World Bank Directors Reject Wolfowitz’s Regressive Family Planning Policy
World Bank Directors Reject Wolfowitz’s Regressive Family Planning Policy
World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz and his political appointees have attempted to reverse the institution’s long-standing policy of promoting family planning, despite Wolfowitz’s recent statement, “Our policy hasn’t changed.”
As ThinkProgress noted earlier, a draft of the bank’s pending Strategy for Health, Nutrition, and Population (HNP) mentions family planning just once, in reference to a 2006 reproductive health project in the Caribbean that supported family planning services (p. 120). In contrast, the previous HNP (1997) identified a “lack of access to family planning services as a primary health challenge.” The draft was prepared by the office of managing director Juan José Daboub, a strong proponent of U.S. policy in Iraq whom Wolfowitz hired last year.
Officials at the World Bank have now rejected this regressive family planning policy. In an April 19 memo, eight of the World Bank’s executive directors write:
The directors specifically attack Daboub’s revision of the World Bank’s family planning policies. Some examples of their criticisms:
– “The original document makes virtually no reference to sexual and reproductive health, on a strategic level. This is surprising, considering the Bank has committed almost US$2 billion to sexual and reproductive health over the past 10 years.”
– “The document — including the supplmental note — still does not contain a clear position on how the Bank engages in issues of sexual and reproductive health.”
– “The document and supplemental note place sexual and reproductive health within the context of population policy and contains language, which suggests a limitation of sexual and reproductive health to tackle ‘fertility rates.’ This is not acceptable. … Sexual and reproductive health and family planning are integral parts of health service delivery and, as such, essential for women’s health.”
Even though Wolfowitz is no longer a member of the Bush administration, his World Bank policies continue to support the President’s conservative priorities: promoting abstinence-only policies and conservative ideology over solid scientific research.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
117 Responses to “World Bank Directors Reject Wolfowitz’s Regressive Family Planning Policy”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Medically accurate family planning is the only to go in regards to this issue. Abstinence only is a failure.
April 24th, 2007 at 5:46 pmBuh-bye Wolfy, you sorry sack of crap.
April 24th, 2007 at 5:46 pmWhat can we expect for a policy offered by da boob?
April 24th, 2007 at 5:48 pmHe’s performing fellatio on his comb, according to the picture.
April 24th, 2007 at 5:48 pmWolfy is a typical Family Values Repuke…he has a wife AND a girlfriend.
What a scumbag.
April 24th, 2007 at 5:48 pmIf there is one thing a World Bank bureaucrat loves more than creating poverty it is killing babies.
April 24th, 2007 at 5:48 pmCondoms don’t kill babies, you idiot troll.
Go back under your bridge.
April 24th, 2007 at 5:49 pmHow about the U.S. Rejecting Funding for the World Bank?
April 24th, 2007 at 5:50 pmPatrick1,
Where you been all day?
Abstinence only results in more unwanted pregnanices/abortions than medically accurate family planning does.
If what you really after is cutting down on the number of abortions, why not support medically accurate family planning, so that people can take the necessary precautions to prevent unwanted pregnancy?
April 24th, 2007 at 5:51 pmGood points, Patrick1. I’m sure someone is going to claim we are both “Jake” though.
April 24th, 2007 at 5:51 pm“when you own a big chunk of the bloody third world,
the babies just come with the scenery…”
(from the [very satirical] Pretender’s song “Middle of the Road”)
April 24th, 2007 at 5:52 pmAnti-choicers, sing it with me,
“Every sperm is sacred, every sperm is great, if a sperm is wasted, God gets quite irate.”
April 24th, 2007 at 5:53 pmI’m giving my girlfriend a raise because she’s good in bed, oops. I mean she is hard working in bed, oops. What I really meant to say was, she’s got a great body, oops. I was misquoted, I said I gave her a raise because she deserved it. Don’t question my integrity about give my girlfriend’s a raise, oops. I mean my long time friend. The media is always taking my statements out of context. No, I mean it’s Bill Clinton’s fault or the Democrats gave her the raise without my knowledge.
