Charles Johnson Promotes Shinola Again: Planned Parenthood closing had nothing to do with HIV outbreak in rural Indiana in 2015.

We’re gonna tear this one apart, Charles. You ready?

Let that sink in for a minute. According to Charles Johnson, defunding Planned Parenthood caused an outbreak in HIV infection in rural Indiana.

That photo was taken by Paul Sableman at 30 South 3rd Street in downtown Terre Haute, Indiana in 2011. Not exactly rural, but geography isn’t Johnson’s strong suit. This particular clinic operated with limited hours for several years, until Planned Parenthood decided to close that location. So what.

Here’s the problem.

The closing of a Planned Parenthood clinic in Terre Haute had nothing to do with an outbreak of HIV in Austin, Indiana, 130 miles and 2-1/2 hours drive time away. Austin is a small rural town of about 4,300 people and it has a drug problem. It’s closer to Louisville Kentucky and Cincinnati Ohio than it is to Terra Haute Indiana.

Apparently Planned Parenthood closed the clinic on South 3rd Street on or about July 2016 (prior to the presidential election) yet they still have local clinics elsewhere. A search of zipcode 47807 on their own website turns up 10 clinics in or near Terre Haute. A search of clinics in zipcode 47102 results in another 10 clinics in or near Austin, Indiana.

So the premise is false, and Charles Johnson is promoting an easily disputable lie.

The HIV outbreak happened in March 2015, affected about 190 people, and was due to needle sharing. The idiots were injecting a liquid version of Opana ER (oxymorphone) an opiate painkiller. In other words, an astounding 4% of the residents of Austin fucked themselves up by sharing HIV-infected needles. That’s not Planned Parenthood’s fault, the fault of the Religious Right or that of conservative politicians. It’s the fault of brain-dead white trash morons who did it to themselves.

BTW, Dillo Bush is the Mayor of Austin, Indiana, and he’s a Democrat, not that it matters…

Related posts:

http://www.indystar.com/story/news/2016/04/08/year-after-hiv-outbreak-austin-still-community-recovery/82133598/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/14/defund-planned-parenthood-birth-control_n_899334.html

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/page/323529_Indiana_Shut_Down_Its_Rural_Pl

Charles, you used to pride yourself with fact-checking before posting stupidity. What happened?


[Update: Appended post title; deleted the word “disengenuous” from the “related posts” description; promoted the link to the Indy Star article; added link to LGF page. –Briareus]



Charles Then: Let’s not discuss abortion. Charles Now: Let’s discuss abortion 24/7.

From the LGF Archives:

75 Charles Fri, May 23, 2003 11:28:07am

Caton is right; I would prefer for the abortion argument not to happen here.

258 Charles Tue, Oct 12, 2004 10:48:07am

On the subject of abortion: I do not have a hard and fast rule about not discussing it. However, this topic is a very good example of why I prefer people to avoid the subject — because it inevitably causes hard feelings and vicious fights, among people who are otherwise on the same side, and nobody’s opinion ever changes.
There are plenty of forums on the internet where you can argue about abortion if that’s what you want. I’d prefer to focus elsewhere.

642 Charles Sun, Feb 13, 2005 2:53:55pm

Freedom Fan: I don’t have a specific policy on discussing abortion. I just know from years and years of debating the issue that: 1) there’s nothing left to say on either side, and 2) the debate invariably escalates into personal attacks, rapidly.
I’ve requested in the past that we refrain from bringing this issue into LGF, because of these reasons.

224 Charles Thu, May 5, 2005 10:56:19am

There’s no hard and fast rule about which topics can or can’t be discussed here. I’ve said before (and still feel) that arguments about abortion invariably escalate instantaneously to the point of nuclear fusion, and that I’d prefer (just for my own sanity) that if people can’t refrain from the issue, at least try to avoid meltdown and keep things reasonably civil.
And the same goes for homosexuality; I have nothing against discussing it, but if the tone veers into gay-bashing, then I have a problem because we have quite a few valued commenters here who are gay, and if it comes down to losing a gay-basher versus losing an intelligent commenter — well…
So no — there’s no taboo and you won’t get banned for talking about any subject. Just try to remember that there are people behind all these internet text blocks.

1024 Charles Mon, Oct 31, 2005 1:21:56pm

Sheesh. More than a thousand comments in less than seven hours? What the heck happened in here?
Oh, I see. Abortion again.

889 Charles Sat, Nov 4, 2006 8:09:39am

realwest: I actually don’t have a “policy” about discussing abortion, in the sense of a hard and fast rule. But I’d prefer that people don’t argue about it here, because it inevitably leads to the internet equivalent of a screaming match, and we have enough of those already. There are plenty of other places on the web where you can have that argument…

706 Charles Sat, Mar 24, 2007 3:56:28pm

Re: the scary abortion subject.
There’s no outright ban on abortion discussions. But after years of trouble and strife, I’ve learned that this topic invariably deteriorates very quickly into a flame war.
There are literally thousands of places on the web where you can get into a flame war about Roe v. Wade, if that’s what you really want to do. I’d prefer that LGF not be one of them.

