Students for Life on Hannity and Colmes
One reason I think Alan Colmes is leaving Hannity & Colmes is he must be tired and disgusted with himself for the part he is forced to play as a liberal defending morally bereft liberal positions and actions….
I don’t know how Colmes slept after last night’s show. There he was ignorantly yet vehemently protecting Planned Parenthood, an organization that actually makes its living in part by helping cover up rapes of child sexual predators. He knew the real deal but made a fool of himself by trying to bully the messengers.
Sarah Hardin and Kristan Hawkins of Students for Life of America did a fabulous job handling Alan. I love how Kristan called him on his role in the show, in this case to act as a pro-life spoiler and PP defender. I love how Sarah laughed at his folly.
And where was PP, the chickens?
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Not mad. Am sad, though, sad to note you defend minor rape cover-up.
How do I know PP wasn’t on to the sting? Did you watch the video of the show? PP said in a statement it reported the alleged rape, even though it didn’t.
forced to play? puhleeze!
I listen to Colmes show two or three times a week, and agree with him on many many things. I still like him better than I do Hannity, but last night he was really quite douchebaggish in his approach.
If this was an undercover video expose of torture or even a pro-life pregnancy center, he would be focusing on the issue at hand and not the way the “proof” was brought to light.
Wow, he sounded like such an idiot!
PLA, 8:44am
Exactly. It boils down to one dictum, “who’s ox is being gored?” Protests and demonstrations are just fine, so long as I agree with them. Undercover exposes are just fine so long as they don’t expose practices I prefer to believe don’t occur.
Does Colmes have an issue with undercover police work? Couldn’t one just as rationally argue that criminals are being “set up”?
I guess all undercover reporters should be ridiculed as well.
Of course, why stop there, undercover police officers are obviously “lying” and so we shouldn’t prosecute any crime they discover.
Colmes claims the false pretenses is a crime and not reporting of sexual predators is not a crime
That is how we catch thugs. They do it drugs every day. Colmes is the standard defender of unrighteousness. I suspect he has a problem with OJ being smeared by reason of people watching his sentencing.
I think this decoy method is fantastic.
False reporting of a crime is a criminal act in every jurisdiction, and may result in felony charges if someone is killed or injured.
Criminal impersonation is a crime in most states, where someone lies about their identity or circumstances to obtain a benefit, classic case being cashing your dead mother’s SS check.
Because of the multiple instances, the crossing of state lines and use of instruments of interstate commerce (phone lines) federal criminal rackateering and state rackateering statues may be implicated. Those who financially support these schemes are also potentially criminally liable.
Bottom line is these people commit dozens or hundreds of criminal acts to try to trick someone at PP into saying something that can be used against PP.
Anonymous was Bystander
Bystandar, so are you going to go prosecute every undercover investigative reporter? What about undercover cops? No?
Obviously there is a big difference between coming up with a false identity in order to go under cover, and stealing someone else’s identity.
Cops can stage a sting in which they appear to be prostitutes. The men who try to “hire” them are charged with solistation, even though they weren’t actually going to get any “service.”
Instead of trying to kill the messenger, maybe you should ask yourself why PP repeatedly covers up the rape of minors.
Bystander,
KNOWINGLY reporting a false crime is a crime in every jurisdiction. If you suspect someone is trying to break into your home and call the police, you are not guilty of any crime if it turns out to be a false alarm.
What benefit did these “minor” impersonators obtain?
How did they attempt to trick PP? If PP had simply picked up the phone and reported the incident, as state law requires, that would have been the end of it for PP. The police can quickly determine if a given address and name exist. If not, its likely the investigation will end right there.
Alan is a Planned Parenthood eunuch.
He’s protecting what Planned Parenthood wants to go on in bedrooms.
I’d address his arguments – if he had any. (Among other things)
Bystander,
None of the crimes you stated are remotely applicable in this case! Where do you practice law??
Janet, I have been practicing law in the United States for over 30 years. How about you?
Please outline your legal qualifications, so that we can draw conclusions as to the validity of your legal opinions.
Blech, same old liberal song.(For the first time in my life, I’m actually BORED hearing the same stupid argument again and again..)I swear to you I could cut and paste my response from the last blog on PP and paste it here. Just a sec….
Soooo….because it was a sting operation, PP did nothing wrong since the rape was faked….Sooo, PP is NEVER covering up actual rapes. No! Not ever! Sooo…they totally knew it was all a trick, and were playing to the cameras…..PP cares about little girls being raped by their mother’s boyfriends. Uh-huh! That’s right!
Bystander, if you refuse to acknowledge that SFL is exposing the real Planned Parenthood, you’re just a drop in the ocean of people that contribute to this mass delusion that allows these rapes to continue. If you don’t acknowledge truth when it hits you in the face, consider yourself a contributing factor to the problem itself.
(Why do liberals constantly make me repeat myself?)
Planned Parenthood gets our taxpayer dollars. Sarah and Kristan are doing the government a favor by “taking up Planned Parenthood’s valuable time” to make sure that they’re obeying the law. When audits are done, is it considered wrong for the auditor to take up a company’s/organization’s valuable time? I think not.