April 24th, 2007 at 5:54 pmFrank Mates ewes
April 24th, 2007 at 5:54 pmWolfy’s lack of abstinence has him in this predicament.
April 24th, 2007 at 5:54 pmOn the surface, this looks like good news. Even if Wolf manages to hang on to his post, it looks like he’s effectively been neutered.
April 24th, 2007 at 5:54 pmAbstinence works everytime it is tried.
April 24th, 2007 at 5:57 pmCan I get an “amen” on abstinence for Wolfowitz?
April 24th, 2007 at 5:57 pmGood points, Patrick1.
– Frank “The Idiot” Matthews
So you think Patrick’s inane and uninformed remark was “good points”?
You are as big an idiot as he is then.
And I answered your question in the Tillman thread, you cut and ran from it though. Chickenhawk Piece of crap that you are….
April 24th, 2007 at 5:59 pmPatrick1,
Of course abstinence only would work if people would actually be abstinent. But they don’t, and further, they never will.
So again, I ask you, if what you really after is cutting down on the number of abortions, why not support medically accurate family planning, so that people can take the necessary precautions to prevent unwanted pregnancy?
Otherwise, I guess I’ll just have to conclude that you are in favor of a policy which results in more unwanted pregnancies, then the alternative.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:00 pmWolfie needs to do.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:00 pmTheToonGuy:
Although, technically, the World Bank is part of the United Nations system, its governance structure is different: each institution in the World Bank Group is owned by its member governments, which subscribe to its basic share capital, with votes proportional to shareholding. Membership gives certain voting rights that are the same for all countries but there are also additional votes which depend on financial contributions to the organization. The President of the World Bank is nominated by the President of the United States and elected by the Bank’s Board of Governors. The U.S. currently holds 16.4% of total votes, Japan 7.9%, Germany 4.5%, and the United Kingdom and France each 4.3%. As major decisions, such as firing Wolfowitz, require an 85% super-majority, the U.S. can block any such major change. That doesn’t sound “effectively neutered” to me.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:00 pm#17…
April 24th, 2007 at 6:00 pm“Try? There is no try, only do.”
Yoda
Wayne,
“Chickenhawk Piece of crap that you are”
Way to raise the level of debate!!!
You could at least make an attempt at a civil discourse couldn’t you?
April 24th, 2007 at 6:01 pmWayne:
I will check the Tillman thread.
Crump’s Brother:
If what you really are after is cutting down on the number of abortions, why not support forced sterilizations for high-risk teens? Otherwise, I guess I’ll just have to conclude that you are in favor of a policy which results in more unwanted pregnancies, than the alternative.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:02 pmKarim:
Wolfie needs to do WHAT?
April 24th, 2007 at 6:03 pmAbstinence works everytime it is tried.
Comment by Patrick1
I’m gonna go with, this one is a parody. But in case its real, Patrick there is no try. Do or not do.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:03 pmRaven I just posted that, and I didn’t see your comment.
We tend to think alike at times.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:04 pmI think a lot of the ethics violations and debates are made as distractions to continually deplete the treasury (or increase the debt). This environmental video from the 1992 UN conference seems to explain most of the current issues:
http://video.google.com/ videoplay?docid=-6642758020554799808
April 24th, 2007 at 6:04 pmI bet Wolfie would use World Bank funds to buy an abortion for his girlfriend. Then charge it to some poor nation.
-GSD
April 24th, 2007 at 6:06 pmIdeology based, ‘abstinence only until marriage’ funds keep increasing, although there’s no evidence to support its effectiveness.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:07 pmI have no problem with family planning. Right now Europe is planning itself out of existence. That is a good thing. I just don’t believe the bureaucrats at the World Bank who think austerity for economies is a good idea are up to the job.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:07 pmFrank Matthews,
Your analogy is hardly one at all. You are saying that we infringe on someone’s personal liberties by forcing a sterilization on them. I’m saying we let people make an informed choice regarding their reproductive future.
