Planned Parenthood: Would Planned Parenthood Lie to Protect Its Ability to Perform Abortions and Make Money?

Donate to the Chris McDaniel Senate primary campaign in Mississippi

http://www.fourteenin2014.com/make-a-donation/donate-to-chris-mcdaniel/

NEWS FLASH:


www.amazon.com now has the exclusive right to sale my first e-book in its Kindle Store.

The title of the e-book is The Black Sword: The Secret U.S. Army in Vietnam


A paperback and hardcover version of the book was available since 2007. I believe it was since 2007. I do not know for sure. It was copyrighted in 2007. That edition had one comment and that comment was very negative receiving a one star rating.

The direct link to the e-book:

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00KCWVHIK

Here is that comment in its entirety and without change from the site:

“A poorly self aggrandizing working of ficition. November 8, 2012
By Robert M. Stanford
Format: Hardcover

I should prefix this by saying that I know the author of this book. To start regardless of how this book this being marketed by the author, it is a piece of fiction, the author never served in the military in capacity. Where to start with this review, the book is very poorly written and the author clearly did not do much in the way of historical research on military tactics in general or the Vietnam war in particular. The book reads much like a bad war movie mixed with some kind of cheesy martial arts film, the battle scenes are ridiculously unrealistic. Including laughably bad claims like how the author was trained in hand to hand combat techniques where he would be able to kill some one with one punch in less than one second, he selected for the group because he was genius with Forest Gump like running ability, doing three hours of weight training for 6 straight days a week for months, claims of gun with finger printer readers that only let the owner fire them, ect. Save yourself some money and avoid this book”

Robert does indeed know me. However, it goes a little deeper. Robert is my nephew—the first born of my younger sister. She is four years younger than I am. I was working for a living teaching school when she graduated from Illinois State University. She didn’t meet her future husband until she was working as a teacher. Therefore, Robert wasn’t even born during the time period of most of the book. Robert also never served in the military. Neither did his father or mother.

I do state that I have a tested I.Q. of 130 or above. Both of my children have tested I.Q.s of 130 or above. Does that prove that I do? Of course not. Therefore, before I wrote the book, I went to the public school district that I attended from first grade through high school. I asked for and received a copy of my school records including the results of an I.Q. test. I have written proof that I have a tested I.Q. of 130 or above. If I didn’t, I would not have put it in the book. However, I never said, anywhere in the book, that I am a genius.

As far as his statement that “the book is very poorly written.” That is, at best, an opinion. Read again what he wrote. How well written are his comments? I was a high school American government/economics teacher for ten years. Having been a teacher, I am use to negative comments from students. Most of those comments were from people who did not do well in my class. I expected the students to earn their grade through work and meeting my standards. If they did not, they suffered the consequences. Most did not like the consequences.

If you read the dedication page, I paid an English teacher to edit the work. We did each of the six chapters the same way. At the time, I lived in Tucson and she lived in Arkansas where she taught high school English. I mailed a chapter to her, she ripped it to shreds. I corrected and rewrote the chapter based upon her suggestions and sent the rewritten chapter back to her. She found more items to criticize and gave more suggested corrections. I corrected a second time and sent them back once again. She approved the chapter and mailed it back. When Robert states that “the book is very poorly written,” he criticizes her. I do not believe those criticisms are justified.

Concerning the publication of the book itself, I did not want to go through a regular publishing house because I did not want the book to be edited by the publisher. Since I did not know how to publish a book, I hired a publishing company to do the actual printing of the book and the creation of the front and back book covers. When the company rejected my print copy because the margins were wrong several times including after I went to a Peoria printer to have the margins done correctly by a professional, I wrote the CEO of the company saying I was cancelling the contract because the company was not fulfilling its obligation to print the book. Without my knowledge, the book was printed and offered to the public including on Amazon in paperback and hardcover editions. My guess is that a company lawyer told the CEO that he had better fulfill the contract. I did not know the book was in distribution until I received a royalty check from the company. The copyright date on this published version of the book is 2007.

In the mean time, after borrowing money from my mother, I went to the Peoria printer and paid that company to print my book under my Arizona established publishing company. I had established the company in Arizona before moving back to Illinois in 2004. I never planned to live in Illinois—the land of Barack Hussein Obama—permanently. Until this book was published, I had not actually published anything through the company. My book through my publishing company was published in 2008.