Alan Colmes exudes the arrogance of so many of the political elite – not caring how much he sounds like an idiot as long as he can produce the illusion of sounding intelligent to his friends who also live in “Planned Parenthood” ignorance.
So it’s ok for pro-choicers to use false identities and information in undercover reporting to collect dirt on pregnancy resource centers for public reports but all of a sudden it’s illegal when pro-lifers use the same tactics to gather information on PP? Isn’t that hypocritical?
Alan’s claim that they were playing a game of gotcha is true. The point he misses though is they wouldn’t be able to play this game if PP were reporting these false cases. PP had no way of knowing the case was false.
Theresa,
Exactly. If PP had simply picked up the phone and called the police, there would be no issue.
Its like the johns who unknowingly solicit policewoman when hunting for hookers. Hey guys, if you weren’t out looking for hookers you wouldn’t be in this mess.
Bystander @ 1:52 PM
Janet, I have been practicing law in the United States for over 30 years. How about you?
Please outline your legal qualifications, so that we can draw conclusions as to the validity of your legal opinions.
My experience is from life. Do I need a degree to have a valid legal opinion? An opinion is an opinion after all.
Bottom line is these people commit dozens or hundreds of criminal acts to try to trick someone at PP into saying something that can be used against PP.
I don’t think you have much of a case counselor. Nobody is trying to trick anyone, it’s just a matter of PP doing what the law requires them to do.
Rachel C.
I’m not dogmatic. If anyone, anywhere is doing something morally wrong, by all means expose and humiliate them. People everywhere, regardless of morals or beliefs, should be held accountable for their actions.
I don’t accept corruption from any party, organization, or person. It’s just not right.
The fact that Planned Parenthood is covering up rape on top of murdering millions upon millions of little babies and getting taxpayer dollars to do it is just adding insult to injury. That’s why I’m so angry.
Rachel C.
It just occurred to me that I read your post completely opposite from the way you wrote it. Very sorry. *hides*
Being pro-choice is “morally bankrupt?
That’s a pretty arrogant statement, isn’t it? Pro-choice people are pro-choice because they want abortions to happen but because they realize that making them illegal only makes a bad situation worse.
This doesn”t stop abortions; it only forces women to back-alley abortionists or to use hangers on themselves.
It doesn’t provide for those poor unwamted children who ARE born but merely dooms them to a life of poverty,malnutrition, lack of education and opportunity, dead end jobs or idleness,
and increases poverty, unemployment and crime for society in general.
There is absolutely no evidence that abortions increase the likelihood of breast cancer or mental illness for women.
These are just ant-choice rumors and scare tactics.
Ironically, under Obama, whom you anti-choicers hate so much, the abortion rate could decrease significantly.
That is “Not because they want abortions to happen”. I left a word out.
Dear Robert Berger,
Got any new stuff?? You are starting to look like spam.
Carla, so true.
Agreed, Carla…These are all arguments that have been addressed individually so many times…Anti-lifers want abortions to be rare so badly, they claw at you every time you try to reduce them or make common-sense legislation concerning them. Every single law, and every single thing we do is bad. Tell me, Robert. How would YOU, a “morally bankrupt” anti-lifer, suggest making abortions rare?
Robert, you might consider saving yourself some time and reading “Pro-life Answers to Pro-choice Arguments” by Randy Alcorn if you can’t remember the answers to these same questions/statements you’ve made repeatedly on this blog. Every one of your (very old) arguments is listed there and refuted. You can even get it for a penny on Amazon.com. Or if you want, I’ll even be willing to send you “Why Pro-life” for absolutely free.
Sorry, but none of you anti-choice people have ever successefully refuted anything that I or other pro-choicers have said. Making abortion illegal again in America will NOT stop abortion, and will probably only increase it.
I’m not spam. Randy Alcorn won’t prove anything, and neither he or any one else will ever convince me or other pro-choicers to want to try to force American women to bear children against their will.
You’re a good little proabort robot, Robert. Now run along and hit your head against something hard.
Robert Berger, explain where the “force” is, in preventing someone from using force to kill an unborn child?
What I mean is that if the US government ever issues a law mandating that women be required to bear children even if it is against their will, it will never work. Women will seek and obtain abortions whether they are legal or not. You can’t escape this fact.
And I am not a “pro abort”. I am pro-choice. You people are not pro life. You are anti-choice, and opposed to abortion.
That’s your right, but you will never stop abortion, even if you succeed in wheedling the US government to make it illegal.
Easy for you to say, Robert. You’ll never be in the position to have to make a decision to abort. Men shouldn’t be allowed to have an opinion on abortion unless they are pro-life, of course. :)
Robert,
Regarding my comment at 4:39, do you know what’s ironic, it’s the same logic the women’s libbers used on men in the 1970’s when men opposed abortion. They can’t have an opinion because they are men.
We live in a crazy world when people consider a new life a burden to be dealt with.
