Don’t forget: PP don’t just deal with pregnant women. How many came through the doors for contraceptives and sexual health advice?
Does PP help with fertility advice for those that WANT babies?
Those are still intended as an assertion of fact; they’re just not intended to be as precise. “You do this all the time!” is hyperbole - whatever it is, you probably don’t do it all the time. The point is that you do it often. “Planned Parenthood are out there every day, hunting and killing babies” contains some misleading implications but I think we could all recognize that as a hyperbole.
If you said “most Planned Parenthood clients have abortions,” you’d be making a factual assertion that the majority of people who go into those clinics have abortions. “A lot of” and “many” are at least up for interpretation because they don’t have numerical meanings. “Well over 90 percent” means that abortion is more than nine-tenths of what Planned Parenthood does. There’s more than one way to quantify what they do (in this thread we’ve discussed spending, total procedures, and percentages of donated revenue) but it is in no way intended to be hyperbole and it is not intended to demonstrate only the fact that Planned Parenthood does abortions. I don’t know if the full transcript of Kyl’s remarks is online, but when it is, you’ll see he was arguing that Planned Parenthood’s federal funding should be removed because it does almost nothing but abortions, and tax dollars shouldn’t be used to fund abortions.
I haven’t done research on this, but… After years of pressure the anti-abortion groups have pretty much eliminated all low-cost abortion providers except for Planned Parenthood. If you want to terminate a pregnancy, PP is the place to go. In many places, the only place to go.
In contrast, there are thousands of clinics and hospitals to go to for prenatal care, which is often covered by insurance.
So after reducing the number of abortion providers to ONE (essentially), the anti-abortion groups are attacking PP by saying the reason pregnant women go there is get an abortion – or other type of pregnancy termination Over 90% of the time.
Well, duh.
But that still doesn’t make abortions “well over 90%” of what PP does.
It’s been fun feeling gob-smacked by the stupidity of Kyl and his PR department, but after reading Palo Verde’s post about the explanation offered by conservatives in his locale, this is my guess about what likely happened:
Kyl heard that most pregnant women who went to PP had their pregnancies terminated. Over 90% (according to what Palo Verde posted).
His mind translated that to abortions being over 90% of PP’s total services. Rather than the more accurate 3-15%.
I’m guessing he was confused rather than actively dishonest.
As for the funny explanation that his comment was not intended to be a factual statement. I’m thinking that’s just idiocy rather than cynicism. There are a lot of bad writers and bad thinkers in the world, and many of them work for Republican congressmen.
It’s still damn funny.
Is the hyperbole of a lie a lie, or a hyperbole?
Speaking from experience: YES.
Planned Parenthood (the clue is in the title) is about helping people maintain their overall sexual and reproductive health. So if you are PLANNING to become a PARENT, they help you.
I think that we should all begin reporting that Kyl publicly admitted “Hey, I just lied. I make up shit like that all the time.”
Of course, we won’t intend anyone to take that as a factual statement.
Tris
If they help just one person conceive that otherwise couldn’t have, doesn’t that make it all worth while?
Denying them funding would kill that potential child!
You could but that would mean you lied, defeating the purpose of this outrage. Now Kyl et al. can say, “obviously we all lie, so what’s the big deal?”
There is a point to taking the moral high ground.
Heh heh heh. Awesome.
Yeah-it makes you an easy target for gutless snipers.
He gave a number. If he were exaggerating, he could have said a lot, the bulk or a big part of PP is providing abortion. Then we could argue about it because they are vague amounts.
Since it is actually under 3 percent providing abortion services, it is a lie.
I dunno. Trying to parse that whole thing still makes my head hurt.
Hey, Palo Verde, be a good chap and post a link to that rationalization, so I can try evaluating it with one fewer filter. Thanks.
Hi Kaylasdad. This is my rough parsing:
All patients of PP = less than 20% abortions.
All pregnant patients of PP = over 90% have pregnancy terminated.
That leaves a lot of possible questions unanswered. If you actually do some primary source resource, please share your conclusions. Number of visits vs number of patients. Chemical termination vs mechanical abortion. Stuff like that.
Ah, I see. Thanks.
Time for bed.
Hmph. Only if you stop calling me a chap. I’m a female, a mom, a sister, a daughter, and aunt, etc.
It was just a comment from the Tucson newspaper, but I’ve heard several folks (on talk radio etc.) grab on to this explanation.
The post is here, about 2/3 of the way down, by someone called RC W.
Hey, check out the “Facts and figures” on this site: http://www.survivors.la/
Not to hijack the thread, but it seems a bit related, another politician having trouble with numbers (he seems to be taking lessons from Kyl)
Meh, Haley Barbour was only off 19.2 percent
It’s actually worse than that if you look at the figures using the new accounting process, which eliminates duplicates - those who go on and off Medicaid and back on again.
Let’s see how fast he says:
“Whoops, my figures were wrong because the method of counting those on Medicaid changed. And it looks like the correct figures now render my entire point moot, because rather than decreasing, the number of folks on the Medicare rolls actually increased 10.2 percent during my first seven years in office.”
Or, he could go with the tried and true:
“Governor Barbour’s remark was not intended to be a factual statement.”