Here is a strange occurrence. Robert’s mother—my younger sister—purchased four books in 2008. There are four people in her family—mother, father, brother, sister. I would have thought that Robert would have first read the book in 2008. He certainly did not have to purchase it from Amazon.

It was family squabble time. In 2004, I moved back to Illinois to care for my mother after my father had died. My two sisters and I had a verbal agreement that I would stay in Illinois until mom dies, caring for her in her home. She would not be put into a nursing home. After a series of minor strokes over a period of about a year, my sisters broke the agreement and put her in a home. Conflict resulted over my staying or leaving the house and the State. Discussion was done by e-mail. I stated in one e-mail that I was going to write more Black Sword books—five in total—and the next one would include the current dispute.

In early January of 2012, I received an eviction notice. The process continued through the year until a court date was set for November 30, 2012. (I believe that is the correct date. I did not bother to check to make sure.) On October 15, 2012, my oldest sister died after a brief illness. On November 8, 2012, Robert posted his criticism of the book. Coincidence? On November 30, 2012, I was court ordered to leave the house by midnight on December 31, 2012. On December 31, 2012, I moved out of the house.

If Robert meant to hurt sales of the book, I hope he did. I want the other company to stop selling my book. And the company did send me notice that I am being dropped. Good! I had told them not to publish.

If you read this blog regularly, you may know that I actually write five blogs, six days a week. Not on Sunday.

http://christiangunslinger.blogspot.com—pro-life

http://christiangunslinger1.blogspot.com—politically conservative

http://christiangunslinger3.blogspot.com—politically conservative

http://christiangunslinger5.blogspot.com—pro-traditional family

http://christiangunslinger7.blogspot.com—politically conservative concentrating on the primaries and the upcoming general election

By the very nature of my blogs, I expect the radical Left, pro-abortion/unborn baby MURDERERS, and pro-homosexual behavior advocates to attack my e-book as well as anything else I wrote and publish. Robert may be the first but I do not expect him to be the last.

The e-book costs only $3.00. The only cheaper price is $2.99 and I do not price my books that way. Everyone should know that $2.99 is actually $3.00. What a sad marketing ploy! Spend the $3.00 to determine whether or not Robert is correct. If a member of Amazon prime, the book is a free selection. You just might be pleasantly surprised. I have received very positive comments from readers including people who have actually been in the military unlike Robert and a student at the United States Naval Academy located in Annapolis, Maryland who is the grandson of a friend.

And finally, I would like nothing better than being reconciled with my sister and the rest of my earthly family. The theme of the second book is family. Planned publication date 2015. The theme of the third book is politics with the planned publication date being 2017. The fourth about education in 2019. And the last and final book in the series, on the church of JESUS, the CHRIST in 2021.

The direct link to my e-book:

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00KCWVHIK

—

Texas Primary Run-Off: May 27, 2014 (Primary was March 4, 2014)
—

From: http://www.lifenews.com/2014/05/13/eleven-thousand-reasons-why-planned-parenthood-cant-be-trusted/

“Eleven Thousand Reasons Why Planned Parenthood Can’t Be Trusted
by Casey Mattox | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 5/13/14

The Gonzales decision held that the federal ban on partial-birth abortions, except where necessary to save a woman’s life (Which is not necessary!—my addition), was facially constitutional—meaning that generally speaking the ban was constitutionally sound.


Opponents of the ban, including Planned Parenthood and their allies, had argued strenuously that the law was unconstitutional because it lacked a ‘health’ exception. The Guttmacher Institute, Planned Parenthood’s de facto research arm, claimed that roughly 2,200 (probably a low estimate as Ramesh Ponnoru explains at the link) occurred in a representative year prior to the ban—almost all of which were performed because they were necessary to protect a woman’s health (Which has always been a false argument! Health was based upon how she feels! Not any medical necessity because generally it is not medically necessary!—my addition).

Congress had omitted the exception because of evidence that such an exception was not necessary in practice (My use of red—my addition) and that such an exception would merely be used to circumvent the law entirely, (My use of red. Which was why the Court put it in with the original Doe decision! It was the great “out” to allow unlimited abortion/MURDER throughout all nine months of pregnancy!—my addition) with abortionists claiming falsely that virtually every partial-birth abortion was necessary for ‘health’ reasons, and in Doe v. Bolton, the companion case to Roe v. Wade, the court had created a health exemption so wide that it covered just about everything including depression.

