packaging and transport of human remains. What is the method of
conveyance and tracking for harvested human tissues? How are they
protected against damage or loss? Do they constitute a biological hazard
if broken open?
Canvas district attorneys throughout the country. What do they have to say about the possibility of criminal charges?
Meet the 39 Companies That Donate Directly to Planned Parenthood
ExxonMobil, along with 38 other companies,
donates directly to Planned Parenthood. The group is under fire after
two videos were released showing top Planned Parenthood executives
allegedly discussing the sale of aborted fetal body parts. (Photo:
Sebastien Pirlet//Reuters/Newscom)
In the wake of two videos allegedly showing Planned Parenthood
officials discussing the sale of aborted fetal body parts, Republicans
in Congress are working to ensure that Planned Parenthood is stripped of
its federal funding.
However, it’s not only the government that fills Planned Parenthood’s coffers. According
to 2nd Vote, a website and app that tracks the flow of money from
consumers to political causes, more than 25 percent of Planned
Parenthood’s $1.3-billion annual revenue comes from private donations,
which includes corporate contributions.
2nd Vote researched the corporations and organizations to find which
supported Planned Parenthood and found that more than three dozen
donated to the group. Some companies donated directly, while others
matched employee gifts.
Thirty-nine corporations and organizations directly contribute to the group.
Get our emails for free. We'll respect your inbox and keep you informed.
Planned Parenthood has come under heavy fire following the release of videos from the Center for Medical Progress.
The first video, released
last week, showed Planned Parenthood senior executive Dr. Deborah
Nucatola meeting with actors portraying buyers from a “human biologics
company.” The “buyers” discussed the sale of fetal body parts with
Nucatola over lunch.
In the second video, released
today, Dr. Mary Gatter, president of Planned Parenthood’s medical
directors council, is seen negotiating the price of aborted fetal body
parts.
Here are the 39 companies that have directly funded Planned Parenthood.
PLEASE PROMOTE THIS TO OTHER PATRIOTS & START SENDING POSTS TO THE LIST BELOW...ON AT A TIME...
Adobe
American Cancer Society
American Express
AT&T
Avon
Bank of America
Bath & Body Works
Ben & Jerry’s
Clorox
Coca-Cola
Converse
Deutsche Bank
Dockers
Energizer
Expedia
ExxonMobil
Fannie Mae
Groupon
Intuit
Johnson & Johnson
La Senza
Levi Strauss
Liberty Mutual
Macy’s
March of Dimes
Microsoft
Morgan Stanley
Nike
Oracle
PepsiCo
Pfizer
Progressive
Starbucks
Susan G. Komen
Tostitos
Unilever
United Way
Verizon
Wells Fargo
This story has been updated. Xerox was erroneously listed on Planned Parenthood’s website as having been a donor. “We have communicated with Planned Parenthood. They have removed Xerox from this list of companies that match gifts to the organization. It was not correct,” a Xerox representative told The Daily Signal.
Also, a Ford Motor Co. representative contacted The
Daily Signal claiming they had been erroneously listed on Planned
Parenthood’s website, and have contacted Planned Parenthood to be
removed.
After aborting her BABY ...tv personality commits SUICIDE
IN JUST TEN YEARS 