One is workable, the other is tyranny. Nice try though.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:08 pmThe neocon traitors have spent years learning how to take advantage of people of good will - people that give others the benifit of the doubt. This tactic buys the repigs time as they sneak around doing the opposite of what they say they are doing. Wolfowitz says for example: “Nothing has changed” on family planning. Honest people give this a listen which lets the thugs gain a foot hold. By the time proof comes along that they lied, their work has become an institution. Summary: Say what your opponent needs to hear and do what every you want.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:08 pmIf it were up to the neocons, women would be pregnant and barefoot (except of course for their mistresses), seen not heard and attitudes of race and color would be of those in the 50’s. These insecure freaks want the ‘white man rules’ again and are threatened by our progressive equality.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:09 pmFor Truth…
April 24th, 2007 at 6:09 pmCosmic, isn’t it!
Karim was on the same wavelength as well, it appears…… I didn’t see his, either…….
April 24th, 2007 at 6:12 pmPatrick1,
Maybe I missed something.
You said “If there is one thing a World Bank bureaucrat loves more than creating poverty it is killing babies.” I took that to mean you were for an abstinence only position which the U.S. has unfortunately been pushing through the World Bank. If I got that wrong, I apologize. So you are for medically accurate family planning then?
April 24th, 2007 at 6:13 pmRoyston Vasey:
There is “no evidence” that (a) ‘abstinence only until marriage’ programs keep teens abstinent and/or (b) actual abstinence until marriage would be effective to cut down sexually-transmitted diseases, pregnancies out of wedlock, etc.?
Wayne:
I checked both Tillman threads from today and did not find your question. You happen to remember the gist of it?
April 24th, 2007 at 6:13 pmYes Raven, it is.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:13 pmI can’t imagine what kind of defense Wolfowitz can offer; but I think that the World Bank should accept his request to make his case. And then, if he doesn’t clear himself, fire him.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:14 pmInvoluntary abstinence is what makes Patrick, and his like-minded people so problematic.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:16 pmNot if the World Bank is involved.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:16 pmFrank Matthews,
Your analogy is hardly one at all.
You want to compare taking away someone reproductive choices in the form of forced sterilization, while I’m saying we give them choices by givinng them good medically accurate information with which they can use as they wish.
Nice try at a strawman. False choice arguments sren’t very becoming of you.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:17 pmIt is unfortunate that this type of ideology governs the World Bank. I think Wolfowitz has forgotten that an organization that is attempting assist in the development of nations isn’t meant to be ruled by politics. While the World Bank is far from upstanding in their policies, there needs to be more effort in assisting in the growth of undeveloped countries if the issues that face the world today are to be addressed: global poverty, disease, family planning, education etc. These are the issues that, if addressed in the right way, can make the difference in the tumultuous world we live in today.
If more was done to support the UN Millennium Development Goals, there would certainly be a drastic difference in what this world will look like in ten years, as opposed to the path we are on now. According to the Borgen Project, just $19 billion annually can end starvation and malnutrition. Put into perspective, we have spent over $340 billion on the Iraq war to bring peace. Wolfowitz needs to be replaced because I haven’t seen any great leadership come out of him.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:17 pm‘Just say no’ abstinence-only policies are of little interest to families whose economies and cultures give them logical reasons to have eight children.
So it makes sense to work hard on what causes families to want fewer children, That seems to be development, and especially the education, employment, and empowerment of women.
Family planning programs, especially when they are run by women for women, ARE female education and empowerment. They communicate all sorts of information, including the idea that having a child is something a woman can choose, considering not just the family labor supply and the egos of her husband and mother-in-law, but also her own health and the welfare of her existing children.
Therefore, it is important for the World Bank,and other organisations, to continue to fund Family Planning Programs.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:19 pmFrank Matthews,
You said “There is “no evidence†that (a) ‘abstinence only until marriage’ programs keep teens abstinent and/or (b) actual abstinence until marriage would be effective to cut down sexually-transmitted diseases, pregnancies out of wedlock, etc.?â€
Yes to (a) and to (b). Unfortunately, (b) will usually never happen. I’m sure you can find several anecdotes of people who have waited until marriage to have intercourse. But many of those will have had many other “kinds†of sex before getting to that point. I understand it is good goal, and we should teach abstinence first, but it should be coupled with medically accurate family planning information as well.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:21 pmIs that (a) or (b), Royston Vasey?
