Planned Parenthood CEO Gets Pushback on MSNBC
On May 30 Planned Parenthood CEO Cecile Richards appeared on MSNBC's Morning Joe to tout her group's launch that day of an anti-Romney ad campaign. This was the day after Live Action released its first investigative video of a new series, which exposed Planned Parenthood as a facilitator of sex-selection abortion.
The Live Action videos were not mentioned during the Morning Joe segment, so either they were ignored or Richards stipulated she would only come on if they weren't brought up. Nevertheless, (somewhat) conservative host Joe Scarborough got in several digs against the abortion giant.
Richards looked tense during the interview, and "frankly" (one of her favorite words) haggard. Her voice, although typically husky, sounded hoarse. She must have done lots of talking (yelling?) the day before. Certainly Richards wasn't the bubbly persona we recently saw on Jon Stewart's show.
Planned Parenthood, the Komenator Emulator
Scarborough fired his first salvo beginning at 1:24 on the video:
Scarborough: So, you keep throwing out cancer screenings. Obviously, Planned Parenthood got on the front page of all the papers when one of the largest - actually, the largest, I guess - breast cancer prevention organization decided they didn't want to be involved with Planned Parenthood anymore. Do they not have a right to try to disengage from a very controversial issue?
Richards: Well, I actually think the Komen Foundation, which, of course, is working with us again, and we're really grateful for that partnership -
Scarborough: Well, they really had no choice, did they?
Richards: Well, I mean, they made that decision, and I think, honestly, we do the same work....
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Loved that.
Abortion is preventative care?
Richards then knocked out several talking points, and then Scarborough pushed again, beginning at 2:38. Note the underlined sections below were not included in MSNBC's written recap of the interview, nor was the entire Komen conversation:
Scarborough: Do you understand why some Americans... would not want their tax dollars going to an organization that provides abortion services to probably any other organization on the planet? Just as a matter of morality. If somebody thinks that abortion is murder, they don't want their tax dollars going - they're just like I'm sure other Americans wouldn't want their tax dollars going to the NRA or to pro-life groups.
Richards: Well, of course, tax dollars do go to pro-life groups. But in any case, the important thing here is Planned Parenthood, again, we provide health care to one in five women in America. The vast majority of our healthcare services are preventive health care. And two things you need to know, Joe. One is, actually, all of the money that Mr. Romney wants to get rid of, not only for Planned Parenthood but for all other women's healthcare providers, is for preventative care, is for basically family planning. And I think most of the people around this table would agree the #1 reason -
Scarborough: Well, do you call abortions preventative care? What’s your definition of preventative care?
Richards: No. More than 90% of our services are cancer screenings, birth control services, well-women checkups....
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
There were more good soundbites in the interview, such as when Richards claimed "Planned Parenthood was started by Republicans all across the country." No, Planned Parenthood was started by socialist, racist, eugenicist Margaret Sanger.
In the face of a new Gallup poll finding Americans considering themselves "pro-choice" at a record low of 41%, Richards also unsurprisingly found that "the language 'pro-choice' and 'pro-life' is totally irrelevent in this country." Would she say that if the numbers were reversed? No way.
- Jill Stanek's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
➚ More War On Women
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Mon, 06/04/2012 - 1:40pm.
To liberals, abortion is today, what giving up virginity was yesterday.
It is a sacrament of passage into liberal womanhood.
Family planning is health
Submitted by motherbelt on Mon, 06/04/2012 - 1:59pm.
Family planning is health care? Since when?
And no, Joe, they don't actually call abortion "preventative care," but they do call it a "reproductive health" issue.
You have to "think" like a lib, MB.
Submitted by Newsbubba on Mon, 06/04/2012 - 3:20pm.
When they say "preventive care," they do mean abortion, because it prevents the Sandra Flukes of the world from having those pesky little bastards that mess up their single social lifestyle.
Too bad that little bastard, Drone Boy's baby momma didn't visit the "preventive care" clinic.
90% other than abortion
Submitted by bkeyser on Mon, 06/04/2012 - 2:01pm.
Okay. Hypothetical question than Ms. Richards: Given the good work you do for women's heathcare, if the Supreme Court reversed Roe v Wade and states outlawed abortion except in the case of a medical emergency or as a last resort to save the life of the mother and only allowed such procedures to take place in hospitals, would Planned Parenthood remain in business?
