Planned Parenthood CEO: ‘Hateful Language’ Contributed To Shootings

Posted by | November 29, 2015 10:58 | Filed under: Politics

Vicki Cowart, the Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood CEO, says hateful speech contributed to the Friday’s shootings.

“We’ve experienced so much hateful language… such a negative environment has been created around the work that Planned Parenthood does,” said Vicki Cowart, president and CEO of Rocky Mountains Planned Parenthood, on ABC News “This Week with George Stephanopoulos.””We’ve seen that across the country from all sorts of speakers in the last few months,” she added.

“I can’t believe that this isn’t contributing to some folks, mentally unwell or not, thinking that it’s ok to target Planned Parenthood or to target abortion providers.”

Asked whether she was specifically referring to members of Congress or politicians, Cowart said: “I think politicians have been in that conversation.”

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2015 Liberaland
By: Alan

Alan Colmes is the publisher of Liberaland.

62 responses to Planned Parenthood CEO: ‘Hateful Language’ Contributed To Shootings

  1. Budda November 29th, 2015 at 11:32

    She iscorrect . Specifically, Carlia is one that stands out.

    • Karen Barton November 30th, 2015 at 06:13

      .❝my neighbor’s mom is making $98 HOURLY on the internet❞….A few days ago new McLaren F1 subsequent after earning 18,512$,,,this was my previous month’s paycheck ,and-a little over, $17k Last month ..3-5 h/r of work a day ..with extra open doors & weekly paychecks.. it’s realy the easiest work I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months ago and now making over $87, p/h..Learn More right Here….
      ➤➤➤ http://GlobalSuperEmploymentVacanciesReportOnline/GetPaid/$97hourly… ❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦

  2. illinoisboy1977 November 29th, 2015 at 11:47

    “Hateful language” is still free speech. Under the law, no one is to blame for an attack, but the attacker. He wasn’t ordered or threatened into doing anything. He, ALONE, bears responsibility for his actions and he deserves to be executed for his CHOICE to pull the trigger.

    • Gina Bousquet November 29th, 2015 at 12:02

      Inciting violence is still free speech?

      • illinoisboy1977 November 30th, 2015 at 10:27

        There was no incitement. Incitement, under the law, HAS to include instructions to commit an act, with some degree of specificity. I haven’t heard anyone on the right come out and call for attacks on Planned Parenthood facilities.

        • Gina Bousquet November 30th, 2015 at 11:07

          IF you are right, then there was no incitement under the law, only DE FACTO INCITEMENT from the right-wing rhetoric.

          • illinoisboy1977 November 30th, 2015 at 12:31

            Rhetoric isn’t incitement, unless it INSTRUCTS action. That is not only the law, but the only proper way to assign blame. He and HE ALONE, is responsible for his actions. No one else.

            • Gina Bousquet November 30th, 2015 at 14:49

              I don’t expect logic or reason from a right-winger. His actions were induced by the “baby parts” rhetoric, but you’ll never acknowledge the obvious.

              • illinoisboy1977 December 2nd, 2015 at 13:43

                It may be inspiration, but it doesn’t meet the legal standard for “incitement”.

    • Black Irish November 29th, 2015 at 12:33

      you think shouting “fire” in a crowded movie theater (where there is no fire) is free speech? where did you go to law school?

      • illinoisboy1977 November 30th, 2015 at 10:25

        Your comparison doesn’t equate to this situation. There was no crowded venue, where someone shouted and caused a stampede.

        • Black Irish November 30th, 2015 at 11:11

          that’s where you’re wrong. This is what Fiorina said: “Watch a fully formed fetus on the table, its heart beating, its legs kicking, while someone says, ‘We have to keep it alive to harvest its brain.’ ”
          She convinced a lot of people that PP was, in a very real way, harvesting and torturing babies to make a buck… there are a lot of people who believe that, and they’re acting on this belief… just like if you believed someone yelling “fire” in a crowed movie theater and acted on that belief… or if you convinced me that the guy sitting on that park bench over there just raped and murdered my daughter… if I was convinced of that, don’t you think I might go over and crush his skull with a tire iron? and if I did, wouldn’t it be largely because YOU told me that he raped and murdered my daughter?