April 24th, 2007 at 6:22 pmGeorge Bush’s “abstinence only” programs have failed outright in the United States. Now we are supposed to believe they will magically work in countries that typically have problems providing even basic health care and education facilities to their people?
DO ANY CONSERVATIVE POLICIES ACTUALLY WORK WHEN THEY’RE IMPLEMENTED?
April 24th, 2007 at 6:22 pmYou could at least make an attempt at a civil discourse couldn’t you?
Comment by Crump’s Brother
Stick it where the sun don’t shine.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:27 pmThat civil enough?
Don’t tell me how to respond to trolls, you haven’t earned that right.
Further Frank,
You made a terrible analogy earlier. (That I tried to reply to, but it did not post for some reason.
Saying that the use of forced sterilization to prevent unwanted pregnancy is even in the same ball park with what I was discussing with Patrick1 I find to be a little insulting. Neither of us would promote something so inherently tyrannical and dumb. Why not take your argument farther. Why not castrate? It was a sad attempt.
Wow.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:27 pmCrump’s Brother:
There are indeed other studies that say (a) is effective, and I think you’ve at least admitted that (b) is effective for those couple who stay abstinent. You are making progress.
And You Thought REAGAN Was Stupid:
That federal ban on embryonic stem cell research sure worked, didn’t it?
April 24th, 2007 at 6:29 pmWayne:
I checked both Tillman threads from today and did not find your question. You happen to remember the gist of it?
April 24th, 2007 at 6:31 pmWayne,
It must be hard to be that brilliant in your delivery.
I didn’t tell you how to respond to “trolls”. It’s nice to know however that I have you here to explain my rights to me. Please do go on.
I was just that it is tough for many on this site who would actually like to debate these issues in a civil and constructive manner, when there are so many people of your style who have nothing of substance to offer. I pity you.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:32 pmIf zero teenagers had sex of any kind, including oral, and refused any sexual urges before getting married, then this would lead to zero sexually-transmitted diseases, unwanted pregnancies and so on.
However, this dreamland scenario is NEVR going to happen.
You simply cannot stop all teens from participating in sex. It goes against all their biological urges.
Sexual health awareness and family planning counseling that educate young people in the first bloom of adulthood are more effective than any ‘just say no’ program.
Nicole Clegg, director of public affairs of the Family Planning Association of Maine, said that since 1996 more than a billion dollars had been spent in the United States on abstinence only education. However, she said, 70% of high school students have had sex by graduation. Furthermore, the abstinence guidelines don’t address issues of sexual assault, sexual violence, and the needs of gay and lesbian teenagers.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:32 pm#49: Try to stick to the topic: “family planning.” Ask the person next to you to explain what that term means if you don’t understand the big words.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:34 pmI checked both Tillman threads from today and did not find your question. You happen to remember the gist of it?
Comment by Frank Matthews
You questioned my patriotism, I answered you and asked you the same question.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:34 pmIf you read the whole thread, then you don’t read too good, do ya?
Frank Matthews,
Find one REPUTABLE, double blind study that shows that abstinence only programs are effective at minimizing teen sex and unwanted prenancy. I would love to see it.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:34 pmMay I ask you a question, Crump’s Brother? You really don’t think medically accurate family planning is ever going to encourage, or at the very least facilitate, early sexual behavior?
April 24th, 2007 at 6:34 pmThere’s your mistake Crump, when it comes to put up or shut up - the trolls don’t do either…
April 24th, 2007 at 6:37 pm“Do or do not, there is no try.”