Hi Robert-
I’d be interested to hear your thoughts about a true story that I was recently a part of. I was counseling a married couple who were considering getting an abortion. They had already had one abortion, early in their relationship, then gave birth several times, and now were unexpectedly pregnant at a time when they felt their family was already complete. The husband was adamant that abortion was their only option, the wife, on the other hand, was decidedly unhappy to be pregnant but was quite sure that having another abortion was going to be worse than adjusting their lives to accommodate another child. Towards the end of the session, while talking about how the first abortion was influencing her decision now, the wife looked straight at me and said, with tears in her eyes “I wish abortion wasn’t legal. If it hadn’t been so easily available, I couldn’t have done it the first time and I wouldn’t be facing this choice now. I was rushed and panicked the first time, and this time I’m taking my time but I still hate the fact that I can choose. I made this mess and I should be forced to deal with it and not have the option to make my child pay for my mistake.”
She had already “chosen” abortion once, against her better judgment, to please her husband, and now she was being pressured to “choose” again.
Robert, I wonder if you have any idea how many women are getting abortions because they are panicked, hormonal, tired, pressured, coerced, forced, lied to, manipulated, threatened, can’t see another way out, are trying to please someone else etc etc etc…???
Where are the pro-choicers when no-one asks “Is this really what you want or are you doing this because __________?” “Is this really what you want or are you doing this for someone else?” “If your situation was different, would you still want an abortion- and if the answer is no- how can we change your situation and help you and your baby?”
In the meantime, I see the pro-choicers doing everything they can to make sure that abortion is easily accessible- with no waiting periods, no counseling, no parental or spousal involvement, no informed consent, none of the safe-guards that would save these women from making a “choice” they don’t want but feel forced to make. I am still at a complete loss as to how these tactics are going to reduce the number of abortions- can you explain it to me please? How did legal, accessible abortion help my client choose what she really wanted?
Where are the pro-choicers when no-one asks “Is this really what you want or are you doing this because __________?” “Is this really what you want or are you doing this for someone else?”
MickiMac, good point. I’m Pro-Choice but think that those are entirely valid questions.
…..
“I wish abortion wasn’t legal. If it hadn’t been so easily available, I couldn’t have done it the first time and I wouldn’t be facing this choice now. I was rushed and panicked the first time, and this time I’m taking my time but I still hate the fact that I can choose. I made this mess and I should be forced to deal with it and not have the option to make my child pay for my mistake.”
She sounds like she just doesn’t want to deal with it. But even if abortion were illegal she’d still have to.
Why in the world would she “hate the fact” that she can choose? She can’t willingly just continue the pregnancy, given the way she feels, but rather wants the law different? That really does not make sense.
If it’s really a “mess” for her then she needs to get things straight for herself and between her and her husband, first of all.
Micki Mac, do you really think that by making abortion illegal that this will stop it ? If so, you are deluding yourself.
Don’t you realize the terrible cost to society as a whole which would occur if abortion ever becomes illegal again in America. That illegality never stopped women from seeking and obtaining abortions, and
abortion was legal in SOME states before Roe V Wade.
When large numbers of poor, unwanted children are born, it only increases poverty, unemployment and crime. Unless we do a great deal more to see to it that poor children get good nutrition, decent food, shelter, clothing and education,
we can neither decrease nor stop abortions.
But conservatives don’t want the government to subsidize poor families, or single women who have illegitimate children.
Nooo- that’s socialism, and we don’t want socialism here, do we ?
If there were a way to prevent all unwanted pregnancies, so that no woman would seek an abortion, pro-choices, myself included, would be all for it. But that’s pie in the sky.
Making abortion illegal will be terribly
counterproductive, and disastrous for this country.
MickiMac,
Thank you so much for that. I have several friends that regret their abortions and if it would have been illegal, they wouldn’t have had one. The option to kill your own child did nothing to “help” them. Or me.
Doug,
She sounds conflicted, anxious, worried, pressured and in shock.
Whether you think she sounds like she isn’t dealing with it, SHE IS isn’t she?? The MESS you are talking about is a unplanned pregnancy. A child growing and her husband wants her to kill it. She aborted once and doesn’t want to do that again. Should she and her husband get things straight before or after they kill their baby?
Robert,
I noticed a few new sentences and thank you for not including the word hanger.
Whether you think she sounds like she isn’t dealing with it, SHE IS isn’t she??
Carla, yes but it’s like she thinks the law could “solve” everything, and it’s clearly not the case there.
….
The MESS you are talking about is a unplanned pregnancy. A child growing and her husband wants her to kill it. She aborted once and doesn’t want to do that again. Should she and her husband get things straight before or after they kill their baby?
“Mess” was her word, and they should figure it all out before she has an abortion, given how she feels.
OK. Mess was her word. A law would not solve everything. It would stop her from having another abortion. She regrets the first one.
I pray her husband supports his wife, comes alongside her and tells her it will all work out. That they will face this pregnancy together and welcome this baby into their family.