          • illinoisboy1977 November 30th, 2015 at 12:30

            Well, the law doesn’t agree with your definition of incitement and what’s legal is all that matters, here. It’s still legal to provide abortion and it’s still legal for people to call it murder.

    • tracey marie November 29th, 2015 at 12:46

      nope, when your kind call for violence you are responsible, period.

      • illinoisboy1977 November 30th, 2015 at 10:24

        No one called for violence. Calling someone out for murdering unborn children is an accusation, not a call for more violence. If some nutjob decides to act violently, he should be put away for life. But it’s HIS fault and his alone.

        • tracey marie November 30th, 2015 at 10:25

          No children were murdered, now mind your business

    • William November 29th, 2015 at 12:53

      When your political agenda is based upon lies, deceit and outright fabrication. Then that party is complicit.

      The video Fiorina touted as fact, was debunked, yet we see no retraction or apology from Fox, the right wing media, and the countless liars that represent your base.

      You are happy to swim in a stew of your own lies, and have the audacity to scream foul when someone calls you on the effect your propaganda has on the feeble minded. Not only do you ignore the cause and effect, but you continue to support another calamity. IE the right of crazy people to have guns.

      • Black Irish November 29th, 2015 at 14:51

        do you remember what happened after sarah palin was drawing bullseyes on her political opponents?

        • William November 29th, 2015 at 15:24

          Yes. Gabby was shot.

        • The Original Just Me November 29th, 2015 at 16:20

          BANG ! Did I get it Right ?

        • Lyndia November 29th, 2015 at 21:06

          Hey, I got Irish in me, also. I am a direct descendent of William Campbell, from Hines County.

    • Wendy Sibley November 29th, 2015 at 15:31

      The people who encourage hate, violence and murder need to be held responsible for THEIR actions, too.

      The evil hatemongers of the Right have blood on their hands.

      • illinoisboy1977 November 30th, 2015 at 10:21

        The law and several Supreme Court rulings would seem to disagree with you.

        • whatthe46 November 30th, 2015 at 10:29

          they still have blood on their hands.

        • tracey marie December 6th, 2015 at 16:50

          Then why do you believe muslims who don’t bow down to xtians should be kicked out of the country or put on a list?

    • The Original Just Me November 29th, 2015 at 16:18

      That may be legally true but, without the incentive and incitement of the Republican Party, would he have done it ?

      • illinoisboy1977 November 30th, 2015 at 10:14

        I think he would have. People like that are going to use any excuse for “justifying” their blood lust. He would have murdered people, regardless.

        • Gina Bousquet November 30th, 2015 at 11:37

          But not necessarily people AT Planned Parenthood, once he was heard by police officers rambling “No more baby parts”.

          • illinoisboy1977 November 30th, 2015 at 12:28

            Murder is murder. Where and when he would have done it only makes a difference to who lives and who dies. He was just looking for any old excuse and he found one that he could exploit.

            • Gina Bousquet November 30th, 2015 at 12:45

              Right-wingers like yourself will use any argument to avoid responsibility for the extremist, hate filled, inflammatory rhetoric from the Right.

              • illinoisboy1977 December 2nd, 2015 at 13:46

                Rhetoric is not incitement. Look it up. It’s protected, free speech.

                • Gina Bousquet December 2nd, 2015 at 13:58

                  Maybe it’s not incitement under the law, but inflammatory, hateful, extremist rhetoric is responsible for evil consequences, no doubt about that.

                  • illinoisboy1977 December 4th, 2015 at 16:34

                    No, personal choices to commit acts of violence are responsible for evil consequences. Hateful or insulting words are NEVER a valid reason for committing violence. Threats are another matter, but only with a degree of specificity that removes all doubt that one is about to be attacked.

                    • Gina Bousquet December 4th, 2015 at 16:41

                      Harry Reid happens to agree with me in his pronouncements about the PP shooting, so, I’m in good company.

                    • bpollen December 6th, 2015 at 16:36

                      Threats are another matter, but only with a degree of specificity that removes all doubt that one is about to be attacked.
                      Rhetoric is not incitement. Look it up. It’s protected, free speech.