April 24th, 2007 at 6:37 pm-Master Yoda circa Empire Strikes Back
“New research shows that [Bush’s abstinence only program] doesn’t work. At all.” ” . . . even in 1990s Texas, where Mr Bush spent $10m a year on abstinence education, the state had the fifth highest teen pregnancy rate in the US.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2058066,00.html
April 24th, 2007 at 6:39 pm– April 16, 2007
http://www.cnn.com/ 2007/ POLITICS/ 04/ 24/ kucinich.cheney.ap/ index.html
April 24th, 2007 at 6:41 pmThe denial crowd (religious folk) does not want to deal with education, it would interfere with their denial.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:45 pmComment by Crump’s Brother
Like I said…. Stick it along with your self rightious attitude.
And good luck with trying to get Frank to actually debate and post anything actually resembling a fact. or ever backing anything up.
Let us know how that works for you. /snicker
April 24th, 2007 at 6:45 pmAbstain from abstinence, I always say, starting today.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:45 pmThank you, Spudge Boy, for the correction, and the actual quote.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:45 pmmay the Force be with us…..
So, Wayne, you don’t remember either. Good thing you aren’t the Attorney General, because you could be fired for that.
Crump’s Brother:
Dr. Dobson’s FRC is not “reputable” or did not commission “double blind” studies? Was that latest study about just FOUR early abstinence programs (signed into law under Clinton no less) also “double blind” enough for you?
Royston Vasey:
Chastity belts are ONE program that would be more effective, but no, I’m not looking for ZERO results — that would be fanstasyland — can you answer my question now?
April 24th, 2007 at 6:47 pmThere is currently no federal program dedicated to supporting comprehensive sex education that teaches young people about both abstinence and contraception. Why not?
Despite years of evaluation in this area, there is no evidence to date that abstinence-only education delays teen sexual activity. Moreover, recent research shows that abstinence-only strategies may deter contraceptive use among sexually active teens, increasing their risk of unintended pregnancy and STIs
Ref:
April 24th, 2007 at 6:49 pmKirby D, Emerging Answers: Research Findings on Programs to Reduce Teen Pregnancy, Washington, DC: National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, 2001;
Bearman PS and Bruckner H, Promising the future: virginity pledges and first intercourse, American Journal of Sociology, 2001, 106(4):859–912;
Bruckner H and Bearman PS, After the promise: the STI consequences of adolescent virginity pledges, Journal of Adolescent Health, 2005, 36(4):271–278.
Hey, libtards, the higher the pregnancy rate the more obvious it is that abstinence education works!
April 24th, 2007 at 6:49 pmHave fun debating this evening. I have to shoot out now.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:52 pmCatch ya later.
RV
So, Wayne, you don’t remember either. Good thing you aren’t the Attorney General, because you could be fired for that.
Comment by Frank Matthews
Not obtuse at all are you Frank? Sheesh
Go back and read the first Tillman thread and respond.
Start from your post stating:
Wayne: Yes. I will support the President who has proven himself capable of defending this nation FORCEFULLY against a foreign threat - no questions asked, no task too dirty.
The real question is: where’s your patriotism?
Comment by Frank Matthews
Till you read my response.
No one can support this administration and truthfully state they support the troops, after all they have done to the troops, the wounded and veterans. If you say you do, you are a liar.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:58 pmAnd You Thought REAGAN Was Stupid:
Sorry, I did not know you were limiting the following question to “family planning” policies: DO ANY CONSERVATIVE POLICIES ACTUALLY WORK WHEN THEY’RE IMPLEMENTED?
I think I already got Crump’s Brother to admit that it is effective at least for those couples who remain abstinent.
April 24th, 2007 at 7:00 pmRegarding “Frank Mathews”, Jake put up a front for a while, but he’s revealed himself yet again with his characteristic pattern of discourse, rhetorical questions and scattershot logic. I’m convinced. Frank is Jake.
Patrick1 is not. Their patterns of inanity are equally severe, but hardly identical.
Now back to the topic: anyone who believes that “abstinence only” education is the way to go is NOT trying to reduce unwanted pregnancies or incidence of venereal disease. The reason i can say that is the statistical evidence is overwhelming that Abstinence Only does neither. Consistently.
Thus those people must either be stupid ideologues or they are trying to solve a different problem. My guess is that the problem they’re trying to solve is people having sex.