Congress’s judgment was buttressed by a statement from the American Medical Association that partial-birth abortion was ‘not medically indicated.’ Indeed, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists also agreed that partial-birth abortion was virtually never (if ever) necessary before then Solicitor General Kagan (Who is now a member of the Supreme Court thanks to President Obama and Leftist Democrats!—my addition) intervened to prevent what she called ‘a disaster’ and proposed alternative language for ACOG in its written testimony to Congress.

The Court didn’t have to decide that a health exception was always unnecessary as a factual matter, deferring to Congress’s judgment on the matter. It simply refused to declare the whole law unconstitutional because of the theoretical possibility that a woman might need an abortion for a non-life-threatening health reason. But importantly, the Court held that abortionists could bring future challenges to the law on behalf of actual women who needed a partial-birth abortion for true health reasons (There are none!—my addition).

Hours after the decision, Planned Parenthood was still warning of its imminent negative impact on women’s health (They LIE! Just as our present President lies!—my addition). The battle seemingly joined, Justice Ginsburg’s dissenting opinion, citing the ACOG/Kagan language, specifically invited as-applied challenges on behalf of the alleged thousands of women who needed the partial-birth abortion procedure for health reasons: ‘One may anticipate that such a preenforcement challenge will be mounted swiftly, to ward off serious, sometimes irremediable harm, to women whose health would be endangered by the intact D&E prohibition.’

Over five years later, Justice Ginsburg and the nation still wait (And will wait!—my addition). Although women’s health was allegedly immediately harmed by the decision, we have not yet seen an as-applied challenge on behalf of one of these women, nor have we seen even one documented story of a woman whose health was impacted by the unavailability of a partial-birth abortion (And will not if based upon the truth! The truth is something Planned MURDERHOOD is NOT familiar with!—my addition). If we accept Guttmacher’s figure of approximately 2,200 partial-birth abortions per year, then the decision in Gonzales— upholding the law and lifting the injunction against it— has prevented 11,000 partial-birth abortions from occurring.

And recall that the argument was that this one procedure was the only way to protect a woman’s health. It was necessary, we were told. And yet, there is no evidence whatsoever that any woman’s health has been harmed by the unavailability of this procedure. No as-applied challenge as invited by Justice Ginsburg, no Newsweek cover story, no Rachel Maddow Show interview of a woman whose identity is hidden, no Journal of the American Medical Association article, nothing.

What are we to believe now that we have over five years of a lack of such evidence? I see four options:

‘(1) Planned Parenthood and its allies were being truthful, and up until April 18, 2007, approximately six partial-birth abortions per day were performed for health reasons—but by an incredible blessing, those health threats ceased on that morning until the present (Right!—my addition). I’ll call this the ‘dispensational’ argument.

(2) Planned Parenthood and its allies were correct, and women have been harmed by the Gonzales decision, but the abortion lobby lacks the financial and legal resources to file a challenge on behalf of one of these thousands of women (We know this is not true!—my addition).

(3) The abortion industry continues to perform partial-birth abortions in violation of federal law (This is possible! We know they violate the law!—my addition).

(4) The claim by Planned Parenthood and its allies that partial-birth abortions were— and are— necessary to protect women’s health is untrue (Planned MURDERHOOD lies! We know this to be true!—my addition).’


Draw your own conclusions about which of these is the more likely explanation. But should it surprise us that Planned Parenthood and its abortion industry allies are willing to lie and distort the facts in order to protect their sacred (and coincidentally—cash) cow? With roughly $8 million in documented waste, abuse, and potential fraud in just a few Planned Parenthood affiliates—should we be surprised? When you’re in the killing business, lying is easy (It sure is!—my addition).

CLICK LIKE IF YOU’RE PRO-LIFE!

For more than five years, every day has brought more evidence to answer this question. Will Planned Parenthood and its abortion industry allies lie about ‘women’s health’ in order to further their ideology of death and support their bottom line (Absolutely!—my addition)? As surely as the sun rises in the east.

LifeNews Note: Casey Mattox is senior counsel with Alliance Defending Freedom.