                      Seems you have TWO different opinions on rhetoric. Rhetoric is, essentially, persuasive speech. So, if I persuade somebody to commit violence against you, it’s OK unless I remove all doubt that I want you to be attacked NOW???? And WHOSE doubt do I have to remove? Yours, mine, some arbiter to be determined at some point in the future? Gee, with such clear cut lines, you’d think it would be SOOO easy to determine.

                • whatthe46 December 2nd, 2015 at 13:58

                  if you had a brain, it would hurt.

                • bpollen December 6th, 2015 at 16:28

                  the action of provoking unlawful behavior or urging someone to behave unlawfully.

                  By the actual definition of the word, rhetoric would certainly qualify. And, remember, there ARE limits on speech. Incitement to riot, slander, and libel are ALL proscribed, and ALL are rhetoric-dependent. If I tell Vito Genovese to whack you, I can be convicted of murder for that “speech.” If I lie on the stand, I CAN be prosecuted for it.

                  Look it up. Speech is not inviolate.

                  • illinoisboy1977 December 8th, 2015 at 11:23

                    But, if you simply say something ridiculous, like “all muslims are terrorists”, it’s ignorant and stupid, but also protected by the Constitution.

                    • bpollen December 8th, 2015 at 17:02

                      So you abandon the “rhetoric can’t be touched” argument to stump for stupidity. Way to stand up for your people!

            • bpollen December 6th, 2015 at 16:22

              He was just looking for any old excuse and he found one that he could exploit.

              Wow, legal scholar, long-distance psychiatrist… You base your psychoanalysis on your long interviews with him? Your extensive studies on mass shooters? Your PhD dissertation of psychotic breaks? Or just an opinion you pulled out of your nether regions?

              What’s his shoe size? His blood pressure? Is he lactose intolerant? What behavior out of the norm did you observe prior to his rampage? I see you making claims about him, but I have yet to see where your opinion has any probative value.

        • bpollen December 2nd, 2015 at 16:30

          I think he would have.

          Thanks for that insightful analysis. Of course, that hardly qualifies as a LEGAL opinion, does it, Mr. Scalia?

    • bpollen November 29th, 2015 at 19:45

      Apparently, you’ve never heard of inciting to riot. Or the Chicago Seven.

      • illinoisboy1977 November 30th, 2015 at 10:17

        Inciting has to include encouragement with specific intent, which doesn’t include “hateful speech”. The guy saying “burn this bitch down”, in Ferguson, was inciting speech. Calling abortion providers murderers is not incitement, under the law, regardless of the actions others may take.

        • bpollen November 30th, 2015 at 15:46

          Again, you obviously never heard of the Chicago Seven. Convicted for the high crime of organizing protests. The charges included conspiracy and inciting to riot.

          Seems that Judge Hoffman disagreed with you. Unless you can tell me where YOU adjudicate cases, I think I will go with the opinion of a professional. And historical facts.

          • illinoisboy1977 December 2nd, 2015 at 13:41

            You seem to forget that, on appeal in 1972, ALL convictions were overturned. Why? Because there were no specific threats or instructions, which would prove incitement.

            • bpollen December 2nd, 2015 at 16:28

              No, I didn’t. But they WERE convicted, weren’t they? And incarcerated?

              • illinoisboy1977 December 4th, 2015 at 16:27

                The important thing is that the government realized that they were wrongfully convicted and freed them. That’s the beauty of our justice system.

                • bpollen December 5th, 2015 at 02:22

                  When you lose years of your life, you might not feel that “oopsie” qualifies as justice.

                  • illinoisboy1977 December 5th, 2015 at 10:57

                    It’s better than in most other countries. Many countries stack the deck against the defendant and don’t allow appeals.

                    • bpollen December 5th, 2015 at 16:45

                      Not pertinent. We are talking about America. So what others do really isn’t pertinent to whether or not our system is “just.”

                      Didn’t your mother ever tell you that what others do really doesn’t matter to what YOU do?

                    • illinoisboy1977 December 6th, 2015 at 10:53

                      Remember that, the next time you argue our gun laws, vs. other countries.