April 24th, 2007 at 7:01 pmSo, Wayne, you don’t remember either. Good thing you aren’t the Attorney General, because you could be fired for that.
Comment by Frank Matthews — April 24, 2007 @ 6:47 pm
Why, Jake? Can you name an Attorney General who was fired for not remembering something? I can’t.
April 24th, 2007 at 7:02 pmWayne:
I support this Administration and can truthfully state I support the troops.
April 24th, 2007 at 7:04 pmFind one REPUTABLE, double blind study that shows that abstinence only programs are effective at minimizing teen sex and unwanted prenancy. I would love to see it.
Comment by Crump’s Brother — April 24, 2007 @ 6:34 pm
LOL Crump’s Brother. He, and the other trolls here, wouldn’t know what a double blind study is. Their idea of a double blind study is to close their eyes while the preacher (or Fox news or Bush) speaks! LOL good one.
April 24th, 2007 at 7:04 pmAs I said, KRank, I am not Jake. I’m smarter than he is.
April 24th, 2007 at 7:05 pmWhy, Jake? Can you name an Attorney General who was fired for not remembering something? I can’t.
Comment by KRank
He is obtuse when he has no answers.
I expect a return of “The List” very soon from Jake.
April 24th, 2007 at 7:06 pm“I think I already got Crump’s Brother to admit that it is effective at least for those couples who remain abstinent.” Comment by Frank Matthews
And I think I already got Frank mathews to admit that grass is wet when it rains.
April 24th, 2007 at 7:08 pmI think I already got Crump’s Brother to admit that it is effective at least for those couples who remain abstinent. Comment by Frank Matthews.
Terrific. So your argument is “it works when people follow the policy.” I am now instituting a worldwide policy that all people shall (i) not litter; (ii) eat five servings of fruit and vegetables each day; (iii) exercise regularly.
There. In the same way you’ve solved the issues of unwanted pregnancies or sex before marriage (arguably, not an issue), I’ve solved littering AND obesity. Chalk those up to me. They will WORK, as long as everyone follows my new rules.
April 24th, 2007 at 7:09 pmPatrick & Franks view on Abstinence, see they were as ugly, and hateful as teens, so of course no girl wanted to have sex with them. See so it should be easy for anyone.
April 24th, 2007 at 7:09 pm#74. Double blind? How do those people find each other to even have sex?
April 24th, 2007 at 7:10 pmI support this Administration and can truthfully state I support the troops.
Comment by Frank Matthews
As I said, if you support this administration, especially the with the way they have treated the troops and the wounded, as a veteran, I can safely state you are a liar.
Please explain how you support the troops.
April 24th, 2007 at 7:11 pmThat magnetic sticker isn’t enough.
#76. Not “The [dreaded] List”!
April 24th, 2007 at 7:11 pmAs I said, KRank, I am not Jake. I’m smarter than he is.
Comment by Frank Matthews — April 24, 2007 @ 7:05 pm
It’s not a tall order to be smarter than Jake is, but you fail even that. Either you are Jake (and we know you are, thus we know that you’re dishonest and only here to f*ck with the boards) or you trolls all sound exactly alike.
Either way, you don’t look too good.
April 24th, 2007 at 7:11 pm#
#74. Double blind? How do those people find each other to even have sex?
Comment by And You Thought REAGAN Was Stupid — April 24, 2007 @ 7:10 pm
They just follow the smell!
April 24th, 2007 at 7:13 pmI tried to get my Dad to take me to a Purity Ball, but they laughed at me.
April 24th, 2007 at 7:14 pm*sniff*
I expect a return of “The List†very soon from Jake.
Comment by Wayne — April 24, 2007 @ 7:06 pm
I don’t. That would be like a little girl admitting that there’s really no tea in the cups she’s pouring for her teddy bears.
April 24th, 2007 at 7:16 pm#
I tried to get my Dad to take me to a Purity Ball, but they laughed at me.