Compare this to the energy industry which has had to fold up a number of coal-fired plants due to EPA regulations. Those plants provided no other service; ≈100% was electricity production by a means outlawed by Federal regulation. Dropping 10% of PP's services would seem, in the context in which Ms. Richards described it, quite feasible. And yet, somehow I doubt she would agree.
Planed Parenthood already admitted the lie
Submitted by c5then on Mon, 06/04/2012 - 2:48pm.
They don't do mamograms or the other "preventive" care that they want everyone to think that they do. The "refer" their clients to the clinics and hospitals that do.
Planned parenthood simply distributes contraception otherwise called birth control pills (and bills medicare for it) and performs abortions. That's it.
In late January, look for PP to get a funding cut from the Federal Government. The murderes are going to have to beg for private funding to continue their grusome work.
Madison and Jefferson and Franklin built a Republic - Roberts killed it!
More than 90% of their services are preventative health?
Submitted by drsamherman on Mon, 06/04/2012 - 3:44pm.
Preventative care can mean anything from somebody taking a history to looking at a mole to doing a breast examination (not a gold-standard for diagnosis) to providing referrals to other physicians. Planned Parenthood's preventative services may account for over 90% of their service counts, but it does not necessarily account for the number of abortions they provide.
The way this is shrouded behind a veil is easy--a typical illustration:
Patient walks into the clinic for a oral contraceptive renewal. This usually would go as follows:
A. Patient history to assess how birth control pill working = + 1 service (history)
B. Standard electrolyte panel (7 different serum markers) ordered + blood drawn = + 2 services (blood draw + order/blood to lab)
C. Brief physical exam done = + 1 service (low-level physical examination, e.g. blood pressure, heart rate, chest sounds, etc.)
D. Breast exam (usually separate from physical) = + 1 service
E. Referred for mammogram = + 1 service
G. Routine pelvic exam = + 1 service
F. Pap smear done and sent to lab = + 2 services (taking of sample & order/sample to lab)
H Prescription for birth control pills renewed = + 1 service
Grand total for *1* patient = (1+2+1+1+1+2+1) 9 total services rendered
The medical coder looking at the patient's service record for that visit would be highly trained to pick up all 9 services rendered and to bill accordingly.
Even though abortion may only be less than 10% of the total service counts, this is primarily due to the way service counts in clinics and hospitals are done for billing and medical reimbursement services. I don't know of one Planned Parenthood clinic where they do mammograms or provide anything but contraception-related services. A breast exam is not a gold standard for diagnosis of breast cancer, and accordingly can be performed by an appropriately licensed and trained health care professional and not just a physician, nurse practitioner or physician's assistant.
The way correct way to report the abortion rate for Planned Parenthood is not to bury their reports with meaningless service counts, but to instead report them by percentage of patient counts and not service counts. The service counts vastly underestimate the extent of abortions being performed.
Stick to shrinking heads, Doc.
Submitted by 4for4 on Mon, 06/04/2012 - 4:05pm.
Opinion science appears to be your expertise.
What's wrong 4for
Submitted by Radical1979 on Mon, 06/04/2012 - 4:54pm.
You don't like facts?
4for4 is just another lib troll who believes being ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 06/04/2012 - 5:55pm.
a lefty gives him the gravitas to successfully pooh-pooh anything said by a conservative who happens to be a professional.
Like all trolls, 4for4 deals, rather, in spouting poo-poo.
The worse it gets for Obama, the nastier the trolls become.
QED
MD
Good point, Matt.
Submitted by drsamherman on Tue, 06/05/2012 - 11:06am.
I have noticed that 4x4 (wondering if it's referring to it's schizophrenia diagnostic criteria?) likes using the unsupported quip.
Glib trolls are about as useful as an umbrella in a hurricane.
Perhaps s/he could find ready employment as a garden gnome or a scarecrow?
News flash: Blogger Stanek commits major blunder...
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 06/04/2012 - 4:42pm.
labels MSNBC's Scarborough "(somewhat) conservative". Following emergency staff meeting, website declares "This will not stand!"
Guilt-ridden apology and retraction expected soon.
Jer
*
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 06/04/2012 - 4:43pm.
double
Good to see, Jer, that you realized ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 06/04/2012 - 5:49pm.
saying it twice wouldn't double Scarborough's "conservative" chops. :o)
MD
Tax Status
Submitted by desert3030 on Tue, 06/05/2012 - 10:58am.
What is their tax status and does it cahnge with direct "marketing" of the POTUS? Or the same as the DNC?
Then the question is, should we reduce the government allocation by the partisan campaigning?