172 Charles Fri, May 4, 2007 5:00:52pm

I should have known better than to try to ask a tech question in the middle of an abortion argument.

56 Charles Sat, Sep 22, 2007 6:25:56pm

And I really do not appreciate the effort to divert this important topic into another argument about abortion.

59 Charles Sat, Sep 22, 2007 6:26:57pm

re: #57 Killgore Trout

re: #52 cbinfluxI just turned it on a few days ago. Might turn it off again. Looks like we’re headed for an abortion fight on a friday night. This could get ugly.

There isn’t going to be an abortion fight, because I’m not going to allow it.

3 Charles Mon, Oct 8, 2007 6:34:56pm

re: #1 zombie

Dobson. Ay Caramba.

Well, we had an abortion discussion in an open thread a couple of days ago, and it was actually pretty sane, so I’m hoping this one won’t turn into a total meltdown.
I know, I’m an optimist.

427 Charles Fri, Oct 26, 2007 7:47:09pm

re: #411 Caliredst8r
How did “abortion” get into this discussion? Please take your agenda somewhere else.

Yeah, let’s keep the topic of abortion off of Little Green Footballs because it’s so inflammatory.

Charles Johnson On Abortion


Charles, remember when you had “Crunchy Parts?” Nobody here does either. Go figure.

CJ Crunchy Parts


What I find ironic is that Charles F. Johnson is essentially defending Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger, an undisputed racist and an adherent to the ethnic cleansing tenets of the eugenics movement. These tenets of racial purity were supported by Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and many others of her time.

Sanger’s stated mission was to promote birth control and sterilization of blacks and other non-white people to limit the populations of those deemed to be inferior.

What’s also ironic was that Margaret Sanger was against abortion as a prophylactic. It wasn’t until her death in 1966 that Planned Parenthood took off their masks and began promoting abortion as a simple medical procedure with no regard to the sanctity of human life.

Yet Charles F. Johnson claims he’s not a racist.


Mr. Toot poised to repeat the Weinergate debacle

The Planned Parenthood video scandal is so toxic, that some on the left refuse to go near it. Always wanting to prove his progressive bona fides, Charles goes all in to defend Planned Parenthood by praising Nancy Pelosi’s attacks on the group that uncovered Planned Parenthood’s evil eugenicists mindset.

Pelosi-PP Pelosi-PP2Mr. Toot did not learn his lesson from Weinergate.

 


There’s going to be violence!; Update: A spot on observation

The progressive movement is in an uproar over the sting videos showing the contempt for human life members of Planned Parenthood have. Rather than be angry at this callous view of life, the Left is lashing out at anyone who is disgusted over these videos. Being a Libertarian, I am not a hardliner on the abortion issue or other social issues for that matter, but these videos make me sick.

Rather than be upset at Planned Parenthood, Shiplord Kirel worries that the video may lead to violent attacks on abortion clinics.

Kirel abortion

Kirel, what is ugly is the evil mindset of Planned Parenthood.

Update: A good observation has been made about LGF’s blackout on the Chattanooga attack.

Chattanooga Update

The answer is obvious. Mr. Toot sympathizes with Islamic terrorists.

 


Another Chuck Deception

I might have to start a post called the daily Chuck lie. Charles “Icarus” Johnson has another post today, that when you actually read the links,  contradict what he is saying.

What Chuck doesn’t tell his readers that it’s that the government is funding a NASCAR team for the sake of doing it. It’s the US military sponsoring a NASCAR team to carry a recruiting logo.

From Chuck’s own link:

The Army, the Air Force and the National Guard NASCAR racing teams will ride again this year, after the House voted 241-148 to ditch a measure to ban the Pentagon from sponsoring stock car teams.

What Charles doesn’t comprehend is that The Military is an obligation the government must pay for. How ill this nation be defended without a military. We have  a volunteer force, so the armed services must recruit. Using NASCAR to recruit is a cost-effective way to do it. Funding Planned Parenthood is not an obligation the US government has. In fact they perform procedures that many Americans abhor.

I have stated many times that abortion is an issue I really could care less about. That said, I don’t support the government funding or supporting an organization that promotes this procedure. If PLanned Parenthood is providing a greats service, let them raise funds privately, not with my money.

Clearly Charles knows full well the US Government must maintain a military. He clearly decided to lie about this issue here because wants our tax dollars to go to Planned Parenthood. Why doesn’t he and his cult members raise the funds for this organization? The reason is he’s a leech and wants us to fork the bill for abortion and organizations that promote it. But advertising for the military he’s against.

Here’s an example of the type of thinking on the part of Chuck’s minions

What this idiot Kragar doesn’t know is that Blacks have had a disproportionate amount of abortions compared to Whites.  Planned Parenthood has been at the forefront of this, so this actually helps Blacks. Also those NASCAR cars have ads for joining the US military. Clearly this is what Chuck caters too.

People like Kragar are the reason why Charles lies, his audience is so brainwashed that he can tell them the sky is yellow and they would believe it. Another day, another vile lie by Chuck. He sinks lower and lower by the day.