*sniff*
Comment by Zooey — April 24, 2007 @ 7:14 pm
Frank keeps asking his dad too, and the keep laughing at him, so don’t feel too bad! :)
April 24th, 2007 at 7:16 pmAs I said, KRank, I am not Jake. I’m smarter than he is. — Comment by Frank Matthews
As is my coffee cup.
April 24th, 2007 at 7:18 pmWolfowitz, Cheney, Focus on the Family, Religious right & neocons - All enemies of America. Welcome to the real enemy America. Time to take out the trash.
April 24th, 2007 at 7:19 pmFrank keeps asking his dad too, and the keep laughing at him, so don’t feel too bad! :)
Comment by Can-O-Whoop-Ass
There are Purity Balls for boys? Who knew!?
I thought Purity Balls were only for dirty girls, who have no sense whatsoever, and need their Daddies to protect the Holy Tissue.
April 24th, 2007 at 7:20 pmWhatever, KRank.
Wayne:
Well, let’s see, tax day just came around again so my $12,000 + donation is probably the most concrete support this year. Now, I think I have answered every question you’ve posed to me on this thread. Just because you won’t (or can’t) find some other question you think you asked me on some other thread, I could care less at this point.
April 24th, 2007 at 7:23 pmAs I said, KRank, I am not Jake. I’m smarter than he is. — Comment by Frank Matthews
As is my coffee cup.
Comment by And You Thought REAGAN Was Stupid — April 24, 2007 @ 7:18 pm
frank’s a smart conservative. not as smart as rod majors, but pretty smart. for a conservative.
April 24th, 2007 at 7:26 pmJust because you won’t (or can’t) find some other question you think you asked me on some other thread, I could care less at this point.
Comment by Frank Matthews
Your reading comprehension must be very bad then, or you are just avoiding it.
Figures.
frank’s a smart conservative. not as smart as rod majors, but pretty smart. for a conservative.
Comment by joe cantwell
LOL
He is smarter than a rock, but has the critical thinking of a molusk, at least he beats patrick1 on that one. That boy is dumber than a rock.
April 24th, 2007 at 7:35 pmWhatever, KRank.
Comment by Frank Matthews — April 24, 2007 @ 7:23 pm
Uh-oh… sounds like “Frank” Jake isn’t having so much funa anymore. Did you ever come up that AG who was fired for forgetting stuff?
Didn’t think so.
April 24th, 2007 at 7:35 pmAlways gotta set lofty goals, joe.
April 24th, 2007 at 7:37 pmWayne:
I’m not avoiding anything. I checked two threads for your question, and I asked you repeatedly if you remember the gist of it so I might answer here as well.
Oh, BTW: KRank, I thought you were asking “Jake” that question, not me. Maybe you and Wayne can go searching through every Gonzales thread looking for all the posts trashing Gonzales’s memory. He seems to enjoy scavenger hunts.
April 24th, 2007 at 7:42 pmBack on the topic (I guess Crump’s Brother is gone): does anyone else want to discuss the World Bank’s policy on family planning issues?
April 24th, 2007 at 7:44 pmYou know the neocons are screwed in 08′. Look at all the trolls that are on here today. The more the trolls show up. The more you know the neocons are slowly drowning. Too funny. Abstinence is a joke and so are the neocon trolls. WE really know why the neocons prefer abstinence. Cause neocons prefer male prostitutes and they’re (neocons) pedophiles.
Check out this list of fine republicans.
http://www.armchairsubversive.com/
April 24th, 2007 at 7:48 pmI tried to get my Dad to take me to a Purity Ball, but they laughed at me.
*sniff*
Comment by Zooey
HAHAH/// ..*ahem. excuse me. sorry*
April 24th, 2007 at 7:48 pmKRank, I thought you were asking “Jake†that question, not me. Maybe you and Wayne can go searching through every Gonzales thread looking for all the posts trashing Gonzales’s memory. He seems to enjoy scavenger hunts.
Comment by Frank Matthews — April 24, 2007 @ 7:42 pm
You were the one who claimed that “forgetting things” gets Attorneys General fired. Got any names for us?