                    • bpollen December 6th, 2015 at 16:13

                      If you can show me statistics showing, by the numbers, that our system is “better” than other countries, that’s worth discussing. But “other countries do it different” hardly qualifies as a quantitative or qualitative comparison. And of course, what constitutes “better?” Not really a precise thing to measure, wouldn’t you say?

                      I’ll use FACTS and STATISTICAL comparisons when they are valid. Vague comparisons based on vague terminology, on the other hand, do not lend themselves to objective comparison. “My dog is better than your dog” is opinion only unless you can show a comparison of what makes up “better.” And then there has to be agreement on what actually constitutes better. A dog-fight promoter might think aggressiveness makes a “better” dog, but a family with small children is not apt to think that qualifies as “better.”

                      So, I have no qualms dismissing vague comparisons as simply opinion. This, on the other hand, is the use of data to show comparisons based on defined concepts. If “better” is based on the number of citizens per 100K incarcerated, then we are nearly 3 times “better” than the next nearest country. And if we want to compare death penalties, we lose to the “enlightened” peers like North Korea, Yemen, Botswana… though there are countries, like Iraq and Iran and China who kill more. If we want to compare juvenile incarceration rates, we are “better” because we put more kids in jail?

                      All you give for actual data is “It’s better than in most other countries.”

  3. mistlesuede November 29th, 2015 at 12:34

    She is so darn polite. Wouldn’t you love to just see her call them all out by name and say “you are responsible Carly Fiorina and etc.”
    Of course, that would backfire because it would elevate the loons running for POTUS on the right.
    What a sick country this is.

    • The Original Just Me November 29th, 2015 at 16:16

      She has to be Respectful, Courteous, Polite, and Thoughtful. She is not a licensed Republican.

      • mistlesuede November 29th, 2015 at 18:32

        Hehe. Exactly. :)

  4. Gindy51 November 29th, 2015 at 12:40

    If it weren’t for the hate speech and bullshit videos three living, breathing, contributing members of society would be alive right now.
    If it weren’t for the vile things that compose the anti choice brigade, even more people who do good work would still be alive.
    The pro choice people have got to start calling it like it is instead of pussy footing around so politely. That doesn’t work with the piles of shit that oppose them and it never will.

  5. maggie November 29th, 2015 at 12:58

    message to ms cowart….we are taking back america for reproductive rights and gun control….FIRE THE GOP, SINK THE NRA …AND THE CPM..AND THE MIPR, AND THE CONFEDERATE FLAGGERS….GUN CONTROL IS COMING TO THE USA…(sung to the tune of leonard cohen)

  6. maggie November 29th, 2015 at 13:00

    the haters (domestic terrorists) think massacring innocent people is a perfectly acceptable form of free speech…use your vote people to show them it is not

  7. labman57 November 29th, 2015 at 13:40

    Numerous conservative politicians and pundits have touted the misleading, heavily-edited, and wholly inaccurate videos as “proof” that “baby parts” are being sold at Planned Parenthood clinics.

    Numerous states (including several run by Republican governors and legislatures) have confirmed that nothing unethical or illegal has transpired at clinics in their own states. These videos are little more than deliberately-manipulated right wing propaganda, but conservative POTUS wannabes have enthusiastically used this faux evidence to condemn Planned Parenthood as an evil organization that must be stopped at all costs.

    And so the delusional gunman took up a “righteous cause” … because as Marco Rubio, Mike Huckabee, Ben Carson, Teddy Cruz, Rick Santorum, Bobby Jindal, Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, and Sarah Palin have reminded us on numerous occasions, Biblical law outweighs governmental laws.

    Let’s hold every one of these sanctimonious theocrats accountable for this assertion — may each of them choke on it!

  8. rg9rts November 29th, 2015 at 14:06

    She minimizes…it is part and parcel of the hate campaign waged by the gopee on women

  9. maggie November 29th, 2015 at 22:08

    Obama got it right with his No More Tears (Enough is Enough) reference….(Streisand and Summers) go check it out on youtube….a great reference….;)

  10. maggie November 29th, 2015 at 22:18

    It’s very easy to understand why these ideologues think people will think they are heroes if they commit these heinous acts…with all the hate talk in all the media streams and in culture in general…

Leave a Reply