talkpolitics | Lies, Damned Lies, and Remarks Not Intended to be Factual

Senator John Kyl (R-AZ) on the Senate Floor, explaining why it’s necessary to pass a bill defunding Planned Parenthood:

Everybody goes to clinics, to doctors, to hospitals, so on. Some people go to Planned Parenthood. But you don’t have to go to Planned Parenthood to get your cholesterol or your blood pressure checked. If you want an abortion, you go to Planned Parenthood, and that’s well over 90% of what Planned Parenthood does.

Statement from John Kyl’s office later that day, after it’s revealed that, in fact, abortion comprises only 3% of what Planned Parenthood does:

His remark was not intended to be a factual statement, but rather to illustrate that Planned Parenthood, an organization that receives millions of dollars in taxpayer funding, does subsidize abortions.

So, the man stood up in the senate and, in the course of arguing for defunding Planned Parenthood, claimed that over 90% of what Planned Parenthood does is provide abortions.

This is untrue. No, not debatably untrue, not a matter of opinion. It’s simply flat-out untrue. Abortion comprises not “well over 90%” but 3% of what Planned Parenthood does. Kyl’s comment is objectively false, and obviously false to those of us who use and have used Planned Parenthood for pap smears, breast examinations, contraceptives, etc.

So, Kyl got called on this. Did he apologize and say “I had some bad information?” or simply “I was wrong?” No.

Instead, his office issued a statement obliquely defending that flat-out-lie, explaining that his remark “was not intended to be factual.”

“Oh, you thought I meant that abortion comprised over 90% of Planned Parenthood services when I said that abortion comprised over 90% of Planned Parenthood services? Why of course that’s not what I meant! I was just trying to explain in my own way that Planned Parenthood is bad. I never imagined that anyone would take that figure seriously!”

See, that “more than 90%” bit was just to give his statement a little more “oomph.” Saying “25%” would not have given it the needed boost. “50%?” An improvement, but not quite enough. 75%? Close, very close, but still… Now, 90% -- no, even better, well over 90% -- That’s cookin’ with gas!

I mean, come on, people, would Kyl’s comments have had the same power if he’d said, “If you want an abortion, you go to Planned Parenthood, and that’s well over 3% of what Planned Parenthood does?”

Of course it wouldn’t. In fact, including the actual figure would make the Republicans' attempt to defund Planned Parenthood look silly and vindictive.

So, naturally, Kyl couldn’t use it. He had to use some other figure, and his office is confident that, now that they've explained it, we'll all understand.

Do you?

Crossposted from Thoughtcrimes

PS: Just in case there is something unclear about this -- my premise is that lies are bad. John Kyl lied. He lied because the truth would not make him look good. And apparently, he considers that okay and expects the rest of us to consider it okay, because his "clarification" as read verbatim by CNN contains not one note of apology.

Is this level of lying now supposed to be normal and accepted from senators as they argue in favor of passing bills?