For the record: “trashing Gonzales’ memory” isn’t the same thing as getting him fired. Last I heard, he was still on the job, forgetting how to protect the American people.
does anyone else want to discuss the World Bank’s policy on family planning issues?
Comment by Frank Matthews — April 24, 2007 @ 7:44 pm
More proof (if any was needed) that Frank is Jake. unfortunately, Jake is somewhat less than frank.
April 24th, 2007 at 7:59 pmHow does a crook like this…
…not only keep his job…
…but gets to make policy too?
…Bushiva REALLY has ushered in a new era of “governance”…
…by fiat…
April 24th, 2007 at 8:07 pmAfter THESE scummy sons-of-bi*ches…
…what are parents gonna teach their kids NOW?
April 24th, 2007 at 8:08 pmAfter THESE scummy sons-of-bi*ches…
…what are parents gonna teach their kids NOW?
Comment by big papa
..Not to trust anything their gvt. tells them?….
April 24th, 2007 at 8:11 pmSexual and reproductive health affect everything the World Bank does. It affects whole populations, overall public health and communicable diseases, STD’s, AID’s, worker (mean the worker(s) and their families) productivity, huge chunks of developing country budgets, population density and movements (which impact all development projects, from dams to roads to public transport), you name it. Not to mention domestic politics, the social status of women and children, sexual trafficking, and on and on.
Like Justice Kennedy and his Supreme Court majority, the underlying theme seems to be to demote women’s independence via women’s reproductive and health issues, and to promote the political power of conservative men and their institutions, including many churches. That may be Mr. Bush’s domestic agenda, but imposing it on foreign stattes under the guise of assistance is as genuine as a Karl Rove handshake.
The World Bank cannot do its job, and the conditions of the countries it seeks to help will not improve, under policies or personalities advocated by Paul Wolfowitz.
April 24th, 2007 at 9:15 pmMore proof (if any was needed) that Frank is Jake. unfortunately, Jake is somewhat less than frank.
Comment by KRank
He really is stupid.
April 24th, 2007 at 9:19 pmHe forgets that word pattern repettition really gives someone away.
Something he forgets in each new troll incarnation.
haha
#22 interesting post frank
well at least it was the first time I read it, on Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Bank
a Google intellectual eh?
April 24th, 2007 at 9:20 pmPatrick1.
– Frank “The Idiot†Matthews
Two rethugnicans with absolutely no life, why else would they spend every waking hour here. They can’t possibly believe they can change anyones position on any subject.
BOZO’s
April 24th, 2007 at 9:27 pm#22 interesting post frank
well at least it was the first time I read it, on Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Bank
a Google intellectual eh?
Comment by Me
What a surprise, Jake plagarizes too.
April 24th, 2007 at 9:42 pmSo long Wolfie. By the way, is the girlfriend still getting a paycheck from our government, and is she still holding the secret clearance that foreigners are not supposed to be allowed to have??? And what did she do at that job that paid so much? Since she worked only with a Cheney, I can only doubt it was legal.
April 24th, 2007 at 10:50 pmgarnishee Wolfie’s wages…
…freeze his personal assets…
…confiscate his wealth…
…and make HIM pay for the illegal Iraq invasion and occupation…
…along with EVERYBODY who “planned” it…
April 24th, 2007 at 11:17 pm#110 Traitors used to swing in the wind.
April 24th, 2007 at 11:46 pmWhy isn’t this turd gone yet?
April 25th, 2007 at 2:40 pmBushies just can’t accept “the sex” as a reality that must be dealt with… unless it’s sex provided through a Washington, DC madam, of course…
May 2nd, 2007 at 11:19 amAs a retired professor who spent 26 years in research on fertilization, I can assure you that Family Planning warrants Extensive Support! The narrow idealistic views of the US President, the Pope, Falwell, Robertson, etc. are the result of GROSS IGNORANCE OF REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY!!!!!
Wolfowitz should not only be fired, he should be tried for high treason for his role in the lead up of a war that has cost thousands of lives, injured many thousands of soldiers and civilians, including children —a war that had nothing to do with the 9/11 attack in New York!
May 2nd, 2007 at 1:54 pm